Accessibility, usability, scalability at very, very large scale, actual searchability, and actual return on investment, because some people actually get money from youtube?
Actually, peertube, depending on the instance and the popularity of the content, can be incredibly frustrating for a viewer. And it can be frustrating to the content creator. Some people are quick to dismiss minor (and less minor) annoyances, are able to look for fixes, and so on, but for almost everyone? The experience is nightmareish, with incertain returns (or no returns at all, as it stands).
Once you fix all that, you might have a chance to convince larger entities to move to peertube. Well, more realistically, to host their own instance. Well, more realistically, to host multiple instances, because really some people would hammer the platform down with each video. See the issue yet?
Peer to peer viewing can only go so far. Some people, when they put a video out, get hundred of thousands of view in the span of a few minutes. This works relatively well on youtube, with a very large CDN (and probably some heuristics for big accounts). It is enough to hinder “smaller” platforms like dailymotion. It would just be a terrible experience on peertube as it is now, unless the creator preemptively mirrored it in many, many places beforehand.
Accessibility, usability, scalability at very, very large scale, actual searchability, and actual return on investment, because some people actually get money from youtube?
Actually, peertube, depending on the instance and the popularity of the content, can be incredibly frustrating for a viewer. And it can be frustrating to the content creator. Some people are quick to dismiss minor (and less minor) annoyances, are able to look for fixes, and so on, but for almost everyone? The experience is nightmareish, with incertain returns (or no returns at all, as it stands).
Once you fix all that, you might have a chance to convince larger entities to move to peertube. Well, more realistically, to host their own instance. Well, more realistically, to host multiple instances, because really some people would hammer the platform down with each video. See the issue yet?
I agree, but I didn’t really get the last point about hammering the platform.
Peer to peer viewing can only go so far. Some people, when they put a video out, get hundred of thousands of view in the span of a few minutes. This works relatively well on youtube, with a very large CDN (and probably some heuristics for big accounts). It is enough to hinder “smaller” platforms like dailymotion. It would just be a terrible experience on peertube as it is now, unless the creator preemptively mirrored it in many, many places beforehand.
Maybe the peer to peer aspect of it could sustain big amounts of viewers
Not really, at least not when viewers all flood in once the video is out.
In this situation, everyone needs a file, but barely anyone can share it, leading to terrible bandwidth.