MTV’s underOverdrive
MTV bills its next great thing as “the Ultimate Broadband Video Channel”, great since I love to watch music videos of Beyonce, Alicia Keyes, and even Britney do their thing. So I head on over to the site and am instantly impressed by the design mostly because of the smooth color scheme.
Then I try to read the font…I can’t…I view the CSS to see what font that is and what size they are trying to blind me with. I see the CSS and my eyes cross and my vision gets blurry. I am go blind. I quickly close the editcss window and decide that it’s time to just watch some videos.
I can’t. Why? Well it seems that using a Dual 1.8GHz G5 with Firefox simply isn’t cutting edge enough.
Detecting OS…
WE’RE SORRY!
In order to offer a broad selection of full-length music videos on-demand and free of charge, MTV Overdrive uses Windows Digital Rights Management (DRM) to protect videos from unauthorized re-distribution.
Unfortunately, Microsoft’s Windows Media Player Plug-in for Macintosh does not support Windows DRM. If DRM support becomes available for Macintosh, MTV will develop a version of MTV Overdrive that works on a Mac.
So not only do I get a table-based layout with typography that could only be read by an ant, but I also can’t access the site because of proprietary technology available to only one audience. Welcome back to 1999.
Over the past year I have learned to control my anger and think things through because I figure there is always a good reason behind decisions such as these. However, I am dumbfounded on this one. Don’t need tables for the site. Don’t need typography that is unreadable. And I shouldn’t be restricted to simply using one OS, with one browser, while watching through only one media player.
Did I mention that it has a nice color scheme?
Actually, I run Windows Xp Pro, but simply using FF pulls up that message
Gee, thanks MTV. FUCK YOU!
By Bryan on April 29, 2005 3:04 am
It’s MTV! What did you expect? Only a select portion of their audience, those who get MTV2, can actually watch the videos they air. Now only a select portion of their audience, those who have pc’s running IE, can watch videos on the web.
How many of us are actually surprised? I for one am not. I gave up on MTV actually including music in their programming a while ago.
By Mike on April 29, 2005 4:37 am
Ditto here on the WinXP/FF combo. A white error box appears where a video should in prime real-estate…suddenly half the site doesn’t work?
In fact the entire right column is now distracting and detracting, being filled with “Optimal” and “Minimum” System Configuration stats. Why am I, the “customer,” reading this? Better yet, why should our mom or teenage sibling (who happen to run Firefox after we installed it for them) be confused by it?
In 2003, website is not problem, you are. Ghosts of the 90s return to haunt us, but with far fewer excuses.
By Jeff Werner on April 29, 2005 4:42 am
Ya’ll think this might have anything to do with the strategic alliance between the Mtv networks and Microsoft?
I guess ya’ll missed the big honkin’ Microsoft “start anythng” banner ad at the top of the page.
By Mark on April 29, 2005 7:18 am
The fact that I can’t play videos on mtv.com has had me depressed for a while now…almost as long as Yahoo Launch, which wants me to only use NETSCAPE 4.x if I ever want to see a music video on their site. Sorry, I don’t want to fire up ye olde OS 9 every time I want to see a music video online :(
By Liz on April 29, 2005 8:02 am
Yeah, I raised the font size a bit with Firefox and then the site pretty much dies (design-wise). It’s not made to scale with font-sizes at ALL. Well, luckily I don’t have much use for this type of stuff, but sadly some people (not us, of course) think this is a problem with Firefox or other browsers rather than what it really is.
By chris rhee on April 29, 2005 8:53 am
What kind of designer or developer these days would do something like that??
I can read the font, for me it’s more of a contrast issue than size. But does MTV have developers who don’t use Firefox yet??
Also, as Liz pointed out…Videos over at Yahoo don’t work on FF either, it tells you you need Netscape 7.1.
By Jeff on April 29, 2005 10:27 am
Wow… One must wonder: would it actually affect anyone’s profit if the music videos were not DRM’d? I really, really doubt it.
Digital Rights Minimization will be the scourge of the internet in this decade.
By Chris Vincent on April 29, 2005 10:32 am
Damn, I was really looking forward to checking out <hip-hip/r&b/pop artist>’s latest video.
