All Youtube Alternatives Are Horrible | Vidme, Bitchute, Minds, review

By | October 14, 2019


It’s hard to make a Youtube alternative
that will sustain itself and capture some percentage points of video hosting market
share, when not even Youtube is a profitable platform. Should any Youtube alternative succeed, it
ought to give people a strong motivation to stop using the second most visited website,
second largest search engine, most profitable digital marketing platform, and most open
video sharing service in the world. An alternative to Youtube is going need to
offer something that has a such value to people that Youtube will not be able to deliver it
without fundamentally restructuring or dismantling their current business model. It can’t be somewhat better than Youtube. It must be an absolute punch in the face of
the Youtube’s company for neglecting to satisfy some essential market demands. Is any of the proposed Youtube alternatives
delivering on this promise? My view is they all fall behind for a similar
reason – they fail to give people enough motivation to use their service. Some of them just don’t understand market
demands, or just focus on a different service than what Youtube does. Others act as if they wanted to maintain their
hipster position and remain alternatives forever instead of taking a chunk of mainstream networks’
share. Let’s get vimeo out of the way real quick. Vimeo has been around as long as Youtube and
is a name that is perhaps equally as known as Youtube. It has only one problem. Vimeo is nowhere near a Youtube alternative. Look at these offerings. What is up with those upload limits? I wouldn’t even be able to upload my last
video with a basic account. Why should anyone bother to pay for uploading
to Vimeo when they have tons of other platforms to upload for free without any limit? This is not a website where you can quickly
share videos that everybody will be able to watch. This site operates on highly entrepreneurial
level. Nobody is going to pay 14 euros per month
to upload gaming videos or social commentary. Especially channels who are starting out. Vimeo doesn’t act as a search engine either. It doesn’t display its content in the same
transparent way. It’s not a social media platform, which
is what a proper Youtube alternative needs to be. It’s a video sharing and hosting provider
for professionals to earn money, businesses to to do their business, and viewers to pay
for quality content. It’s not made to interact with people from
all walks of life. Vimeo strictly doesn’t display any ads over
its videos. The only revenue stream for content creators
is if their viewers pay to watch. Which means you’d have to have some strong
motivation to pay for content and that’s not an option for unestablished creators. If you are small or medium size content creator
on Youtube, forget about Vimeo. The two websites serve completely different
purposes. Vimeo has poor search engine optimization,
terrible content suggestions, and only a fraction of Youtube’s traffic, which is a problem
if you are not established and want to get discovered. Try searching for anything on vimeo. What the hell is this? I guess I want to watch this video… Oh no I can’t! It’s a paid one! I wonder if it’s worth it. Let me see…
waiting… still waiting… ok I am starting to loose my patience here. Argh screw it! I give up! Vimeo is not a community based service. Vimeo was created by filmmakers to have a
sleek platform for sharing videos. Youtube was created by a bunch of 20-year
olds to share videos of Janet Jackson’s side boob slip and earth disaster porn. And that says it all. A proper Youtube alternative that’s gonna
be successful needs to be doing things Youtube does right, and correct things Youtube does
wrong. It can’t be opposite to Youtube. It has to be a social network where people
are able to connect easily without a steep learning curve. The hurdle of transferring from Youtube to
another platform must be very low. Because it’s based on user-created web content,
the platform essentially needs to be a search engine with smart algorithms able to show
results people are looking for. It has to be possible to optimize the content
for search engines and have them indexed in search aggregates. It can’t be an isolated website people have
to actively look for to find. It needs to be easily found without even directly
looking for it. It can’t expect action from the general
public. It has to give them a motivation in form of
content they are looking for and innovation at an offer they have been given yet. Successful Youtube alternative is going to
have to balance the relationship between creators, advertisers, and its own platform. It should allow creators to be driven by profit
as well as values of their choice. While at the same time, it has to customize
the space according to individual viewers needs so that they are able to have a circle
of content they are interested in without being flooded with content they’ll never
want to watch. All of this has to be done while beating a
multi-billion dollar centralized business that has a well over a decade of experience,
development, and established position. So how is vid.me doing on this one? Horribly, in my opinion. The experience I get from using vid.me is
so similar to what I was getting when I visited vessel.com. Do you remember vessel? It was supposed to be the big new Youtube
alternative that everybody was going to switch to. Well, it doesn’t exist anymore. It was sold to Satan. I mean Verizon. I foresee similar faith with vid.me. I might be wrong so correct me in the comments
if you think otherwise or have anything to add. But the site is basically just a clone of
Youtube. There’s nothing that’s better. Many promises and desires about Youtube alternatives
are that they fix the copyright abuse problem, broken flagging system, totally unusable Youtube
comment section, and won’t actively take down or demonetize channels or videos that
conflict with the politics of Youtube and its advertisers. Vid.me doesn’t guarantee any of that. It doesn’t even market it anything like
it. And what’s a grave no-go for me is if I
visit a video sharing website and I don’t see any videos on their home page. What are you trying to be? Do you just want to attract creators to upload
their videos to your website and then you want general users to not watch those videos
on Youtube but actively look for them on vid.me? It’s understandable you need creators but
vast majority of visits to your website will be from people looking for content not creating
one. This so basic behavioral economics. What are you doing? Then there’s minds.com. A project I really love but a website I totally
don’t understand. Especially its user interface. It’s not complicated. It just doesn’t make any sense. It fails to explain itself easily. You’d have to commit yourself to use it
because you devote yourself to an ideal. And even then it doesn’t quite fit in my
brain. I like minds core ideas, but from UE and UI
perspective – are they trying to be an alternative to Facebook? But they do call in a lot of Youtubers promising
payoffs from various monetizing features – like peer-to-peer support, paid subscriptions,
donations, and they apparently want to make an alternative to patreon. Minds doesn’t have any objective reasonable
