Jump to content

Talk:Joost/Archives/2014

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Live content

started with live content over p2p: http://www.joost.com/featured/marchmadness/ (89.251.0.64 (talk) 12:52, 25 April 2008 (UTC))

openbeta since oct 1st, 2007

According to http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071001-joost-finally-sheds-invite-only-status-opens-up-to-the-public.html an not the suggested march 2008 (89.251.0.64 (talk) 12:52, 25 April 2008 (UTC))

Performance

Joost (1.0beta) and all the previous versions have been very unresponsive (as far as the user interface) even on modern machines (e.g. core 2 duo with 4 GB ram) —Preceding unsigned comment added by AzzAz (talk • contribs) 02:44, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

encoding?

Any word on the type of encoding it uses for video? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AtHomeBoy 2000 (talk • contribs) 19:53, January 19, 2007 (UTC)

Yes. https://www.joost.com/FAQ.html#include_faq_public-WhatVideodecoderdoesJoost_26trade_3Buse_3F --Elwood j blues 20:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Channels?

Someone should list all the channels that are available. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Assassimon (talk • contribs) 18:53, January 28, 2007 (UTC)

I have heard from TWIT that they have Muchmusic from canada —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.128.235.150 (talk • contribs) 00:59, January 31, 2007 (UTC)
I put up a list of all the channels Andweallfalldown 08:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Now that there are more channels found at http://www.joost.com/whatson/channels.html someone should move the channels section to a new page just for channels --Assassimon 21:59, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

DRM

Be on the lookout for information about its DRM scheme and post accordingly. Beatsleepless 11:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Product placement purchasing

When will this be available? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.91.29.114 (talk) 00:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC).

I'm pretty sure that video was a proof of concept piece by a user. Joost has no word on that yet. It would be cool however. Mbstrlbstr 13:34, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Advertising model

The article suggests that advertising model will be analogous to traditional TV. Although from what I've read/understood the model will be quite different. Taking advantage of the medium, the advertising will be very targeted based on user profile, geography, even the current weather (think air conditioning adverts during a heat-wave). This is all discussed in the Wired article and I think should have mention here. This targeted advertising should be more valuable to advertisers and hence less should be needed to fund the content than trad. TV. --Bleveret 13:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Fishy security

Could anyone who has the beta please do a security analysis on Joost? These guys have been known to hide quite a bit in their programs (Kazaa spyware, Skype supernode and BIOS reporting). I have signed up, but I haven't gotten my ticket yet, and I would like to know exactly what it does (I am one of those people who doesn't really trust Skype). Also, could someone post the EULA? The Skype one gives them ability to zombie my computer. Telepheedian 16:29, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I can tell you one thing from what I've experienced with Joost, it eats a lot of bandwidth. And in terms of EULA, it's quite detailed on how it can be used and they stipulate how you can use the program, and how you can not - eg: you can not take pictures/screenshots or videocasts of video being played. So I wonder whether they are going to enforce this since many review sites are posting screenshots of Joost in action with images of it playing videos. They still haven't mentioned if it will continue to be a VOD service or if it will actually stream real live television. So far it's just high res videos. [[User:JayAlto|JayAlto]
You can not take pictures/screenshots or videocasts of video being played. -Unsigned
This is likely due to it running on a directDraw surface and not DRM. This is a common misconception... -Unsigned

Linux support

Anyone have any word on when a Linux client will be available, I've seen the FAQ page on Joost.com, but all it says is we are working on it. Since the OSX version is out already how long do you think it will be before a linux version comes out, makes since for it to come out soon because their last project (skype) release a version on linux and its the 3ed most popular OS --Assassimon 06:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Seems like they dropped the paragraph where they promised a Linux client from their FAQ. It used to be on this page. Now it just says that they "are currently investigating the potential for porting Joost to new platforms". Sammi84 10:27, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
The FAQ link moved to here. Now says they're working on a Linux version, but there is no date of the statement nor delivery date. -- SEWilco (talk) 20:46, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

List of unsupported OS

Why the hell do we need that? Isn't it enough to say it runs on XP Pro, Home and OS X 10.4 on Intel Macs. Which other software article merges the List of operating systems into itself? --soum (0_o) 10:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Not this one, anymore... ;-) -/- Warren 12:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I just discovered Joost today. I'm using an iMacG5 PPC, 10.4.11, on a DSL line, and Joost is running just fine as far as I can tell. Even without the PPC support. Although with only a medium speed DSL, the audio and visual both broke up and hesitated just a little bit with my first movie viewing. Emerald twilites (talk) 02:30, 15 October 2008 (UTC)Emerald Twilights

