Thank you to J.D. Lasica for pointing us to FLVR, a Safari plug in that makes saving any FLV file a snap. At $15, it’s a bargain.
I’ve tried several apps and sites over the past couple of years in my various attempts to save videos.
J.D.’s pointer is well timed, too.Â I have a presentation to prepare for an Inland Press Association gathering in Phoenix on Sept. 15. It’s going to be all about disruptive video strategy, and I wanted to show some exampes of video from various sites.Â This app will help a lot.
just a point on the use of the word “disruptive” in regards to change/innovation.
Scott Kerblun contends that the use of the term disruptive in this context is hype – and that “big change” would be more appropriate: “Edison didn’t describe the lightbulb as a disruptive innovation. There’s no reason to assume throwing the word around gives anyone particular power to make good creative things happen.”
Amongst innovation strategists the phrase “disruptive innovation” has a very specific meaning. It refers to innovation that allows consumers to undertake tasks previously requiring professional input. A 2 minute vid on the subject:
Except that A) Edison didn’t invent the light bulb; B) It wasn’t a big change. It was really incremental change, like all innovation, built on the break-throughs and work of others who proceeded Edison.
The light bulb is a different kind of innovation (not necessarily disruptive) because it wasn’t a low-end change aimed at displacing an incumbent with “good enough,” but like the iPhone, it was initially aimed at well-heeled customers with a clear job-to-be-done need.
Having spent a number of years studying disruption and innovation, while admittedly from a lay/practical perspective, I think I have a good handle on the meaning of the words and am applying them correctly — if you are implying otherwise.
And I’m happy to leverage the buzz-worthiness of the words to help promote the best video strategy for newspapers to follow.
BTW: This Strategyn guy isn’t completely accurate in his thinking about disruption and innovation.
For example, he says that it’s a myth that innovation might address unmet needs of consumers who don’t know they have a particular need. He said “outcome-driven innovation” (now there’s a buzz phrase only a consultant could come up with) uncovers this myth because only research can uncover unmet needs (read, pay us to find those needs). He uses as an example the microwave oven. He says that it’s incorrect to say microwaves uncovered an unexpressed need, because consumers were looking for a way to prepare meals faster. The problem is, before the microwave, consumers couldn’t imagine a device that would speed up cooking times. Consumers would never have gone looking for this device if the microwave hadn’t been invented. The microwave is actually a perfect example of helping consumers discover needs they didn’t fully realize they had.
Of course, like all innovations, the microwave was not without its precursors, such as the classic TV dinner. In that respect, the guy is right, but “outcome-driven innovation” isn’t going to help you uncover that. Good old fashioned observation will do the trick.
There is no substitute — no amount of research — for taking an idea to market. That is the only way to discover whether it really is a good substitute innovation, or whether it truly meets unmet consumer needs. In the end, innovations succeed or fail in the market place, not in an R&D facility.
Though I would be vastly overmatched in talk about online media trends, if you’re in Phoenix on the 14, 15th or 16th, I’d happily buy you a cool beer or three. email me if you wanna feel the draught.
The Edison quote and “hype” comment are from Kerblun. Use of the word “disruptive” is not inaccurate. As Kerblun points out – all innovation is disruptive.
But in the context of online video – the change occasioned by youtube etc. is disruptive in the narrower sense of professionals being replaced by users.