A 'fix' for those STUPID YouTube 'Shorts'

[ERD50]

I posted some of this in another thread where a YouTube 'short' was posted. I decided it was worth its own thread.

I do not watch YouTube 'shorts'. They are an ill-conceived idea with absolutely zero redeeming qualities. They never should have seen the light of day. The 'short' format basically removes all control from the viewer, and adds nothing in return. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

But there is a solution. In the url, replace 'shorts' with 'watch', and it is back to 'normal' format, with a scrub/progress bar, screen controls, FW/REV, etc. Here you go (I added "ZZZ" to youtube in the url so the forum SW doesn't automatically replace it with the thumbnail, even though I deselected the option to parse links, so you can see the url itself. Remove the ZZZ to actually view these):

www.youtubeZZZ.com/shorts/sefXjZB9dBQ

www.youtubeZZZ.com/watch?v=sefXjZB9dBQ


If anyone can come up with a supporting argument for 'shorts', I'd like to hear it. Worse yet, I've read that Google automatically converted any video less than 60 seconds to this format, without the consent of the content creator. I'd be PO'd if they did that to me.

I guess it looks a little simpler on a phone/small screen - fewer controls? I feel there is a big difference between 'simplify' and 'dumb-down'. And a right and a wrong way to do it. This is just wrong. Or as one of my favorite 2 lines from "The Glass Onion":

Birdie: "It's so dumb it's brilliant!"
Blanc: "No, it's just DUMB!".

More options here:

https://piunikaweb.com/2022/03/15/h...ube-shorts-watch-layout-on-desktop-to-normal/

-ERD50

 

[qwerty3656]

Is it just replacing "shorts" with "watch"? In your example, it looks like you replaced "shorts/" with "watch?v="

 

[TripleLindy]

My wife is addicted to those shorts. Like you, I dislike them. My guess is that they are a response to competitors like Instagram, which I don’t use at all.

I just scroll past the row of shorts whenever I’m on YouTube, so they don’t bother me. I rarely use a browser for YouTube, as I usually use the app on my iPad or phone, as well as on Roku, so there’s no editing of a URL in those scenarios.

 

[sengsational]

They're probably trying to compete with TikTok. I've never watched even one second on TikTok, but heard it discussed on a podcast.

 

[Qs Laptop]

How does one happen to land on YouTube shorts? I've never had it happen. I mostly view YouTube on my PC or TV.

 

[HenryD]

One of my favorite YouTubers experimented with a lot of shorts in November. He said it was his worst month ever for metrics so I have a feeling the market with correct itself. I don't use TikTok but I understand that Shorts are Google's response to that platform's success, much like Facebook Reels are Meta's.

 

[ERD50]

Is it just replacing "shorts" with "watch"? In your example, it looks like you replaced "shorts/" with "watch?v="

Good catch.

Yes, just change 'shorts' to 'watch'. I didn't realize it until you pointed it out, but there is some redirect or something that goes on, and it automatically changes to go from the entered:

https://www.youtubeZZZ.com/watch/sefXjZB9dBQ

to

https://www.youtubeZZZ.com/watch?v=sefXjZB9dBQ

-ERD50

 

[ERD50]

How does one happen to land on YouTube shorts? I've never had it happen. I mostly view YouTube on my PC or TV.

Mostly when someone links to one! But I think if I go to my YouTube home page, a bunch show up.

-ERD50

 

[captain3d]

Like watching a trailer instead of the movie. Terrible

 

[W2R]

Excellent!! We hate youtube "shorts", but this fix worked on the first try. Thanks.

 

[JoeWras]

I see a few of mine got converted to shorts.

Thanks for reminding me that I have to delete my Youtube channel. Anyone do this lately? Is it easy?

I lost interest in "helping" the world and Google to my pitiful little content.

 

[Mr. Tightwad]

I see that most of you dislike them, but I watch them all the time. Daily.

Solely for amusing entertainment for about 10-20 seconds each.

There's shorts with 5 or 10 million views so I'm not the only one.

If it's a worthless video I click off it.

 

[Ronstar]

I don’t watch shorts either. But they’re good for Youtubers because the short videos can be posted on instagram also. I think the instagram limit is 1 minute.

 

[Midpack]

If you don’t like them, don’t watch them - seems easy. Those who like them couldn’t care less what you think. I’m sure they’re YouTube combating Instagram and TikTok.

 

[ERD50]

If you don’t like them, don’t watch them - seems easy. Those who like them couldn’t care less what you think. I’m sure they’re YouTube combating Instagram and TikTok.

You are missing the point. There are some that I want to watch, but google "stole" the user interface from me, making it more difficult for me to watch them.

If they think there is some advantage to 'shorts', they ought to at least give the option to show the regular desktop interface, for those who want it.

-ERD50

 

[ERD50]

I see that most of you dislike them, but I watch them all the time. Daily.

Solely for amusing entertainment for about 10-20 seconds each.

There's shorts with 5 or 10 million views so I'm not the only one.

If it's a worthless video I click off it.