algorithm content creators could follow to make their videos searchable. Search engine optimization is completely absent,
videos are viewed as posts, which makes it impossible to search for them by merit, you
can’t add tags to your videos, if you share your videos they’ll get zero views unless
you boost. Boosting is basically just paying for views,
but these are not views just mere displays of your posts on other people’s news feeds. It’s like paying for like farms in Bangladesh. You’ll get likes but no real engagement. As a creator you don’t want to be noticed. You want to be discovered when other people
search for stuff you made content for. You are not a product to be advertised. There are other cosmetic flaws that need fixing
if minds wants more youtubers – the biggest as mentioned is that there is no video list. The channel’s content is viewed as posts
in feed and not list of videos on a channel page. Since uploads are treated as posts, there
is no real description tab that would appear underneath the video. It creates a messy combination of Facebook
and Youtube content layouts and they don’t really blend together very well. Also if you upload directly to minds, it’s
not possible to add your custom thumbnails to distinguish your videos, which significantly
diminishes your channel branding. To me minds is more of an alternative to Facebook
and tries to make money by implementing monetization models of Youtube and Patreon. It’s not horrible, but it’s not all that
intuitive and expected. There should be a clear distinction between
an ordinary user page layout, and channel page layout. Content creators should be allowed to adopt
Youtube-like display page, while general users could keep Facebook newsfeed. The core message of minds is to be a social
network that doesn’t censor you and doesn’t track you. Which is great, but who gives a damn? Apparently not those 500 million people who
upgraded to Windows 10. And certainly not 90% of worldwide Internet
citizens relying on Google to search for news and pretty much everything else Google censors. And absolutely definitely not those 2 billion
Facebook monthly active users. An alternative to Youtube that doesn’t just
want to remain an alternative in the corner full of people lamenting how right they are
about the masses of sheeple has to have a kick ass user experience. It has to blow everyone’s mind away. Minds.com certainly didn’t blow my mind
away. LOL. I must stop… Another new video sharing platform is bitchute. This one looks very promising. It has just a tiny problem. So tiny it’s hard to see. Oh there it is. No views! You can create a great project, with fantastic
values hard coded in its core. But it needs something additional that will
pay the bills. Something that draws everybody’s attention. Even if Pewdiepie announced his bitchute channel,
he’d still get 7 views per video, because people would be asked to sacrifice a little
bit of convenience that they so sacredly don’t want to give up to migrate to a new website
and subscribe there. Bitchute would need to make some partnerships
with established organizations and creators. Maybe if some news outlet started posting
their videos on bitchute and shared them with their audience on their platform. That would start to build some traction. How much it is in their control to attract
the kind of content that draws everyone in, that I don’t know. But bitchute is doing something that certainly
has a potential. It’s a completely decentralized network
that doesn’t look horrible and is actually easy to use. Bitchute is clearly an outcome of a brilliant
human genius and maximum effort. Bitchute trades as a peer-to-peer network
based on a web browser version of bit torrent. This means that the site’s developers do
not provide their own servers for hosting the videos, but rather spread this costly
burden to the network of torrent users seeding file storage from their devices. It works similarly to bitcoin blockhain network
– in order for it to work, there is a group of core developers maintaining the software
side, and then seeders, like miners in bitcoin making transactions possible, provide the
lifeblood to the Bitchute network by making it possible for users to upload and share
videos, and just generally use the website. Bitcoin blew cryptocurrency into a &150 billion
dollar market asset class, even though it’s still far from becoming mainstream and the
establishment hates it. Decentralized service is just a better idea
because it doesn’t have a single point of failure – like a centralized company or
a regulatory body that make and break the whole thing. Bitchute currently doesn’t serve its own
search. Any search will transfer you away from their
website to DuckDuckGo’s search engine, which proxies results from Yahoo. It is crucially important to see a thumbnail
of a video. Youtube heavily relies on it. Videos wouldn’t get nearly as discovered
if they were offshoot of Google index pages. You don’t search for videos to read but
to watch. Bitchute certainly is an interesting project
and it deserves to be given a chance. Something to keep in mind though is that 30%
of Youtubers make 90% of the website traffic. If Bitchute wants to grow big, its bitchuters
need to be big as well. Popular creators will be able to generate
more traffic and attract more profits, in which way they will pull smaller ones and
newcomers with them. I think only that way the whole network will
be able to grow and attract more new and small content creators. My whole take on this is that we’ll probably
never see a complete replacement of Google, Youtube, and Facebook by ethical alternatives. If they ever fall, it will be because the
innovation will outpace them. In which case these corporations will invest
in such new innovations and will transfer their business model to them. Google is already preparing for this which
is why Alphabet has acquired 160+ companies, most of which have nothing to do with being
a search engine. Diversity is a necessity to sustain a free
and strong middle class. The economy is more stable if the free market
is more open and spread across as many players as possible. We are living in a dangerous world where more
and more wealth is accumulated and merged within fewer and fewer boards of directors. It’s problematic because instead of serving
millions of interests to millions of people, only a handful of interests are met with satisfaction
because their monopoly power is at such a level that whatever their actions define the
whole market. So I would conclude that the free Internet
needs more alternatives like bitchute and less clones like vidme. But they can’t just be alternatives. They must strive towards innovation. Luckily for them, centralized monopolies are
poised to kill more innovation than make, so decentralized projects have an upper hand
on this one. But let me know – do you have any content
creators you watch posting on one of these alternatives? And also which one do you think has the biggest
potential to gain some percentage points? If you engage in liking or commenting, my
videos will be discovered by more people to join the discussion. So please do so and also feel free to share
my work and subscribe for more coverage of cyber Silmarillion in the next chapter.

Leave a Reply

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