Seriously though, it’s cool someone is trying to do this sort of thing. It isn’t cool that Microsoft is involved.
By nick on April 29, 2005 10:35 am
I get the feeling that some developers don’t even test in FF… they just assume it won’t work and throw up some javascript. At least this error message acknowledges the existence of something other than netscape or IE.
By Sunshine on April 29, 2005 2:44 pm
God, I hate this. Yahoo! Music does this as well. Though they don’t mention the DRM thing. What makes it worse, is these are all things you see for free. You’d think they want people to re-distribute unless they signed an exclusive contract.
To date, I’ve only found that AOL’s Sessions or whatever they call it, actually displays videos in a format compatible for Macs. Such a crock.
By allgood2 on April 29, 2005 8:40 pm
If the past 11 comments and Scrivs’s post are any indication, I’m going to be fairly unpopular for what I’m about to say.
I’m really tired of reading the whiny refrain of “Wah! Wah! Wah! So-and-so’s corporate site isn’t built with such-and-such in mind.” Nobody’s perfect. For some reason, though, talking heads on the internet have found themselves to be pretty damn close. Who knows what web-education MTV’s design team has. Do they read up on accessibility, web standards, Ajax, sIFR, and all the other neat things that have sprung up over the last few years?
Isn’t it a big deal anytime a corporate site “goes standard” or even takes steps in that direction? Remember ESPN, remember Hotwired, remember Microsoft and MSN. If you’re going to chastise every corporate site that’s not up to snuff, you’re going to have some pretty tired fingers and no time for anything else.
These things take time. And don’t tell me that they’ve had enough time, as the web standards revolution started in 1998 when the WaSP was born. It’s not all about standards, either. There are corporate goals, too, that nobody seems to take into account, but that’s a whole other issue.
Yeah, it sucks that they rely on a one-platform, one-browser solution to their Digital Rights Management problem. But think about it from their side: they buy the videos from artists and play them to you. Should they just waste all that money and give the videos to you for free without even trying to protect their investment? If some schmo just came in and nicked all their videos, why would people even bother going to MTV.com?
Two points I’m trying to make:
1. Try positive reinforcement (by way of congratulations and encouragement) to those who break the mold and embrace the New Web instead of disdain to those who do things the Old Way. You’ll generally get more positive results.
2. It’s not all about web standards and the new technologies. There may be other reasons why site crafters produce their sites in a certain way. Try getting their side of the story, perhaps?
By Stu Schaff on April 30, 2005 2:47 pm
Good points Stu, but I have to disagree with my knowledge of MTV buying the videos. I am pretty sure artists give them to MTV because they need the publicity, but I could be wrong so making them DRM is kind of silly. And if that’s the case where the artists are paid for their videos and MTV is “protecting their investment” you can’t tell me that they couldn’t spend a little more time looking into other technologies.
Build a site with tables that works and I am cool with it. Just building a site that hits ONE demographic and I am not cool with that.
I do think it would be nice to hear their side of the story, but from what I have learned from corporate types is that they must only follow the money. I don’t necessarily blame them, but it just sucks to see.
So if you wish for me to offer postive reinforcement to MTV I am really struggling for something to be postive about. Nice background I guess.
In the end I just want to see my damn videos.
By Scrivs on April 30, 2005 2:54 pm
It’s business, Scrivs. Supply and demand. I assume you ended up at MTV.com because of the name. MTV: Music Television. It’s a staple in our minds, and that’s worth something. It makes them a leader in the industry.
However, from an economist’s perspective, people will find the best solution. Really, anything other than IE/Win is a niche, and inevitably, sites that appeal to your niche will pop up.
Instead of whining, all of you, just swallow your pride and don’t give them your business. Maybe some day, MTV won’t have any choice but to change.
Another idea? You could try to get other media players to stick DRM in their products. Wait, that would go against other ideals, wouldn’t it?
By Stu Schaff on April 30, 2005 3:07 pm
Stu -
I (as one of the previous commentors) applaud you for the common sense - I honestly was starting to wonder where it had gone.
Microsoft and MTv have an exclusive, strategic agreement (refer to the link I provided in comment #4). That’s why the site doesn’t support FireFox or Apple or Quicktime or…whatever. It’s got nothing to do with developers not understanding…
It’s got everything to do with a contract, share holder value, competitiion.
