Cats! In! HD!

Hey peeps: We’re putting on our geek hat for a moment to ask your opinion. YouTube has videos in high definition; they look great, but may load slowly. We can rig these to play in HD by default, or standard resolution. Which would be better?

Even if you don’t have a preference, enjoy this awesome cat video anyway!

Comments

  1. It’s a tad slower here of course.

  2. I propose they immediately begin playing this in all dentist offices. Your mouth would be open wide from all the “aww”-ing and hence all procedures would be easier.

  3. Wow, that’s a hard one… The video looks beautiful, but I had some hitchiness due to my rather slow video card. I guess I’d vote for the low res stuff, since it loads faster and plays more smoothly.

  4. No noticeable difference on the speed. But the sharpness, the clarity. Nothing like HD. Wunnerful!!!

  5. Oh yeah, and really nice looking cats!

  6. Linda Stuart says:

    Well, the picture quality is just wonderful and I really like it, but every video may not merit this treatment. I really don’t understand the technology involved. Can you run some this way and others standard? It wouldn’t hurt my feelings, though, if they all looked like this.

  7. Don’t rig. The standard version contains plenty of Cute.

  8. All cute animals deserve HD!

  9. 720p is a little stuttery on my box even after full download. Also, the video is so pretty I was almost too distracted to answer your question.

  10. HDHDHD. Tocks in HD. Enough said!

  11. countess says:

    I want my qte quick.

  12. I’ve learned 1) that I don’t have a preference for HD and 2) cats laze about ALL DAY! How am I supposed to be awake enough to teach a class now, after watching that?

  13. I say HD! They’ll be even MORE cute that way! :-D

  14. ridbaxter says:

    Default to the lower resolution, please. Youtube’s HD brings Safari to its knees on pre-Intel Macs like mine.

  15. Vickinator says:

    HD all the way. I have high-speed internet and there’s hardly any difference with loading times.

  16. Not That Mike The Other Mike says:

    Linda: Very good questions, all. Thank you. Not all YouTube vids are available in HD; most still aren’t, and we’d still show those at the standard resolution we’re all used to.

    You can see all available resolutions for a YouTube video by selecting a number from a pop-up list in the lower right corner. For example, this video is available at 360p, 480p (a little sharper), and 720p (much sharper).

    My concern was whether I should force 720p as the default, which I can do when embedding videos into a post. It may be better to leave the resolution at standard, and tell readers when an HD version is available.

  17. TheLoveOfIsis says:

    I’d say low res because then you have no problems… it’s something everyone can load easily for the most part. Go high-res and you’re going to have people complaining about loading times. If we want to watch it in high res good night loretta it’s not all that hard to press a button :P

  18. Yeah I think the best bet is doing it in standard resolution and notifying readers when higher resolution is available. Because it takes way too long to wait for HD and I wind up getting frustrated and just not watching the videos.

  19. Well, since the videos embedded in the page aren’t displayed large enough for the HD to matter, I vote low-res for the sake of those with slow computers and connections. Watching the actual HD version will take an extra click or two either way.

  20. Wow, it looks great in HD! I feel like I could reach through the screen and pet the kitties, it’s so sharp. :)

  21. Mew mew mew I has a cute says:

    Wow! The quality is amazing, the cats are adorable and the music makes me tie-tie! A purr-fect video if I do say so myself. ykwim

  22. adalheidis says:

    I’d go for HD. Even with the low res videos, I tend to let them buffer first anyway. Connection speeds will always vary. The HD is worth the wait.

  23. adalheidis says:

    Then if the wait looks like it’ll take *too* long, you can always just switch to low res.

  24. What are the reader demographics of Cute Overload? Does traffic come primarily from Western Europe and North America? If so, I think HD can be default – there is always the option to lower the quality. Why don’t you try it and see how people react?

  25. Loved the video, but it took too long to load. Please stick with lo-res.

  26. mrowbecca says:

    Wow, it’s so much better in HD. It’s like looking at the real cat, which means any cat video is cuter! No problem with wait for me.

