The new YouTube layout Sux!!1!

I must admit the title may be a little misleading as I don’t think the new layout sucks. Is it perfect? No, but was the last layout perfect? Certainly not.

New YouTube Layout
New YouTube Layout.

I suppose the question as to whether it’s better or not comes down to the amount of things that are better or worse than the last one.

Parts that are better
-@ replys in the comments
-Thumbs up and thumbs down rather than 5 stars
-Tells you the amount of videos that user has made at the top
-Video quality changer doesn’t seem to stick anymore

Parts that are worse
-Too much white
-Videos in the side seem to be random and I would prefer my videos there not related.

Verdict
So it seems that there are more parts to the layout that are better, When the option to use this layout came out in beta I chose to stick with the old one. The major turn off was the thumbs up button meant favouriting the video which was the stupidest thing ever.

But as YouTube decided not to go with that and just a ‘Like’ thumbs up (There is a ‘Like’ list that almost acts like a favourites) which I think is the better option. I’m fairly happy with the new change, hopefully they’ll slightly update it with some colour but otherwise it’s a change for the better.

YouTube Comments system
New YouTube Comments system.












The video shown above is ‘Gabriel’ our Film Dash 2010 Entry. Watch it here

1 comment on “The new YouTube layout Sux!!1!Add yours →

  1. Parts that are worse:

    -Huge minus: You don’t see the rating, until liking/disliking a video.
    ° You have too watch every crap
    ° You can’t see the rating of mediocre videos, unless, you lie

    -The comments are a mess. Now there is a fancy @reply, but where did the threaded structure go? If you see one of those @replies, you have to crawl through pages of comments, in order to find the text, to which the reply belongs.

    -Favorite as a point in a drop-down menu?!

    – No user avatar of the producer

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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