i just had a chance to play around with msn soapbox. youtube copy? whatever, i've decided not to try to care much anymore about the "you're copying us" mentality after i saw iMediaCenter...er...i mean iTV.
i didn't want to use soapbox mainly because i'm not a fan of the usability experience of windows live id and/or passport. why? take a look...here's msn's home page:
notice the branding and look and feel...now let's click 'sign in':
does this look the same? other than the msn butterfly logo, i'm clearly jumped to another place...and by the way, if i signup for a login at this point, i lost context of what i'm signing in for. why can't ther just be a username/password box on the msn page? want to use live id? fine, just do it behind the scense...services anyone?
i'm pretty sure they are using the same service, and look at the difference, no dual windows, and it looks/feels like i didn't leave soapbox -- and it is faster for some reason.
so anyway...why do i like soapbox so far? two reasons: experience and quality. first the experience. it's all web 2.x (trying to stay away from the term so no big book publishers get mad...hmmm...maybe i should trademark web 2.x) looking. the menus on the side size up/down as you roll over them and it's all smooth like with no flash involved. then when i start to upload a video i enter all the information and click upload...what do i see? a note saying i can upload another while the other one is processing...so i do...check it out:
see the 'uploading' and 'queued' -- and i can still do everything else, browse/play videos, etc. -- very well done here.
then when my video is finished, i look at the quality...it is great (it started as an avi). compared to the same file in youtube, it is much better quality from my perspective:
i think the soapbox team did a good job and i hope they continue to enhance their offerings.