  27. VERY long load time, very jerky viewing. :( Anyone with a shared connection (I’m on an office T1) is gonna likely prefer Standard.

  28. Defualt to slower. People can always change it to HD if they want.

  29. I didn’t have any problems at all, and it looked great! maybe put links to the standard for people who have problems with HD…or do HD for amazing videos like that (more national geographic-y and whatnot)

  30. I love cats in HD! I started the video, then paused it and looked at the other pictures that were posted while it fully downloaded, then scrolled back up and watched the wonderful HD cats. Easy-peasy no waiting! : )

  31. I like the kitten at 1:44. So sweet!

  32. thursday says:

    Another vote for low-res with a notification. I don’t mind more clicks for more awesome when I’m on my powerful computer at home.

  33. I love the HD!

  34. Ubermaus says:

    Mike, I agree that lo-res with notification is the way to go. I like my videos HD, but I appreciate that many peeps don’t have that bandwidth (and we can always change the resolution ourselves).

  35. It might just be my wireless connection, not sure, it does seem to be better quality but it kept stopping and starting. So I’m with the low-res group, I want to see the kitties running smoothly… thanks for asking!

  36. Standard.

  37. I didn’t have any problems and I really loved this in HD…made the desire to snorgle even more aqte:)

  38. I preload all videos anyway, so whatever you do is fine with me :)

  39. CottlestonPie says:

    I was just thinking this morning how frickin’ annoying it is to have to wait five minutes for a video to download so that I can watch the stupid thing.

    Does that answer your question.

    It would have to be some pretty darned cute cats to make it worth the hassle and annoyance.

    Like these. Yeah.

  40. beautious NTMTOM, beautious. the content made me think about my dog-centric, catless life…thank you!

  41. Geisha_Girl says:

    Hate to be the dissenting voice because I do love me some C. O., but what’s with all the videos? Can we have more of a balance instead of finding 4 things a day we have to wait to watch until it’s finished loading?

  42. CottlestonPie says:

    Actually, I take that back. I don’t know if these cats are cute or not. I haven’t been able to get the video to move past the 16 second mark…

  43. I vote for low-res default. Most videos aren’t even recorded in a quality that justifies 720 (even if they have a camera with that resolution, focus and lighting may kill it). We watch most of them embedded in a small window. The hi-def is running very slow for me.

    If you happen to run into a video worth watching in 720p, just make a note of it in the post.

  44. I lurve the HD!

    @ 1:37, “Hey, I didn’t say you can stop!” My cat gives me those looks all the time when I dare to stop petting him.

  45. I don’t have flash, but if Cute overload (or Youtube) switches to HTML5 video, I would prefer something like 480p as the default.

  46. so sweet. I like HD cats.

  47. My computer ran HD just fine, and it looked awesome, but I don’t want anyone to be inconvenianced just so some of us can watch HD without clicking a button. Standard with notification seems the most considerate way to go. And my mom always tried to teach me to be considerate of others.

  48. HD! HD! Sleepy twitches in HD!

  49. Standard please! Some of us aren’t blessed with good internet, and those who want to see it in HD can always click the HD button :)

  50. My vote goes for standard res – though if it is easy to switch between them I guess it doesn’t matter

  51. Not That Mike The Other Mike says:

    James: YouTube is experimenting with HTML5 video. I don’t think they’re offering it as a choice for embedded video, but they’re testing it on their site. You can try it by setting your preference here: http://www.youtube.com/html5

  52. Well I vote for sticking it in at standard but that is because my home and work computers have the slower video cards sadly. But then it is easy enough to go up and tell it to play in the lower definition which is waht I just did.

    Kitties are soooo cute

  53. I say HD. I noticed no slowing down at all. The cute was way better in this one. :-)

    But not everyone may have high speed connections.

  54. I played it on my droid…. it looked amazing.

  55. fifthsonata says:

    I love the HD, but I think it’s best to opt for standard and notify readers of an HD option when available, especially for the non-regular users of cuteoverload. I think they’ll be more likely to re-visit or stick around if the video loads quickly.

