Just wanted to get an idea of what you thought would be a better model - I'm starting a basic blog but I'd like to be able to add video content to it - I know how to add embedded video into an article post, and once I figure out how to get my Transcoders up and going I'll be able to host streaming video right from my web server.
My question is - which is better? If YouTube's providing me free storage space, and unlimited views, I'm not wasting any bandwidth on my end by creating a YouTube Channel for the stuff I would normally upload, and then just embed into posts. Is there any drawback to using YouTube embedding versus native hosting? Are there any advantages to going native hosting, and using the Media/Video Modules to display the content?
I figure if YouTube is giving away storage space, bandwidth, etc, why not? Any drawbacks?
Comments
Storage & Backups
One thing that you may want to consider is the effect of hosting the video content is the amount of space this will take and, perhaps more importantly, what this will do to your backup operation.
If the content is hosted on YouTube you should avoid the overhead of storing the media and the added logistics of backing it up.
Hope this helps!
Alan
Also interested in opinions on this...
I can't think of any significant disadvantages of relying on YouTube for hosting video. Perhaps if you wanted to display information like video size? Or control the player interface? There must be others... Any suggestions?