• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    241 year ago

    If he didn’t sold it to Google I don’t think he have enough budget to maintain the site

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      101 year ago

      Yeah, they had the better technology (Google Video was very bad) and Google had the money.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        What was bad about Google Video? That was my favourite of the two: nice UI, clean, good recommendations

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          The thing that stuck with me was that I always had the impression that the Video quality was much worse than on Youtube. IIRC when there was content that was available on both platforms, Youtube had the much better picture and sound. But maybe that was just specific to the content I watched back then. There was not THAT much to see in the beginning, not like today where you can spend 24h straight and always see new stuff :-)

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Could be, on my connection back then the quality difference was probably unnoticeable. I remember having to wait for buffering every time I played a video on a website.