It’s kinda like signing up your blog to belong to a network of blogs. You get accepted into one, you probably won’t be able to join another - or writing content for a free ipod on a popular site - Your article gets accepted, the popular site gets exclusive rights.
You sign a contract with Microsoft (or whomever) and you got to play by their rules - like it, or not.
By Mark on April 30, 2005 4:45 pm
I don’t really think anyone argues the motives behind business decisions. But if you back up and look at the bigger picture (ignoring standards and developer preferences) bottom line is that MTV has decided that it’s ok to alienate parts of their audience by being exclusive. Are you guys saying that the audience has no right to be irritated by it? If people don’t whine about it how are the decision makers at MTV or any corporate site to know that their site is inaccessible or ugly or unusable or (bottom line) that they ignored or excluded a part of their intended audience that would have been willing to use their product when it could have been almost as easy to do something more inclusive. How do you get included on the list of people that need to be supplied if you don’t demand it?
By Sunshine on May 2, 2005 8:31 am
Sunshine -
As a PC owner, I am “alienated” by Apple from seeing their HD movie trailers because our version of Quicktime doesn’t support that functionalty. Is it ok for Apple to be so inclusive?
Of course it is. It’s good business strategy to one up your competition and try to gain market share away from them - keeps everyone on their toes.
If you don’t like the direction that MTv and Microsoft (or anyone, for that matter) are going, then I would suggest that instead of whining on a blog, that you instead buy stock in those companies. Viacom (VIA) and Microsoft (MSFT) are all about increasing shareholder value. If enough shareholders start expressing dissenting opinions about corporate moves, they’ll change.
By Mark on May 2, 2005 9:45 am
I think there is a difference (although it could just be point of view) between taking your primary audience (mtv watchers) and narrowing it with your web presence (mtv watchers that use IE) and leaving your primary audience as intact as possible (mac users get all the lovely features and only the expanded audience doesn’t) Yes I wouldn’t mind HD movies or video chat for free on Windows but I don’t think it’s Apple’s responsibility to provide it. I’m rather looking to MS to step up to the plate and deliver something comparable. But I would get irritated if Apple suddenly made it so that you could only download quicktime from the Safari browser or something equally silly.
and somehow buying stock in a multimillion dollar organization with the intent of eventually getting enough shares for them to listen to my complaint seems inefficient to me. Blog whining may also be inefficient but if I’m going to not be effective I would like to do it as cheaply as possible. Could be just me though.
By Sunshine on May 2, 2005 11:10 am
Yes there is a reason why MTV is exclusively using Microsoft technology. Money! Their bosses think by doing this they will make more money.
I usually don’t like ranting about things that I don’t like. I tend to ignore it and I don’t let them bother my life, but this time it’s very personal. it feels like they are grabbing my legs and pulling me back down to the pits of nightmare where I was trying to escape from.
We’ve been working hard at my workplace, and me personally as a designer to support standards, CSS, and accessibility, for all it’s pro’s which I don’t have to elaborate here. And I am so grateful for the people and organizations who contributed so much to make all of our lives better. But when I see big sites like this going backwards it’s no longer a trivial matter of not keeping with trends, but I see them actually intentionally harming progress for their own profit. It is very irresponsible, and it is a hostile business practice.
I can totally see their point of view, it is the master mind Microsoft at work here. Firefox is slowly winning over users by making a better browser, but Microsoft will try to win them back with DRM, and “Plays for sure†it’s the browser war all over again. It’s hostile business to make things exclusive, and hurt the competition no matter what that does to the users. MTV is the first real example that I see this plan in action. They are going for the kids who what the MTV fix online, and Microsoft wants the teens to think Windows and IE is the only way to view cool content online… Sadly it looks like its working too and that is why I think we need to voice up to these kinds of sites.
It’s not just ranting out my feelings to a blog, if I can make my point across to one other person then I think it’s worth my effort. And you know what, more often then not complaints to the company actually work! I feel bad for the designers who had to make this site because if it’s anything like my company you have to do what the bosses want you to do even when you don’t like it. We had to constantly fight not to have banner ads, popup windows, for example. But when you have all the user emails complaining, and user studies backing up your points of making the site better it works.