  56. Wow. That was beautiful.

    I’m fine with the HD speed, but if others prefer the lower resolution, that’s cool.

  57. Sasha's mum says:

    I … sooo … sleeeeepy now … zzzz.

    Mmph huh? what was the question?

  58. janet2buns says:

    I am a technophobe, so if it doesn’t load OK by itself, I’m way too inept to figure out how to make it work. So make it janet2bunsproof, and I’ll be happy.

  59. HD works fine for me.

    PS: Beep! Beep! Beep! When I beeped the picnic-table cat’s nose it WOKE UP and scared me.

  60. marthava says:

    Looked beautiful, but it was a little herky jerky with my DSL connection. I vote for standard.

  61. low res!!!

  62. I vote for regular def/saying that an HD is available.

  63. katenjeff says:

    Standard – those with HD capabilities have faster loading times anyways, so they can afford the extra minute to change to HD. Power to the poor!

  64. Argyle Donkeypants says:

    Whew! I was afraid it was going to be HD video of “Cats” the musical. I’m thinkin’ I don’t need to see the Rum-Tum Tugger’s giblets in high-rez, know what I mean? I think you do.

    In any event, I’m good with standard rez, since I’d hate for anyone with older and/or slower tech toys to be inconvenienced or miss out on a CO video due to loading speeds.

  65. In theory I adore the HD resolution, but in reality I don’t have the patience to wait for it to load.

  66. Standard with a note that HD is available, please! My internet is strange sometimes, but I’ll opt for HD and wait a bit as a trade off for quality. Still, I don’t think it’d be best to make HD standard cause it can be a tad sluggish even when fully buffered!

  67. Standard format please! Maybe you could have a link for the HD-philes, it just takes too long to load and buffer

  68. I don’t care as long as there are cats… I think this may have been my favorite video evahs.

  69. NTMTOM, perhaps we could embedd a web poll widget on the page, for peeps to vote ?

    Olivier

  70. I have no problem watching it in HD on my iPod Touch, but I still think videos should be embedded with 360p or 480p as default. Maybe in 2 or 3 years later HD can be default.

    BTW even on the tiny screen of the iPod Touch the HD vid looks so much better than the non-HD stuff.

  71. HD is much better.

  72. The HD looks great, but as a rule of thumb, I always think websites should default to lower resolutions so the page doesn’t bork lower-end systems. We can always choose the HD from the drop-down.

  73. Please don’t for those of us without the fancy ‘pewter.

  74. Not That Mike The Other Mike says:

    Olivier: I wish I’d thought of a poll sooner, but it appears that the consensus is pulling in a certain direction, which I’m sure will aid our decision-making in the future.

    By the way, thanks to all readers who’ve shared their opinions.

  75. Queen of Dork says:

    It loaded and played fine and was gorgeous! But I agree with leaving videos standard and notifying us when HD is an option. Also, I really love the napping, dreaming, twitchy pawed kitty.

  76. homer mariner says:

    Love the HD, but like others, I have an older computer that just can’t run it smoothly. Knowing it’s available is always a good option! I was about to go for a run, but now I just want to snorgle my kitties. Thanks…

  77. Not That Mike The Other Mike says:

    edmundh: I have an iPod Touch, too, and it appears that YouTube videos play at the highest available resolution exclusively. The player doesn’t have a way to choose a lower resolution.

  78. For ease of viewing, the lower quality, please. Takes too long to load, you get through a few minutes.. have to wait again.. sort of a pain in the wazoo. 720 isn’t still the best HD, if it’s not 1080, why bother? :)

  79. Prefer a clickable option for HD but default to regular resolution, especially for when I’m using the phone.

  80. Low res. I have a brand new machine with lots of power, but so many HD’s get wonky on me. I vote for low, and as some one else said, not all videos are worth the wait. But of course I love them all here. A fan I am.