I guess it's no big deal for a very short 'fun' video (though I still don't see any advantage), but even a 60 second video can have some content that I want to do a pause and frame-by-frame (using the "<" and ">" keys), and/or a short/long RW/FF (L/R arrow keys, or "J"/"L" for a longer jump).

I mean, if that wasn't the case, I wouldn't be complaining, and other's wouldn't be agreeing, right?

Taking away features/functionality for no reason/advantage is just wrong.As I said before, "It's just DUMB!".

-ERD50

 

[dixonge]

You are missing the point. There are some that I want to watch, but google "stole" the user interface from me, making it more difficult for me to watch them.

If they think there is some advantage to 'shorts', they ought to at least give the option to show the regular desktop interface, for those who want it.

-ERD50

OK Boomer LOL

I have to admit clicking a few, but pretty soon you realize that 90% of them are setups, staged in order to get clicks/views. Generally avoid when possible. Thanks for the tips!

 

[ERD50]

OK Boomer LOL

I have to admit clicking a few, but pretty soon you realize that 90% of them are setups, staged in order to get clicks/views. Generally avoid when possible. Thanks for the tips!

But don't forget, some content creators are also complaining about this.

I've seen short, informative videos that packed a LOT of info into 60 seconds. One way they do that is they include several pages of fairly detailed text, and rather than leaving it up for X seconds (some people read faster than others), they leave it up for maybe just one second, and tell you to pause to read it at your leisure. Then you can use the frame-by frame or FW/RW jump keys to get to the next page of text, and read that at your leisure. It's really a very convenient and practical way to do it. It puts the viewer in control. I like that.

The content creator does this purposefully, then YouTube bastardizes it. Stupid.

I guess the 'OK, boomer' meme means "someone with enough life experience to know right from wrong and what to do about it", then OK, thanks!

-ERD50

 

[Time2]

I see that most of you dislike them, but I watch them all the time. Daily.

Solely for amusing entertainment for about 10-20 seconds each.

There's shorts with 5 or 10 million views so I'm not the only one.

If it's a worthless video I click off it.

I also enjoy them, but there are times I wish to see the rest of the video, I thought this was the solution. After check 6 shorts, none of them go back to the original video. all it does is change the format. I would like to get to the original video.

 

[ls99]

A coupple of times I clicked on shorts, found them useless. Not going to do that again.

 

[Midpack]

You are missing the point. There are some that I want to watch, but google "stole" the user interface from me, making it more difficult for me to watch them.

If they think there is some advantage to 'shorts', they ought to at least give the option to show the regular desktop interface, for those who want it.

-ERD50

No I didn't but I'm not going to argue with you. Nowhere in your OP did you note you wanted to watch any of them, the excerpt below certainly doesn't suggest you wanted to, and it's not stated otherwise thereafter.

And they're usually 15-60 seconds, most people wouldn't miss controls to FF etc.

I do not watch YouTube 'shorts'. They are an ill-conceived idea with absolutely zero redeeming qualities. They never should have seen the light of day. The 'short' format basically removes all control from the viewer, and adds nothing in return. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

[ERD50]

I also enjoy them, but there are times I wish to see the rest of the video, I thought this was the solution. After check 6 shorts, none of them go back to the original video. all it does is change the format. I would like to get to the original video.

I'm not sure what you mean by the 'original video'? AFAIK, 'shorts' are their own videos of 60 Sec or less. I don't think they are some sort of edit of a longer video, unless the content creator did that purposely (like a movie 'trailer').

-ERD50

 

[ERD50]

No I didn't but I'm not going to argue with you. Nowhere in your OP did you note you wanted to watch any of them. Excerpt, not qualified thereafter. And they're very short, shouldn't need controls to FF etc.

OK, maybe that wasn't completely clear in my OP from my phrasing, but the context did make it clear I think. If I didn't want to watch shorts because of the content, then I wouldn't care if the controls were there or not, right?

I don't read romance novels, and I guarantee that you will never (and I'm the 'never say never' guy) complain about the fonts used in romance novels! Get it?

So to keep my wording crystal clear (hindsight is 20/20), I could/should have said :

{modified} I do not watch YouTube 'shorts' because the 'short' format basically removes all control from the viewer, and adds nothing in return. It detracts from my ability to watch the content in the way I want, so I skip 'shorts'. But I would watch some of them if I had the controls (which just makes them a <61 second video, not a 'short') The 'short' format is stupid, stupid, stupid.

And my post #18 explains why the controls can be needed in even (especially) a short video.

-ERD50

 

[Time2]

I'm not sure what you mean by the 'original video'? AFAIK, 'shorts' are their own videos of 60 Sec or less. I don't think they are some sort of edit of a longer video, unless the content creator did that purposely (like a movie 'trailer').

-ERD50

Maybe? I thought they were clips from longer videos. I'm still thinking they are or at least some of them are.
Arghh, I just tried the link change on about 10 more, still all shorts.
Is there any way to find he original, it seems Youtube would like you to go watch the long form.

 

[Golden Mean]

Something not mentioned here, is that the 'shorts' format is rotated 90 degrees from what every screen in the world is designed to display. Who decided it was cool to watch a video like your are peeking through a keyhole?