Terms of service

There's a summary of Ning's terms of service on WikiSummaries.org which would be a useful external link here. The summary can be found here. The summary is released under the GNU FDL and so it's content is therefore "compatible" with Wikipedia.Geneffects 05:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Instead of using a site like JoostSwap to beg for an invite you can also use certain blogs which allows users to just fill in their email address and then quickly receive an invite in return... worked for me in about 20 minutes. JoostSwap.com is a community site for people to trade for Joost invites. They have over 1,000 members now, and put regular reviews up. It is an English site. They just started a community forum as well. (Mbstrlbstr 18:54, 19 April 2007 (UTC))

Sorry, forums are not linkable as external link per wikipedia policy. --soum (0_o) 20:11, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

JoostSwap is more than a forum. The front page is used to display latest news regarding Joost, and The swaps section is a place for trading Joost tokens. The forum is not the main part of the site currently. Adding a link to joostswap.com is not a direct link to a fourm. The website currently listed as external links has a forum also. It doesn't look like the Beta tester community was ever discussed in the talk section.Mbstrlbstr 13:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I completely agree that JoostSwap should be added. Its by far the best resource out there about Joost. Also the beta tester community link goes to a site that isn't in english. I really doubt that link should be on the english Joost wiki page. User:Bucko158 17:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Soumyash, it should not be added. MahangaTalk 05:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Why not, what are your reasons for this? If we are going by what is already in place, JoostSwap is on par with the beta testers community. The user base is over 1,000. Not very many, but a large percentage of the Joost users. It is the place to go for joost invitations. Mbstrlbstr 18:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
You're half right. Neither of these two links meet the inclusion criteria of WP:External links. I have removed the German beta-tester forum link. -- Satori Son 19:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Should joost.com itself not be included, since it has a forum integrated into the site? Kidding aside, how can JoostSwap be altered to allow it to be added?Mbstrlbstr 19:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Again, see WP:EL. Among the links to avoid are "3. Links mainly intended to promote a website." i.e. you shouldn't put links in articles to promote your site. How you can modify it to make it acceptable is not the point. 128.174.93.161 20:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Joost and TV Cable ISPs

Does anybody know if the cable companies are feeling threathened by this technology? My ISP is RCS&RDS, which is also offering cable television. I received an invitation from Joost, downloaded the program, but despite setting it up correctly, it failed to connect (the error I get is that the program can`not connect; I even disabled my firewall, but to no avail). I suspect it is because of RDS&RCS, which may have blocked acces, either through the port Joost is using, either to the Joost network. Are there any simmilar situations? Dry dust 09:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Private company?

Is this a private company? Is it owned by a larger company, I was thinking maybe eBay. 66.30.166.58 18:42, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

It's owned by the founders and the companys investors. See frontpage for further information about the investors. But it's a privately held company, yes.

Onthetoob.com is a much more current, and much more actively updated channelguide than JoostList. Also 100% Joost dedicated, and adds RSS feeds for content as well. I changed the Joost Channel Guide in this article to Onthetoob becuse Joostlist is no longer updated and Onthetube has become notable with one of the major IPTV blogs giving it some coverage http://newteevee.com/2007/07/27/what-if-joost-were-a-web-app Matt hendry 01:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

The following is a Joost Channel Guide. It is 100% Joost dedicated. It provides a meaningful service to wiki users. Please add the link to the page: Onthetoob Joostlist is no longer updated it should be replaced with OnTheToob that is used by the Joost developers and content teams .Matt hendry 14:33, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Since the following external link has been deleted, I am asking for feedback on it. If anyone feels that it violates Wikipedia rules or is inappropriate, please post comments here: 7 Reasons Why Joost could fail If no comments are received, it should remain on the Joost page. First choice is "External Links" and second is the "Further Reading" section. Please comment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.21.93 (talk • contribs) 18:21, May 18, 2007 (UTC)

Here is the response originally given to Boffob. In short the point made is no Wikipedia guidelines are being violated, in fact Wikipedia guidelines strongly suggest the inclusion. The only "bad thing" is that there may be a slight conflict of interest because I suggested its inclusion to the person who posted it and it links to my (external) article). Here it is in more detail:

Please sign your comments. First, it's a blog, which is to be avoided as per the external links guidelines. As it turns out, it's the personal blog of Anil Gupte which makes this addition by himself (or him as the anonymous User:203.199.165.66, as he identified himself on my talk page) a conflict of interest. Since you are also an unsigned IP, there is no way to know whether you are an independent user or not. As no independent registered user is here to help confirm whether Anil Gupte is an established authority on the subject (which may make such a link acceptable, provided it also follows the NPOV guidelines, which appears debatable given the subject of the blog post), it constitutes spam. Finally, asking for comments on that blog is a complete non sequitur as to whether the link is acceptable on Wikipedia.--Boffob 00:29, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
As the Anil Gupte identified here, I am going to respond first. The poster will identify himself later. BTW, I resent you calling my hard work and carefully reasoned article Spam. 1. It is not a "Personal" Blog - there are no pictures of my children or dog. This is a technology blog with some well-thought out stuff that obviously good enough for Business Week. 2. This is not a non-sequitur - if you take the time to read WP:EL caefully you will no doubt see the sentence: "If the link is to a relevant and informative site that should otherwise be included, please consider mentioning it on the talk page and let neutral and independent Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it. This is in line with the conflict of interest guidelines." 3. Every sentence in an article cannot have a NPOV - the article as a whole should include multiple points of view and some of them obviously can be through links. Agupte 19:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
The issue is that you are the author of the blog and you posted the link (and in fact, several such links on other articles, usually a tell-tale sign of spam), making it a conflict of interest . It is a non-sequitur to ask for comments on your blog for a decision on Wikipedia. The only relevant comments as to whether it is appropriate or not are by Wikipedians on Wikipedia. I've otherwise stated many times why I think it is an inappropriate link, but I can't be a one person jury. You can put a request for comment if you want other independent Wikipedians to comment so we can resolve this issue, as just asking your friends to sign up would constitute sockpuppetry by proxy--Boffob 21:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Where did I ask for comments on my blog for Wikipedia? You are confused. I am glad you at least agree not to be a one-person jury. I will ask for comments on RFC as well, even though Wikipedia guidelines ask for such topics to be discussed on the talk page of the article in question - which is exactly what I did.
Please sign your post. I may have misinterpreted the "please comment here" followed by the link to the blog in your first post above (suggesting to post comments on the blog rather than in this talk page).--Boffob 21:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

RFC

Here is the response originally given to Boffob. In short the point made is no Wikipedia guidelines are being violated, in fact Wikipedia guidelines strongly suggest the inclusion. The only "bad thing" is that there may be a slight conflict of interest because I suggested its inclusion to the person who posted it and it links to my (external) article). Which is of course why I am defending it. The original poster has refused to participate because he does not want to get involvedd in a fight - his words "What a waste of time, this guy deleting stuff. Is he your enemy or what?" (Ha!) Here are my points in more detail:

What should be linked Meets this criteria: 3. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons.

Meets this criteria: 4. Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews. (The Joost article is a review)

Links to be considered Meets this criteria: 4. Sites which fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources may be linked to, for example a blog written by the subject of a biography article.

Links normally to be avoided It does not meet any of these criteria. It has no advertising on it. Although it is a blog, it is written by an authority that 26 websites and blogs link to including gigaom.com and businessweek.com, which are respected online publications. Check the Technorati linking for the blog l3media.blogspot.com for confirmation if you need it.

I should add that User Boffob has deleted several other external links in the same article, which are not by me and which as far as I can tell existed for 8 months prior to this. It appears that User Boffob did not know they were mine - sounds like a vendetta at first glance. Agupte 06:45, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Add the link I read the blog post, its informative about Joost, seems to to be a reliable source and does has no advertising. Boffob seems to be just deleting things, the link is a good external link and should be in the article. Urdna 15:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not merely deleting links. Internet TV related articles are prone to spam. Blogs are generally to be avoided, particularly when added by their author. But if consensus is to keep the link, I won't go against it.--Boffob 21:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
  • No link A blog is not a reliable source for anything other than what the author says. Unless the author is notable, I fail to see why the link should be included. The content of the blog may be included in the article, to the extent that secondary sources cite it (e.g. the oft-mentioned Business Week, although it does not seem to [mention] Mr Gupte's work) but in general an external link to a blog is simply not appropriate. User:Agupte's arguments are inconclusive (e.g. he asserts that the link meets several criteria for inclusion but makes no attempt to justify those assertions) obviously violate WP:COI and bear a similarity to the strawmen found on WP:WPSPAM. It seems that this blog might fall below the threshold of notability - and indeed notice - if not for his efforts such as this RfC (and [this] for example) to publicise it. SheffieldSteel 21:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  • No link. User:Agupte's contention that the linked page "contain[s] neutral and accurate material" is unfounded, because the blog is not neutral. That the blog post is "meaningful" and "relevant" is also an unsupported opinion. The third criterion cited does not apply, because the blog does not relate to Joost in the manner specified. The link also does indeed fall under the criteria for Links normally to be avoided: namely 3, 11, and 13, as well as the guideline against conflicts of interest. I also note that this request for comment has not been submitted in a manner consistent with a neutral point of view. In particular, the last paragraph seems to suggest that User:Boffob has a "vendetta" against links to User:Agupte's blog; this supposed vendetta has no bearing on whether or not the link should stay. BassoProfundo 00:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

