Blip.TV vs. YouTube

I’ve been experimenting a bit with Blip.TV over the weekend. At first blush it seems to have some significant benefits as compared to YouTube.

Unlike YouTube, Blip.TV doesn’t have its own graphic identity or “bug” inserted into your video when you link to it from your blog. For example, here’s how the video I produced from the Austin, Minn. girls basketball team’s win over Rochester Mayo Friday night appears in YouTube:


For organizations that may not want to be tied with the YouTube brand, that little “bug” in the lower right corner may be less than desirable.

I do want to stress, as I have earlier, that YouTube is ridiculously easy to use and has a great interface. For individuals who want to just share their fun and quirky video, it’s a great place for self-expression. And CBS has found it a worthwhile place to post clips, and that it has increased broadcast viewership for featured programs.

Clearly the potential traffic that can come to clips from being on YouTube, with its huge daily traffic, also is an advantage, although a file I recently uploaded to both services has gotten more views on Blip.TV. Maybe the larger volume of available clips on YouTube means those on Blip.TV get more exposure because the field isn’t as crowded.

Blip.TV, on the other hand, lets clip owners maintain all of their ownership rights, and share 50/50 in any advertising revenue. It also seems to have lots of options for posting video in different formats. The progress bar on uploads also is more helpful than what you see in YouTube. YouTube never lets you know how much longer the upload will take, until it suddenly is completed.

Blip.TV seems a lot more complicated than YouTube. That’s probably as it should be. If your main goal is to quickly and easily get your video to the web to share it, YouTube is easier (although uploading through Blip.TV is just a one-screen simple entry.) For people who want to clearly and unambiguously retain rights in their video creations, the added complexity of more options will likely be worth it.

As I said, I need to explore some more with Blip.TV to better understand its power and how it works. One good place for more info is the company’s blog.

For example, I haven’t yet figured out how to incorporate Blip.TV videos directly within this blog. The best I can do right now is link to it. You need to click to see it instead of it being an in-line graphic. I do like the higher quality of the QuickTime, though.

I just remembered that Jeff Jarvis did a post a while ago comparing various on-line video services. It seems his observations are similar to mine, that Blip.TV has respectable traffic and better quality, but YouTube is really easy. He also reviewed some other services that I haven’t yet tried.

TechnoratiTechnorati: , , ,

Author: Lee Aase

Husband of one, father of six, grandfather of 15. Chancellor Emeritus, SMUG. Emeritus staff of Mayo Clinic. Founder of HELPcare and Administrator for HELPcare Clinic.

One thought on “Blip.TV vs. YouTube”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.