YouTube serves 100m a day - bit-tech.net Forums

WilHarris · 17th Jul 2006, 22:31

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/07...es_100m_a_day/

chemo · 17th Jul 2006, 22:39

huge numbers there for youtube, no doubt google will be in hot competition now.
i do love the odd session on youtube though

Firehed · 17th Jul 2006, 23:50

Well the quality does suck, but there's really no beating the covenience. I just used it for the first time, and it was very simple. No need to have a stupid standalone uploader like with Google Video. Admittedly, Google's video quality is somewhat higher, but it's still a royal pain (especially if you're not using Windows, since they tend to be a bit slower in dev for Macs and Linux, though I think the video uploader they have for everything at this point).

Plus the whole free thing.

scq · 18th Jul 2006, 04:10

I like the convenience and fast streaming of Flash video. Quality is definetly not on par with stuff like HD Quicktime, but nothing beats near-instant streaming.

As for advertising, can Youtube even advertise? They have some text ads here and there, but never on video pages. Since their only excuse from avoiding lawsuits is that they're making no money from the copyrighted content, wouldn't advertising jeopardize their forte?

crazydeep74 · 18th Jul 2006, 04:37

Wow, I wonder what they host on. They must pay some big money for there hosting bills.

Solidus · 18th Jul 2006, 07:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazydeep74

Wow, I wonder what they host on. They must pay some big money for there hosting bills.

Thats the question id like to know O_O

apoogod · 18th Jul 2006, 08:50

Id like to know how they make any money

Atomic · 18th Jul 2006, 09:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazydeep74

Wow, I wonder what they host on. They must pay some big money for there hosting bills.

YouTube's is on http://www.limelightnetworks.com/

Spaced_invader · 18th Jul 2006, 10:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by scq

As for advertising, can Youtube even advertise? They have some text ads here and there, but never on video pages. Since their only excuse from avoiding lawsuits is that they're making no money from the copyrighted content, wouldn't advertising jeopardize their forte?

If only that argument would hold... Would that not mean that every peer to peer site and user could then use that excuse...

and as to their hosting bills this must run into the hundreds of thousands with the amount of data they are shifting...

TGImages · 18th Jul 2006, 14:14

Heard a rumor a few days back that YouTube is burning a million a day in bandwidth costs.

I guess it wouldn't be too hard to figure out... 100 million videos a day (evenly distributed viewing for ease of calculations) is bit over 4 million an hour which is about 70,000 videos a minute or about 1100 a second. What's an average video size? 1mb? 1/2 mb? 2 mb? Multiply that times 1100 and there is your rough bandwidth requirements.

Now I have to agree with the other assessments. How are they going to continue to pay for this?

ch424 · 18th Jul 2006, 16:14

Yeah, $1m/day is what I heard too. I think Yahoo are funding it, along with Flickr and some other stuff.

ch424

Atomic · 18th Jul 2006, 16:55

Quote:

The site, which has raised $11.5 million in venture capital in the last year, didn't see a penny in revenue until March, when they cautiously began selling ads. Meanwhile the site's bandwidth costs, which increase every time a visitor clicks on a video, may be approaching $1 million a month--much of which goes to provider Limelight Networks.

http://www.forbes.com/home/intellige...0428video.html

I'd bet there is more than one source funding it.

DXR_13KE · 18th Jul 2006, 20:34

"2.5 billion videos viewed from it in the month of May"
thats a lot of pron.

apoogod · 18th Jul 2006, 22:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by DXR_13KE

"2.5 billion videos viewed from it in the month of May"
thats a lot of pron.

thats the thing, I thought youtube dont let porn on

Atomic · 19th Jul 2006, 08:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by apoogod

thats the thing, I thought youtube dont let porn on

they dont, a small amount of nudity can be allowed if its to do with the video.

17th Jul 2006, 22:31	#1
WilHarris Just another nobody Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Oxford Posts: 2,671	YouTube serves 100m a day http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/07...es_100m_a_day/

17th Jul 2006, 22:39	#2
chemo True Jungle Brother Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 2,639	huge numbers there for youtube, no doubt google will be in hot competition now. i do love the odd session on youtube though __________________ Don't hate the Geek, Hate the code!

17th Jul 2006, 23:50	#3
Firehed Why not? I own a domain to match. Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: An hour north of Boston Posts: 12,576	Well the quality does suck, but there's really no beating the covenience. I just used it for the first time, and it was very simple. No need to have a stupid standalone uploader like with Google Video. Admittedly, Google's video quality is somewhat higher, but it's still a royal pain (especially if you're not using Windows, since they tend to be a bit slower in dev for Macs and Linux, though I think the video uploader they have for everything at this point). Plus the whole free thing. __________________ hire me @ eric-stern.com - web developer and php ninja pics @ my smugmug :: Twitter @firehed :: blog @ firehed.net 40D\|580EXII\|285HV\|AB800\|70-200f/4LIS\|17-50f/2.8\|150f/2.8Macro\|50f/1.8 MacPro @ 8x2.8GHz, 10GB FBDDR2, 3TB HD :: MBP @ 2x2.2GHz, 4GB DDR2, 320GB HD

18th Jul 2006, 04:37	#5
crazydeep74 Hypermodder Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Rochester, NY Posts: 761	Wow, I wonder what they host on. They must pay some big money for there hosting bills. __________________ Project PlexBox - Planning - Log Coming Soon.

18th Jul 2006, 08:50	#7
apoogod Xport1.com Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,029	Id like to know how they make any money __________________ It's like a koala bear crapped a rainbow in my brain!

18th Jul 2006, 04:10	#4
scq Hypermodder Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 783	I like the convenience and fast streaming of Flash video. Quality is definetly not on par with stuff like HD Quicktime, but nothing beats near-instant streaming. As for advertising, can Youtube even advertise? They have some text ads here and there, but never on video pages. Since their only excuse from avoiding lawsuits is that they're making no money from the copyrighted content, wouldn't advertising jeopardize their forte?

18th Jul 2006, 14:14	#10
TGImages Grandpa Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Illinois, US Posts: 160	Heard a rumor a few days back that YouTube is burning a million a day in bandwidth costs. I guess it wouldn't be too hard to figure out... 100 million videos a day (evenly distributed viewing for ease of calculations) is bit over 4 million an hour which is about 70,000 videos a minute or about 1100 a second. What's an average video size? 1mb? 1/2 mb? 2 mb? Multiply that times 1100 and there is your rough bandwidth requirements. Now I have to agree with the other assessments. How are they going to continue to pay for this?

18th Jul 2006, 16:14	#11
ch424 Design Warrior Join Date: May 2004 Location: Oxford, UK Posts: 2,513	Yeah, $1m/day is what I heard too. I think Yahoo are funding it, along with Flickr and some other stuff. ch424

18th Jul 2006, 20:34	#13
DXR_13KE Madeira's banana is the best!!! Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Madeira ; Portugal Posts: 6,476	"2.5 billion videos viewed from it in the month of May" thats a lot of pron. __________________ *Renegade X - 0.40 Release!* <---- CLICK!