TV resolution

The program is based on P2PTV technology and is expected to deliver (relaying) near-TV resolution images. What is "tv resolution"? Nowadays tv resolution doesn't simply mean 576x480 anymore...SuperMidget 10:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean 720x480 (ntsc), or 720x576 (pal)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.201.100.166 (talk) 00:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Marketing

This is not a criticism of Joost, but it seems it is an important topic that ought to be covered in a wiki entry. Joost is engaged in a novel viral marketing campaign using its "limited" beta and other tools to build anticipation of its roll-out. Especially since in many ways it is really beta vapor-ware at this point - it exists to the public only as marketed. Using the limited beta-invite as a carrot, they are openly encouraging people to try to get invitations by talking about the product on blogs and message boards. I'm not sure that is new, but until the product goes public it is an important part of their activities.

Thank you whoever you are. Boffob, I hope you are listening. And yes, I do not know this person at all. Agupte 19:02, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
I've noticed very suspicious repeated posting to 4chan and other such places-- it looks like a deliberate astroturfing activity is happening. 203.14.156.193 20:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

"See Also"

Why would we want to click on all those links without any description of whatever they are? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.90.17.134 (talk) 06:50:33, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

See also should be internal links to other Wikipedia articles rather than external links so it is not a major investment to click on them, since Wikipedia articles are not memory-consuming compared to external sites. Tyciol (talk) 00:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Peercasting?

Is Joost a peercasting technology? Should it be listed and categorized as such? --lynX 12:02, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Reference

The yahoo biz reference has expired and the link is no longer available. Pirikou 11:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Is is correct? Joost is pronounced "Jew Street"? D-Fluff has had E-Nuff 17:04, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Isn't it supposed to be pronounced like juiced? Like a juice drink? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.19.196 (talk) 11:27, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
I believe it is meant to be pronounced Joost and NOT "Yost" (i.e. how the forename Joost is pronounced in Dutch). We need a verification of this. 77.96.240.178 (talk) 12:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
In Dutch I think it's pronounced Yoast. Kausill 10:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
It is pronounced like juiced, from their own site, "it rhymes with boost". see http://www.joost.com/support/faq/General-questions.html#How-is-Joost-pronounced 76.111.62.73 (talk) 14:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
The currently given pronunciations, /j ooːst/ and "Juiced", don't fit together. --Abdull (talk) 20:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Colorful diagram

The arrangement of items in that "P2Ptv" diagram is needlessly complicated. That is to say, the system is not as complex as it is made to appear in the diagram. Each stream serves a distinct set of users, some in series, some in parallel, but no lines ever need cross one another and the sets could each occupy a separate diagram or region of a single diagram. I wouldn't bother to point this out except that this appears to be motivated by the desire to make the system look more complex than it is. And I cannot think of any reason for doing this except making the image more visually enticing at the expense of clarity, which is always a poor trade-off. Asat (talk) 08:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

There's a statement about being ready for an end of year release. It's now 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.197.122.13 (talk) 19:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

"North America"

North America is Canada, Mexico, and the US. If you mean US, say US. Joost is useless in Canada, nothing is licensed to play here. It's like YouTube, a bunch of random video snippets. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.201.100.166 (talk) 00:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

This section is ironic to me: when I tried Joost I was frustrated at how much international content US users couldn't use. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.229.62.47 (talk) 01:58, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
This is also out of date since Naruto plays quite well here in Canada. I added mention of this to the article. Tyciol (talk) 00:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

New adobe flash version

New easier —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.91.213.37 (talk) 19:53, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Does this mean the downloaded Joost software is no longer required to watch videos? I couldn't find it on the website, but I didn't look that hard. It's now entirely a browser based service? The article should reflect if they've switched to a completely different delivery model. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 05:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Hulu clone -Unsigned

Not P2P anymore

Joost is now completely web based. The downloadable software is discontinued (I don't know whether it still works, but I signed up since I forgot my previous account information since I reinstalled my system, and the download is not even an option now). The website seems to be the only way to use joost now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.108.13.253 (talk) 19:52, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Discountinuing P2P Distribution. (email recieved 17/dec/08)

In October, we introduced our new website: Joost.com. With our new website, you're able to watch all of our videos – TV shows, music videos, and films – right in your web browser. At this point, we have decided to discontinue our original Joost software application. As of Friday, Dec. 19th, you will no longer be able to watch videos in the Joost software application – but you will be able to find all of our videos, and more, on Joost.com. Log on to Joost.com today for a complete online video experience! Your friends at Joost —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barton71 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Joost/Archives/2014&oldid=1136854375"