I think things like this is like companies polluting the environment to make profits with their products. The virtual world need to be protected as well. Because when companies are allowed to make profits at the expense of the users and the web community, especially large companies that draw so many traffic. Their negative impact is something we all have to pay.
Don’t encourage them by buying their stocks, take action, voice up, complain. Companies need to keep their users happy. Make them change.
By paldari on May 2, 2005 4:48 pm
“Paldari”:
Are you serious when you claim that “[t]heir bosses think by doing this they will make more money”? You would have to be the least savvy businessman in the history of the world to think that shutting out potential customers would make you more money. Catering to a niche (a la Apple) is one thing, but shutting off access is another.
Also, where do you even see a similarity between Microsoft’s DRM and environmental pollution? One restricts the market while the other is a negative externality, meaning it has a negative cost paid by society. Totally different. You don’t like this, go somewhere else.
But I feel like a stark-raving lunatic here. Come on, people! It’s business, it’s business, it’s business. Complain all you want. If people keep buying MTV, they’ll keep doing what they can to increase shareholder’s value.
It’s all just business.
By Stu Schaff on May 2, 2005 6:28 pm
Hey Stu Schaff
I am totally serious! Because it’s not about catering to a niche but it’s about gaining control using an exclusive technology and killing competition using their market power. You were talking about the least savvy businessman in the history of the world? Sony did it with their Beta video technology, they keep trying to dominate proprietary formats using memory stick, Microsoft did that with Internet Explorer to kill Netscape, and they are doing it now using DRM. You might think they will lose business by doing this (in the case of Sony they did lose the consumer market to VHS at the end), it might be true in the short term, but if it’s MTV and Microsoft, they have the power to force people to use their technology. And once you do it’s hard to convert to another. I think it’s brilliant business people thinking up these strategies.
And to answer your question about the similarities of DRM and environmental pollution. As you’ve elegantly put it, it is negative externality. They are doing this at the cost of the online society, and at the cost of progress. It might not be as serious as killing off bald eagles or something like that, but if the browser war had not happened and companies worked together to create an open standard. I bet you’d see a lot more accessible sites, cost savings in terms of web development not trying to create v4 dual browser compatible sites, and a lot less headaches for web developers.
I totally agree with you! It is business, business, business, everybody’s doing it. That doesn’t mean it’s ok. Don’t get me wrong I don’t mind people buying MTV, and I understand the need for a proper DRM. I just hope companies don’t get too greedy and get a bit wiser for the good of everyone. I’m asking too much now aren’t I :)
If we don’t who will demand responsibilities from the greedy corporations? I’m just worried looking at Microsoft’s past track record. They will try to dominate the content distribution market at what ever cost to the users.
By paldari on May 2, 2005 9:46 pm
i just got a mac b/c i thought it was pretty..
i am so mad i did
same prob as you i just wanted to watch videos..
i cant watch the videos on vh1 or yahoo either…
it sucks
By jalisha johnson on June 22, 2005 3:43 pm
can someone help me? I am operating on windows XP (no service pack 2 yet) and I have an ati radeon 9200 video card. I have internet explorer 6.0 and for some reason when I go to MTV to get into Overdrive it will show me the commercial then when I click ready to play the video it won’t play? what could be the issue? can someone help?
thanks!
By lori on August 10, 2005 9:29 pm
I have the same problem like lori. I see the commercial , but then when I try to watch the overdrive it doesn’t show anything I just hear the voice. I need help.
By naomi on September 18, 2005 5:43 pm
it’s a fucking conspiracy. okay, so the player will stream the stupid advertisements, so mtv can rake in money from that, but when it comes time to play the videos, it mysteriously crashes due to incompatability/error. Why not crash when streaming the ads then…wtf?
By Henry on September 27, 2005 3:12 pm
dunno if any1 mentioned b4 but ppl outside the US just as me from germany wont be able to see anything cos its protected by copyright wtf we have mtv here so what is the shit about copyright ;) seriously mtv does not want german ppl to notice that they 10 years behind the states in entertainment - anyway need to emigrate ;)
wonder if drm is the thing that keeps me from seeing the videos - if any1 knows how to handle that pls let me know :)
By me on November 5, 2006 4:21 pm