Which is better to get knowledge across: Webcast or written text?

Question

I just did some research on how to do X (it's not important what I was researching). A blog post suggested that I should try using product Y to solve my problem with X. So I went on their site - and since I had never used their product I skimmed the "hello" page, had the faint impression that it could indeed help me with my X. So I immediately went to the "Getting started" page - and was presented a 10 minutes webcast.

My first impulse was to just close the damn window, because frankly I am starting to get fed up with all those webcasts that are popping up all over the place in the last couple of months. I hope this is a phase, since in my opinion they just do not have the same information density as written text has. I already knew that I was going to sit there for 10 minutes watching somebody clicking around on an IDE telling me stuff that I could have read or at least skimmed in 30-60 seconds.

I think all programmers are people that are very well able to read text. So what is the point of producing webcasts, especially "Getting Started" webcasts? They don't have anything near the information density as text has, they can't (yet) be indexed by Google, there is no way I can copy and paste code from them, ...

Are there any benefits I am missing? Or does everybody agree that webcasts should be regarded as a phase the web (when it comes to programming knowledge) has to go through - but will hopefully die out sooner or later? I just hate watching people not being able to type for the nth time...

Answer 1

This may be the most subjective question on SO. People have different learning styles and tastes. As for not being indexed and all of that, many webcasts are transcribed and have notes so I'm not sure that point is entirely true. And even so, no one is forcing the content creators to create "webcasts." As far as "just a phase," I think you are taking this way too seriously. I've seen webcasts for several years now.

Answer 2

It's hard to skim through a webcast.

Answer 3

I do enjoy watching screencasts when I'm tired and just want stuff. I don't really learn much until i use the X in question, but that's ok cause I usually want to learn about something when I'm away from a machine I can use to develop.

Answer 4

@chaiguy: is that an advantage or disadvantage? :) Reads: Do webcasts have a higher probability of getting at least the points covered across? Could be true...

Answer 5

Webcasts and written text (to me) have different purposes, but both serve the general dish of knowledge. Where as written text I can quickly scout through, digging out what the very specific bit of information is, or I can read it for a full picture. Whereas with Webcasts, you kinda find they are best suited for demonstrations of various types.

With a webcast I can watch it (without any idea what my questions are yet - e.g. This product says it can do what I want, but I only have half a picture as to how it might achieve it). The webcast can take me through a few scripted examples and demos and hopefully I'll have that eureka moment where it all becomes clear. Diagrams and text can achieve this also - but sometimes you find that they aren't as clear as they might be, or maybe they are too 'marketing speak' and not technical enough (and while this might be the case with the Webcast, it might still guide you to the answers you want).

This is without throwing in the personal choice and the 'I learn better with xyz' comments. Personally I believe Webcasts are a great addition to some information that your site may wish to put out there. They probably shouldn't be the solution to information delivery. However, let your user choose their favoured method (different products, different user base).

Overall, I think written text is much faster in general to find the information you want, so they'd have the advantage for me. That, and well, Webcasts suck if you are blind. ;)

Answer 6

I think webcasts are great when navigating and doing things in a GUI. It's easy to see where things are and familiarize one-self.

The FLTK tutorials are great examples of good screencast, imagine "reading" about getting started?

FLTK tutorials

Answer 7

Both have their strengths and weaknesses.

As mentioned, you can't skim webcasts very well, so the creator has a very strong control over content. You can get an exact workflow across, tell exactly what you want to tell, or give a bird's eye view of ideas.

Text can present much more information, but people can skim and potentially miss very important points. Generally better for specific information.

Look at what information you are trying to relate. If you're information would essentially be a long text page with lots of screenshots (photoshop tutorials for example), then that's a good candidate for a webcast. But I also feel it's important to include notes.

But an API or programmatic examples are probably not going to make great webcasts.

There is no BEST option. It depends on what you want to present and how to effectively relate it.

Answer 8

I use 3 ways to get information:

1. Reading
2. Listening to podcasts
3. Watching podcasts (must be on youtube!)

I read after googling when I want to learn about a specific API, Function, Class ... I print long pdfs for reading.

I almost always speedread, which means I understand 10 to 90% of what I read, depending on how much I wanted to know at the time.

I listen to some podcasts when I'm driving, I just get the general idea about a general subject, nothing is retained when my short term memory (my cache) is cleared.

I watch a webcast/video when I really want to learn something. It's either I watch it all, or I don't. You can't skim a video.

It does take a longer time than reading, but you have to learn something from it.