Observations about Kyte

I’ve been trying Kyte for less than a week, and I love it because:

  1. the ease of use of producing and posting layered multimedia "shows",
  2. the channel concept, which ensures that the content can be distributed immediately to multiple, pre-defined destinations, and
  3. the immediate ensuing conversation through (multimedia) chat.

I’ve embedded it on my blog and on my Facebook profile, and I love the fact that there always seem to be people on the other end who apparently feel compelled to converse about the stuff that I’ve posted.

[UPDATE: I posted the content of this blog entry as a video on my Kyte
channel
– unfortunately the sound quality is quite horrible.]

I have to admit that I very much look at applications like these from a blogger’s point of view. I want to engage in conversation about the things I blog. Blogging is very much about capturing. Whether I do that with text, video, images, flash multimedia, whether on a PC or on-the-go, is of secondary concern. What matters is the capturing and the quality of the conversation.

Seems to me that the scope of the content that you’d want to "socialcast" with Kyte poses somewhat of a challenge. According to Daniel Graf, Kyte is distinctly different from YouTube in that Kyte is not about "broadcasting to the world and trying to get as many viewers as you can", but rather "sharing and conversing about moments that matter".

On one hand, there is content which I’d like to capture and converse about with anyone who’s interested. These conversations are intended to be very public. Anything on my public blog falls into that category. So indeed, the idea is to broadcast to the world and try to get as many viewers as I can. Or at least, to reach as many people as possible so as to have the best chances of attracting the most relevant viewers.

On the other hand, there is content which I’d like to converse about with some people, but not with the public at large. If Kyte would offer distributed access, I believe that "socialcasting" could become a more meaningful term. The thing is, during these past few days I’ve caught myself recording more video material with my N95 that I wouldn’t want to share with the world, than stuff that I’d happily put into the public domain.

If we are talking about "moments that matter", I think that many of those moments are somewhat private, or so draft that they are not ready to be shared with the world. I’d love to converse about those captured moments with people I trust. This can only happen with some sort of access control.

Otherwise, the content on Kyte will not be more interesting than the content on YouTube, and the "community" will not be more engaged or relevant than the "community" on YouTube.

Then a point about searchability. Daniel mentioned how Reuters is using Kyte together with some speech-to-text technology, so as to make Kyte’s audio content searchable. I think this is a brilliant move. Everyone wants to be able to find back the stuff they capture. If I post video content on my blog, I want that to pop up in a relevant search query a year from now.

So, to summarize: I love Kyte because of its (1) ease of use, (2) channel concept, and (3) immediate interactivity. I see room for improvement through (A) access control and (B) speech-to-text searchability.

Advertisements

One thought on “Observations about Kyte

  1. I agree, I have had a great experience with Kyte for the same reasons as you stated. I love the chat feature since its puts me into direct contact with my audience. It’s nice to talk to people as opposed to just posting comments on videos like in youtube.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s