DailyTech - Joost Drops Software Video Player

Submit News

Blog: Internet Joost Drops Software Video Player
Michael Barkoviak - September 8, 2008 1:48 AM

8 comment(s) - last by TomCorelis.. on Sep 9 at 2:38 AM

Joost ready to begin transition away from video player software

It seems Joost is finally ready to phase out its desktop video viewing software in favor of a web-based video player.

Created by the founders of Kazaa and Skype, Joost was met with a high level of curiosity and anticipation, but the fanfare has dramatically decreased due to limited content and the fact that all Joost users were forced to download the desktop client.

The fact that I didn't need to download and install any software was one of the main reasons I stopped using Joost and instead turned to Hulu. Many of my friends and co-workers who began using Hulu didn't know Joost existed, and similar to myself, didn't like that software had to be installed on each PC.

I'm not sure how much competition Joost will be able to offer Hulu, especially because the amount of content available on Hulu trumps the number of shows and movies available through Joost. But since Hulu is available only to U.S. viewers at the moment, Joost has a nice opportunity to promote its service to international users who can only use Hulu through a proxy.

Another problem Joost faces is that it'll require a plug-in download that must be downloaded on each computer that will play the Joost web player. Hulu simply requires Adobe Flash, which is available on most computers already and can be used in multiple applications.

Joost hosting live sporting events or concerts have been talked about, and would help get new users, but the company has not said anything about its plans lately.

I'm not entirely writing off Joost yet, but am rather pessimistic about its chances of success with Hulu and other companies emerging.

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Eh?

By amanojaku on 9/8/2008 2:35:46 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
Another problem Joost faces is that it'll require a plug-in download that must be downloaded on each computer that will play the Joost web player. Hulu simply requires Adobe Flash, which is available on most computers already and can be used in multiple applications.

In all fairness to Joost, Adobe Flash IS a plug-in that has to be downloaded. The difference is nearly everyone has downloaded it already. Not that I'm planning on using Joost since I have NetFlix, which required a plug-in download, as well. That's the way things are going these days since we have broadband. Most of us, anyway. :-)

RE: Eh?

By amanojaku on 9/8/2008 2:38:57 AM , Rating: 2

Forgot to mention that the other difference between Adobe Flash and the Joost player is that Flash does more than video. At least, that's how it is for now. And don't forget MS Silverlight and all the OTHER plug-ins people are developing.

Parent

RE: Eh?

By Possessed Freak on 9/8/2008 9:04:30 AM , Rating: 1

Yes, it also enabled 1000's of animated ads to run bogging down machines all over the world.

Parent

RE: Eh?

By amanojaku on 9/8/2008 9:16:46 AM , Rating: 2

*Scratches head* And how is that the fault of Adobe Flash? Blame the advertisers. Better yet, uninstall Flash or use FireFox with AdBlock or FlashBlock (or whatever they're called.) And be prepared to b*tch at the OTHER plug-ins that (will) do the same. Now if you'll excuse me I'm gonna go complain to manufacturers for making paper. Damn things hold ads for stuff I don't want, too!!!

Parent

RE: Eh?

By Possessed Freak on 9/8/2008 10:26:17 AM , Rating: 2

Scratch your head all you want, I will blame the maker of the program who allows for embedded animations on websites. I think it is quite funny to think that a whole industry popped up in response to this, I don't think there were any sophisticated programs out there to block the static ads of the past.

Uninstalling flash, for something that is more then just video, for something that is almost universally used? That is a pathetic solution.

Parent

RE: Eh?

By amanojaku on 9/8/2008 10:44:00 AM , Rating: 3

quote:
Scratch your head all you want, I will blame the maker of the program who allows for embedded animations on websites.

Why stop there? Why not blame Microsoft for making the OS that Flash runs under? And Apple, too. Oh, and the mathematicians and scientists who design modern computers. And the ones who made the original computer designs decades ago.

quote:
I think it is quite funny to think that a whole industry popped up in response to this, I don't think there were any sophisticated programs out there to block the static ads of the past.

I HATE advertisements, not because I rarely buy the products advertised but because of the glaringly ugly way in which they are. Still, ads exist on TV, the radio, magazines, buses, billboards, taxis, airport docks, etc... Why should the Internet be exempt? What makes it so special? Nothing, and even without Flash ads would have cropped up everywhere, maybe in the form of video clips. Hell, instant messenger clients send you ads nowadays. As to the static ads, they weren't much of a bother so no one really payed much attention. You could turn them off, then, too. Just use a browser that doesn't load 3rd party images.

quote:
Uninstalling flash, for something that is more then just video, for something that is almost universally used? That is a pathetic solution.

Now you're contradicting yourself. First you can't stand Flash and now you say it's important? Do yourself a favor: download Firefox, install Flashblock, and quit-cher-bitchin'!

Parent

RE: Eh?

By Possessed Freak on 9/8/2008 12:02:33 PM , Rating: 1

quote:
Now you're contradicting yourself. First you can't stand Flash and now you say it's important? Do yourself a favor: download Firefox, install Flashblock, and quit-cher-bitchin'!

When did I say I couldn't stand Flash?

Parent