Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

Thrilled to finally see this on InfoQ -- already an underappreciated resource for technical talks. What is it about video + slides that appeals so little to people?

Large banner and tiny video frame, site rendering completely garbled for 8 seconds until fully loaded, signup required to view the slides (after realizing that the video doesn't cut to slides at all). The talks are interesting, and the interview transcription is nice though there are UX issues there as well– I need to click to view each response, and despite the entire question being hyperlinked clicking it actually does nothing. Show all works thankfully (ah, but the frame breaks my scroll).

I'll probably be back to check out more of the videos, but definitely not because of the site. If the editing is good, YouTube is just fine, otherwise SlideShare plus an audio file is just perfect.


    [F] First Byte Time
    [C] Keep-alive Enabled
    [C] Compress Transfer
    [A] Compress Images
    [A] Progressive JPEGs
    [F] Cache static content
    [ ] Effective use of CDN
Source: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/130816_PE_AYH/

I will just comment in full support of this, it says everything.

> SlideShare plus an audio file is just perfect.

Although slideshare is not as bad as infoq by a long shot, it's not very useable (or fast) either. I much prefer speakerdeck.

Speakerdeck is actually what I was thinking of, but the gist is slides + audio = happy. A more polished UI would do some good for SlideShare, but I don't have any major issues.

What is it about video + slides that appeals so little to people?

A full transcript with interleaved slide images takes a few minutes to read at most, and lets you control the pace of information absorption. A video with slides, especially when you cannot 2x the talking speed, is a painfully slow data transfer method.

Video + Slides = analog modem

Transcript w/ embedded slides = Google fiber :-)

Of course, if you're into audio books instead of reading, maybe you consider that a feature.

// I push video for a living. It's great for visual explanation like DIY instruction (e.g. woodworking, swapping RAM on a Mac Mini), emotional content, personal story telling, etc. Systems architecture is generally not in one of those categories.

> What is it about video + slides that appeals so little to people

I don't have a solid block of 40 undisturbed minutes to listen to a talk. Give me a transcript and I can read a paragraph here and there as I do other things at my own pace. I might have ten minutes here, ten minutes there. I don't want to be constantly pausing/unpausing the video, or worse - switching between the video and my music.

Plus, if I concentrate, I could read a 40 minute talk in 20 minutes or less.

Basically, when I'm reading, I control the pace. I rarely watch videos that are longer than about 5 minutes (that aren't entertainment, which is entirely different).

Site kinda sucks and is annoying to use for those of us that prefer textual resources and the ability to flip through slides ourselves without clicking around a teensy tiny 1-px sized gaps between slides.

I can read a slide deck at a rate of 5s/slide (or faster), pausing to concentrate on the ones that interest me. I don't have the spare time to watch a video of someone, just in case the topic is interesting.

The video is 40 minutes long. If this was a blog post it'd take me maybe 5-15 minutes to read/skim.

Creating a video on youtube and linking to a pdf with the slides is easy enough to do. The value add of having the website procedurally flip slides for me is very, very small.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact