YouTube exec claims digital video viewing will overtake TV by 2020

[HEXUS]

And high dynamic range (HDR) video content is coming to YouTube 'soon'.

Read more.

[MrComputerSaint]

Youtube does have more content I want to watch. I love cars and computers. If I don't want to watch cars, I switch.

I love the individual channels like The Smoking Tire, I used to love Drive (and subbed to Drive+) but after there was a lapse of content from Chris Harris I un-subbed (Plus I could tell where in the video they stopped the recording for the normal channel and then they'd repeat some stuff for Drive+ video). But anyway, more choice from a much wider area (the world) as opposed to what production and TV companies think what a specific country wants to watch. I'm all for YouTube overtaking TV.

[PorcupineTime]

If you like car stuff and you're at all interested in EVs then Robert Llewellyn (of Red Dwarf "fame") does one called Fully Charged that I enjoy from time to time.

Once Chris Harris left Drive I stopped watching. He still makes his own videos and they are still high quality.

ETA - I also quite enjoy the car based nonsense of Roadkill when I get a chance.

[lumireleon]

the 'HDR' support will need the features of your new GPU or will it be supported on older GPU's like the world famous 4500HMD by intel

[Saracen]

Personally, I'd say "dream on" to the notion of YouTube replacing TV.

However, if we were to talk about iStreaming replacing broadcast, including satellite, then .... very probably.

What I wouldn't dispute is that YouTube has driven a growth in a new form of video entertainment, and indeed, been central in creating a new genre and made small, low-budget personal production possible ... or rather, hugely accessible. The result has been a vast array of 'content', ranging from truly dire to absolutely excellent.

But what I can't see changing is that more complex productions are ALWAYS going to be expensive, not least because they demand expensive "talent", large production crews and sophisticated equipment. Whether this is outside broadcast for sports events, or large casts for big productions, to location rental, travel expenses to remote locations, huge IP rights costs, massive behind-the-scenes capabilities like wardrobe and makeup departments, or whatever.

And that means major financial resources will be required and three people and a dog sren't ever replacing that.

Will the structure of 'TV' change? Yup. Will transmission medium change? Yeah, no doubt, it'll evolve. Will 'home' production become more important? Up to a point, yeah, mainly because new things start from a low base and initially at least, almost can't help growing fast. But then, there'll be a weeding out and the good will grow, but the weaker plants will be smothered by the stronger.

Youtube "taking over" seems to me to be hugely simplistic, and essentially, a bit of self-promoting spin from Youtube.

[b0redom]

What Saracen said basically. Youtube channels just aren't going to be able to match the draw of things like Game Of Thrones, Sherlock, House of Cards etc. Will things like Netflix and Video On Demand take over from terrestrially broadcast TV? Not completely I'd suggest, but I think they'll definitely make a massive hole in it.

With things like Amazon Fire sticks making streaming really easy for the first time, there's a massive potential market opening up.

I won't subscribe to Sky, because I refuse to pay ~ £70/month and then still have to watch ads. If I could get similar content for the same, or even more per month but with no ads at all ever, and video on demand, I'd definitely consider it.

[Wh00pS]

He never said Youtube would take over, he said that streamed digital video would surpass traditional tv.

[Saracen]

He never said Youtube would take over, he said that streamed digital video would surpass traditional tv.

Actually, he pretty much did.

He started out by pointing out that

Digital video will overtake television to become the single largest way people spend their free time before the end of this decade, ...

But then he moves to the growth of video content and growth rates as evidence of "overtaking". This ignores the basic fact that wide availability of such content is new, whereas traditional TV programming is not, and that such growth rates are an inevitable part of any successful new technology.

That the type of 'low-rent' video content as provided by many YouTube providers has a place, and that it's growing, as any immature market does, is no surprise.

But in my view, there is NO chance that that type of content is going to replace Game of Thrones, Downton Abbey, etc, and tgat mind of content creation is simply beyond anyone without serioys money. The tyoe of typical YT content is in addition to, not a replacement for, TV-type content.

Then there's how content, of both types, gets delivered, and that's a far trickier prospect, not least because of how it's monetised.

He went on to predict a drift away from traditional living-room TV to "inherently mobile" devices, be it laptops, tablets or phones would continue. Again, maybe true up to a point, and some people may be content to watch content on a screen a few inches in size .... but many will not. Personally, watching a few minute clip on a portable device is one thing but for watching a full-length TV prog, like GoT, let alone a blockbuster film, is an event for a comfy chair, a big screen, preferably a decent sound system and a nice drink.

Watching films on your phone or tablet is going to happen more than it used to simply because it's a relatively new capability. But it's no real substitute.

Delivering content via streaming as opposed to terrestrial 'broadcast'? Well, that's a given, I'd think. Having increasing amounts of 'content' "on demand" is also probably a given. Whether a "schedule" of programs ever is entirely replaced by on-demand .... I doubt it, any time soon. Why? Money talks, and you have to buy the rights to first showings. But catch-up, on-demand and 'video rental' via streaming services like Netflix are already here.

Call it what we will, but the "TV" market, the fight for our eyes on screens, the home entertainment market, is changing, evolving, right before our eyes. YT no doubt want a chunk of it. But they're up against real big-money competitors and streaming "low rent" content, while it has a place and will likely grow, I don't see it ever replacing or even over-taking high production value content, whether it's delivered by streaming or digital broadcast, and whether it's to a mobile phone or a 100" screen or home projection system.