Just so that a web site can keep up with the trend, we have to sit through a video with bad sound over a congested network. Am I glad I just got to see Gosling T-shirt for 3 mins! (I say 3 mins because I just gave up, I don't have the time to waste 18 mins having to focus on this video because of the poor sound). I'd rather have it in text so that I can jump to the parts that are of interest to me.

If it were a visual demo, then I would understand the need for video. For a simple interview, it strikes me as a plain stupid idea: more requirements, less benefits.

Next time, provide content instead of presentation and I'll give feedback on the content and not the presentation.

- N -

It would also be nice if we have info on how long the video clipping will run. That way i can plan when to view this.

It's not only a question of being technologically barred from viewing interviews on bandwidth. I prefer to read, rather than watch in a tiny box on my computer, take out my headphones and put them on.

While providing a transcript of an interview certainly involves additional work, you can often get that work done cheaply by students looking for pocket money.

Just a thought from yet another technologically challenged reader.

The previous message is completely true.
Most of the time, a transcription (slang and everything included) is provided for those who can`t access streaming video, check out TheServerSide.com for an example.

Doing that will increase the audience you've got, and the quality of your content.

Thanx.

what about those who dont have any bandwidth ?
are they not allowed to know this message ?
why cant you provide a text version of this video,
some non-English speaking like me,dont even understand your slang.
If companies like mine doesnt alowy video viewing in company ?

providing a text version of the message will be very helpfull.

Thank You,