And this is on hackaday.com because …!? Seriously, don’t do regular news authors.

Posted at 3:03 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by foo

Wow. Turn it down. The service sucks as it is right now. The last several months it has slowed down to suckville. I’ve got a 20/2 connection and its still buffers like hell even at the University.

Posted at 3:14 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by willdibbern

I haven’t had any trouble. Youtube is just fine, your getting throttled, have a problem on your computer, or have a slow connection.

I just tried to play this vid on the family computer and it didn’t get past the black screen, while on my gaming/everything else rig it played just fine.

Posted at 3:18 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by Edward Nardella

no, youtube really doesn’t have the bandwidth for this

Posted at 3:28 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by will d.

Care to back up that claim with some evidence or supporting facts?

Posted at 4:18 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by Edward Nardella

Mine’s running fine…buffer is about 2x my position in the above video.

Posted at 4:20 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by roboguy

Wow, that is good quality.

Posted at 4:58 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by Sammy

Worked perfectly at work on my laptop, a bit of buffering at first on my home system while downloading torrents. Just had to pause and wait a few seconds.

Youtube is fine. If it doesn’t work for you, it’s your connection or system.

Posted at 5:18 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by germanjmg

Oh, and this is on Hackaday for the instruction for how to insert HD clips on youtube instead of using standard low def. High-horse, much?

Posted at 5:19 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by germanjmg

I wrote a userscript to automatically redirect all my youtube viewing to the high-quality version. Add that to the userscript that makes the vids bigger and you’ve got one heck of a viewing experience. It just uses indexOf to check if the URL contains “fmt”.. if not it adds “&fmt=18″ to the end. I would update it for the new fmt=22, however; when I change it to 22, I get a normal quality vid… what’s the deal with that?

Posted at 6:02 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by mutant

It took about 2 minutes for the whole thing to buffer for me on a university connection. The download speed averaged 650 kb/s (5.2 mbps), so the whole video is about 78mb.

Posted at 7:12 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by Matt

The quality looks great, but it doesn’t seem to work on most of the videos I try it on… Maybe another thing to add to the article would be how to best prepare videos in a “future-proofed” fashion? AKA, a guide for video uploaders to prepare their videos (compression & format) for the best results, especially at the increased quality? That’s something I find useful (there’s lots of different guides out there, but I’ve yet to see one that covers the higher quality/resolutions that are starting to be supported.)

Maybe not entirely hack content, but (considering it’s an undocumented feature for both the viewers and the creators) still relevant, IMO.

Posted at 7:19 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by matt

:)
The quality is very good.
The main person in the video is so consistent with his dance :))) cool.

S

Posted at 7:42 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by lordspace

Great, now if only adobe would make flash for linux not crash every time you try doing it.

Posted at 9:23 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by joe

Matt has the best videos on YouTube!

Posted at 10:39 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by themassakr

it took forever to buffer, but holy shit that was one of the most awesome videos I’ve seen in a long time.

Posted at 11:38 pm on Nov 21st, 2008 by _matt

Great, however the problem with YouTube isn’t the quality but he length of time. Having a 12 minute video rejected because it’s two minutes too long is just lame.

Having to have an account with over 10,000 views before you qualify for an account which can upload longer video is equally lame.

They say it’s because of people uploading illegal content however I call BS, it’s all about pandering to the big media companies and giving them privileged access, over us people with little money.

Posted at 1:15 am on Nov 22nd, 2008 by Andrew

I have noticed slower youtube speeds as well, some videos buffer fast/normal, while other videos of shorter or equal length buffer slower or stall. I always thought it was because different videos were hosted on different servers that were farther away from me or under a heavier load.

Posted at 3:50 am on Nov 22nd, 2008 by Plague420

Seems indeed that if you add 22 and it’s not available it jumps to low quality even if the 18 quality is available, they need to redo their scripts to jump to the 18 if 22 is asked but not available, but manually adding 18 or 22 is of course not officially supported anyway, so I wonder if they will fix that, perhaps they prefer you to log in and set HQ in settings rather than using scripts or plugins.

Posted at 8:39 am on Nov 22nd, 2008 by Wwhat

@andrew
And this is unfair because?

Posted at 11:14 am on Nov 22nd, 2008 by Edward Nardella

I hope they find some way to keep the audio in line with the video, it’s the most annoying thing when it slips out of sync, especially when watching music videos.

Posted at 1:08 pm on Nov 22nd, 2008 by mesoiam

that was an inspiring video. i want to go to japan now ^_^

Posted at 1:44 pm on Nov 22nd, 2008 by bountyx

Now if only flash on linux wasn’t so resource intensive. My main rig plays those just fine in linux, but the little old sempron in the living room doesn’t do so well under linux.

So Adobe I’m putting the blame for this stuttery video at your feet.

Posted at 1:02 pm on Nov 23rd, 2008 by Circs

@plague420, same thing up until today. videos are loading insanely faster now adays for no reason I can tell.

@edward nardella, I have 6 computers in the apt and they all played the same way, slow. 20mb down, 2mb up confirmed by downloading msdn stuff AFTER trying to do youtube with NOTHING else running. Lots of others these last few months were having problems, check youtube’s help site.

Posted at 1:03 pm on Nov 23rd, 2008 by willdibbern

Audio? 99% of the music on yuotube is mono, who want to listen to music in mono? And who cares if it’s in sync when mono sound is much worse for music enjoyment, with music the synchronism is less important, not to mention that such issues are probably present in the original video to begin with.

Posted at 6:00 am on Nov 24th, 2008 by Wwhat

agreed!

Posted at 12:41 pm on Nov 29th, 2008 by willdibbern