I’ll probably drift back and watch the others also.

Thanks

Thanks for the kind words and the review! In your post, you mention that Web users are notoriously lazy scanners of content, and I certainly agree with that point. One thing that I’d like to add, however, is that people tend to gravitate towards mostly-passive sources of entertainment.

Sifting through a blog entry for quality information is somewhat labor-intensive, but simply clicking “play” on a video and letting things happen is more of a passive experience. Of course, you have to follow up that initial response with both entertainment value and quality, and that’s really our focus.

You’ll notice that our videos tend to be about 5 minutes long, and that’s absolutely by design. Thus far, many screencasts that I’ve come across tend to be rather lengthy, so I think this is one area where we’re possibly doing our audience a favor. If we can capture their interest up front and deliver a useful, entertaining experience, then I believe we will accomplish what we set out to achieve with Tubetorial.

Thanks again for the review!

And I think I am also more learning by doing but sometimes it’s nice to have a short video presentation to explain the basic steps to get something to work so you have a basic understanding (e.g. when it’s about programming with a new tool or so). So far I’ve only watched one episode and the content seems different from that anyway in terms of explaining a tool.

What I actually miss the most at that site is that there is no Quicktime video RSS feed. Thus I cannot add it to iTunes or FireAnt and actually I was wondering why there seem to be no episodes in that stream when I subscribed via the latter.
I think this could be improved so that I also can watch it when being offline like on the train.

Besides that it seems to look quite promising and I will definitely check out some more videos.

Thanks for reporting :)

But then these are not really video. They’re more screencasting w/ voice (apart from blogging law which had some video). So it’s not as advanced as it would be with video. There are really two aspects to get right: the screen presentation and the voice recording.

It’s really hard to compare, because I’m comparing these with paid-for screencasts I deal with daily. When someone’s directly paying for something they automatically expect a higher standard.

These ones are somewhere in the middle – I’ve seen far worser paid-for ones that have been successful, so they’re definately on the right track.

I wonder if we’re subconciously comparing video blogging with what we see on television. Could it be that no video blog is going to achieve the same look and feel as even the roughest television programme?

Perhaps we should look at video blogs in a different less subjective way?

Don’t get me wrong – I’m no fan of video blogs at all – I’m one of those who learns by doing and not watching but it was just a thought that crossed my mind.

If you’ve seen other video blogs who does Brian & Co’s compare to those?

LA Acting School

I think they’ve tapped into something here. Many are more visual learners than via reading. I know in some instances I’d much rather learn by watching a screencast.

It’ll be good to see how they go with this – so that we can jump on board if it works :-)

Now when are we going to see an info product from you, Darren?