It could work, but I don't think it will. I think the speed will be dramatically low.
bluedude
· 2 years ago
I think many bloggers talk bullshit when they say 'not many downloads have taken off in recent years'.
Do they have a short memory? Till recently most people downloaded stuff all the time and guess what many still do. Does anyone have any figures about downloads vs web 2.0?
I try a lot of web 2.0 apps. but not many make it to my list of daily used applications.
A lot of web 2.0 apps are simply not good enough or lack features.
Sure the future will probably be online but you never know. When computing started in the early days everyone was hiring cpu time and central computing was it. After that period it was decentralizing with desktops etc., the time Microsoft became big. And guess what, we are back at centralized computers where a lot of processing is on the server and some on the client.
But don't forget, not many enterprises use web 2.0 because all data is stored in a place they cannot control. I would not trust my corporate data with web 2.0 startups that end in a dead pool after they invented the biggest breakthrough ever, pfff.
Most of these web 2.0 apps. only do non critical stuff like social networks, video sites etc. Not many handle critical processes.
Courtland Allen
· 2 years ago
I may be wrong, but I don't think he just meant downloads in general. He was more referring to downloads as alternative to Web 2.0 apps.
YouTube is perfectly comparable to Izimi as a web app vs a download, because they're both for sharing content.
I don't see what your counterargument is trying to prove comparing web 2.0 apps to COMPLETELY unrelated software like Acrobat.
Klim
· 2 years ago
Downloads are only doomed if a web alternative out there does the job easier. I don't think that's quite the case for Izimi. As a visitor I don't need to install anything (unlike divx's stage6) so I'm not bothered.
Veoh' app may be great, but I have never felt the need to download it. Youtube fulfills my needs... web beats desktop. But at least for Veoh, installing is not really necessary because it has a web platform as well.
And that's a good thing for Izimi as well. Like Veoh, one can still view the content without needing to download something.
However, if I'm to install something, I would want it to have enough features to justify it. So I would prefer QNext(.com) for sharing as it does all (as far as I see) that Izimi does plus you can chat with other users, even share your desktop. I used it once to share files when I had network issues between my computers and it worked smoothly.
And lastly, I'm not so sure it is a Youtube rival as I cannot simply click and watch something, I have to hope the user is currently on and sharing.
Windows Vista
· 2 years ago
so if someone downloads a video off you, will they send out the video as well as you or do they have to choose to send out the videos? otherwise this could destroy your bandwidth!
connectionfailre
· 2 years ago
There's always gotta be one guy that is a MS-refuser, so I have to ask, why would anyone in their right mind choose the Windows-only .NET framework for their development platform rather than than Java? I know development's probably harder but at least your stuff will run on a lot more devices that are free of the Windows burden. I'm gonna go try QNext.
Bev
· 2 years ago
Not sure why it took you so long to download izimi, unless you had computer problems of your own. I had downloaded it, created an id and published a few files all within the space of 5 mins. I think its a superb product!!!
Marc
· 2 years ago
If you like Izimi, check out Quickeo. They have similar technology but much richer functionality - http://www.quickeo.com
Matthew
· 2 years ago
Their claims of never needing to "upload" the file border on false advertising. You do, in fact upload the file, but instead of uploading it once to a web or file server, it's uploaded from your PC as many times as it's requested. If 10,000 people download your 20 meg video file, that 20 meg file will be uploaded from your PC 10,000 times. The more popular the file, the more bandwidth your computer sucks up and the slower the downloads will be.
Shaiya
· 1 year ago
When I played the game for the first time ,I liked it deeply until present.In this game ,we can use the shaiya money and the shaiya gold .These shaiya money that if we got a upgrading ,maybe we could get a encourage for these shaiya money .But it is not the only way to get these shaiya money,we can also use the RMB to buy shaiya gold.
All Comments
Reader - comes with new PCs
Skype - already mentioned in article, succeeded because the web still sucks at voip
Firefox - it's a browser. There are no web-based web browsers to compete. ;) (although I'd love to know what a web-based web browser looks like!)
Google Toolbar - Bundled with a bunch of stuff like MSN Messenger and Acrobat, plus pre-installed on Dell machines
http://gigaom.com/2006/11/01/firefox-kids-new-s...
Do they have a short memory? Till recently most people downloaded stuff all the time and guess what many still do. Does anyone have any figures about downloads vs web 2.0?
I try a lot of web 2.0 apps. but not many make it to my list of daily used applications.
A lot of web 2.0 apps are simply not good enough or lack features.
Sure the future will probably be online but you never know. When computing started in the early days everyone was hiring cpu time and central computing was it. After that period it was decentralizing with desktops etc., the time Microsoft became big. And guess what, we are back at centralized computers where a lot of processing is on the server and some on the client.
But don't forget, not many enterprises use web 2.0 because all data is stored in a place they cannot control. I would not trust my corporate data with web 2.0 startups that end in a dead pool after they invented the biggest breakthrough ever, pfff.
Most of these web 2.0 apps. only do non critical stuff like social networks, video sites etc. Not many handle critical processes.
YouTube is perfectly comparable to Izimi as a web app vs a download, because they're both for sharing content.
I don't see what your counterargument is trying to prove comparing web 2.0 apps to COMPLETELY unrelated software like Acrobat.
Veoh' app may be great, but I have never felt the need to download it. Youtube fulfills my needs... web beats desktop. But at least for Veoh, installing is not really necessary because it has a web platform as well.
And that's a good thing for Izimi as well. Like Veoh, one can still view the content without needing to download something.
However, if I'm to install something, I would want it to have enough features to justify it. So I would prefer QNext(.com) for sharing as it does all (as far as I see) that Izimi does plus you can chat with other users, even share your desktop. I used it once to share files when I had network issues between my computers and it worked smoothly.
And lastly, I'm not so sure it is a Youtube rival as I cannot simply click and watch something, I have to hope the user is currently on and sharing.