eHub

Nicely reasoned and provocatively presented.

What's the difference between a podcast file and an mp3 file? I thought it was the same thing.

nah...a podcast automatically updates you to the newest version at specific intervals. it also needs a special program (like itunes) to control it.

an mp3 file just exists.

Ah. So there is certin Zen to an mp3..."They just exist"... Whereas the mp3 players somehow are not in tune with the universe?

Let us meditate on that.

There is no difference between a podcast file and any other mp3 file and you do not need a special program to get podcast files. The difference is the "cast" part of the term. If you want the automation, which is the defining characteristic of a podcast vs. every other mp3, then you must subscribe to a podcast. Otherwise, you can go to any website that offers a podcast and simply download the mp3 manually and listen to it on your computer, burn it to a CD, put it on ANY mp3 player, or anything else that you like to do with digital files. Also, there is no specific interval as far as the end-user is concerned. When you subscribe to a podcast, anytime the creators update the content, the end-user will get the update. If it is a regular weekly podcast and a special event prompts a special podcast, the subscribed end-user will get the special podcast as well. There is much confusion on these issues and with the ubiquitous nomenclature being tossed about by the largely uninformed popular media, that confusion is only compounding.

Michael,

This is exactly why YOU are not the target audience of a podcast and your ignorance to how they work only exacerbates this.

There are services tied to the web, and their usefulness is something we all can agree on. Take RSS feeds and aggregators; Granted these are probably also lost on you, but their usefulness to people who do use them allow them to do exactly what they advertise: Aggregate content in a timely fashion that provides what a user wants or asks for.

Now couple this with a media device, usually a digital audio player. Notice how I didn't say iPod. In fact, most people, and given Apple's latest litigiousness, are moving to the ever more popular moniker of "netcast." The power of delivering new content, be it video (see: Democracy Player) or audio/video, like DiggNation via RSS in a device agnostic fashion is pretty cool. I personally own an iPod and do not use it to view or listen to podcasts, but using RSS readers and open platforms like Democracy I can discover new and interesting content without having to actively search said content out.

Bearing the name "podcast" does not tie the content to any one particular device. Imagine a world where you have to check daily to see if a new mp3 file is posted versus having the authors tell me when their content is live is brilliant and dead useful.

Podcasting isn't stupid, it's a philosophy and a technology that empowers the audience, and empowerment is how you get traffic, page views and a loyal following like DiggNation.

I was just wondering why you thought podcasts had to be listened to in short order. While that may be true for news-related podcasts, other kinds of podcasting content are available and you don't need to listen to them right away. I've heard of people finding an interesting podcast (about running, for example) and going back to download all of the archives to listen to at their leisure. For me, podcasting is about connecting me to community. Every time a new episode of my favorite podcast downloads, it's like a bunch of friends ringing my door bell.

patrick and i talked this one out...his definition is literally correct, whereas mine is correct in popular usage.

And what's the difference between "literal" and "popular usage"? People who know what they're talking about and people who get wrapped up in the hype but don't bother to get a clue about the actual technology?

Far too much of podcasting is hype. Far too much of it is people jumping on the bandwagon simply because they heard there was a bandwagon to jump on.

And the rabid bandwagon jumpers drive me insane, as I'm sure you would guess, but just as annoying are the people who can't wait to slam the trend without seriously considering that maybe there's actually something worthwhile going on.

Jay's right: it's not about devices, it's about giving your content to the people and letting them consume it on their terms.

It's the same reason the TiVo users love their TiVos. And maybe the same reason VHS beat Betamax. And the reason iTunes sells network TV episodes. Hell, it's the reason we buy newspapers instead of standing around to listen to a town crier. It sucks to be a slave to anyone else's publishing schedule. We want to read/listen/watch the content when we feel like it.

So podcasting didn't pull a revolutionary concept out of thin air. What it did was combine existing technologies (RSS + media files) into new content delivery system that was really easy for content producers to use. If blogs made it possible for every person to become a published writer, podcasting made it possible for every person to publish a "TV" or "radio" show.

The real downside of podcasting is that it's hard for the end user to really wrap their head around. I won't even start on that rant.

My point: Podcasting isn't stupid. It's not a standalone revolution and it's kinda hard to easily explain to your grandma, but it's not stupid.

Anyway. DiggNation is awesome. Beer + news = timeless combination.