  81. HD!!!

  82. Low res pleeeeeease.

    you can CHOOSE HD with the click of a button… but HD doesn’t work on every computer

  83. I prefer my kitteh’s in HD – it looks great and did not load slowly.

  84. Christie says:

    I think u should default hd. i feel like i could just reach out and pet one.

  85. Patricia says:

    Beautiful! I am FOR HD!

  86. I always click HD :) Doesn’t matter what the default is, though i’d rather the initial load to be HD rather than standard!

    yey kittens <3

  87. I love this in HD, but I’m gonna have to vote for low res…I’m impatient. This is a beautiful video, and the tabby/cali on the picnic table looks exactly like my cat that recently passed away:(

  88. Standard rez, please! My computer takes too long to load youtube vids as it s.

  89. HD is definitely more cute–you can see every little hair. You can easily switch it to low res. for comparison. (Click where it says 720p.) I like mine with more p!! :-)

  90. HD is so much nicer!

  91. NTMTOM, I had no issues loading the HD really fast and the video is gorgeous. But I’m lucky and have a whizbang laptop, so in fairness to my fellow peeps, I’d vote for keeping it at standard res and then letting us know when there is an HD version available. I’d be happy to click.

    Oh and by the way, the marmie kitty at 0:35 is just begging to be snorgled…

    Thanks for asking for our opinions!

  92. victoreia says:

    Standard low-res with notification, please! I can do HD at home, when I’m not worried about getting caught waiting for a slow-loading video…..(not to mention, home loads faster anyway!)

  93. misscrisp says:

    It played beautifully for me, but I suppose the lo-res default is more community-friendly. The gentle movement of cat-belleh breathing was so lovely and soothing. The HD seemed to make their breathing more noticeable.

  94. This is beautiful but sad. :(

    The videographer states on his/her youtube page that all but the black cat are strays.
    I can only hope that most, if not all of them have a loving home and just like to visit.

  95. I put it on full screen…my dog, Pebbles, freaked…

  96. Or provide a link to the regular video that is not HD so those of us with slower machines can still watch the video

  97. Nicole M. says:

    Ok don’t make fun of me…but I had never seen anything in HD before. I can’t even believe how amazing this is.

  98. I didn’t have a problem with the HD, but others are likely to. I’d say default lower resolution and let people decide if their computers can handle the HD. I know a few puter users who would have no clue how to switch to the lower res if they had trouble with the HD. HD is definately prettier, though.

  99. Looks great in HD, but too much jerkiness in playback. Better to start in lower res and allow the user to select HD if bandwidth and conditions permit.

  100. Michelle says:

    I was just about swayed to HD until mid-way through the clip (and for the duration of it) it kept pausing to load. Bummer. One of the things that makes CO my favorite website is that I can check in, get a quick dose of what I want, and be on my way (at work, in a hurry, whatever). I do this throughout the day. It’s a personal choice, but I tend to frequent LESS the sites that require more time or effort.

    That said, I would buy a DVD of 30 minutes of this video, the most relaxing thing I’ve sat through in … forever?? Very nice.

  101. tamibrat says:

    Low-Res with notification, please. :)

  102. For what it’s worth, this loaded & played just fine on my computer, and I have dsl (not even the high-speed kind), a wireless router, and 3-year-old laptop. Loved seeing all the detail.

  103. For me, it’s HD all the way and I click away on the videos that have HD, or even from 360 to 480. WANT …. MOAR … DOTS.

    But I’d vote for “standard with HD mentioned” too. As many have written or hinted, we can’t all play the high resolutions without our machines or connections choking on them.

  104. Mrs. Catlabash says:

    If we get to vote, I vote low-res. Because I think that would work better for more of us cute animal tocks-lovers, and I know that probably didn’t come out the way I meant it… or did it ;)? Also, because as cute as the sproingy goats and lashy giraffe babies and stuffed-animal-hugging polar bear boys are, I can enjoy them just fine in low-res, and I understand the video would probably stream more smoothly too.

    And if anyone wants to play a special clip on continuous loop in HD, they’ll still be able to link to it.

  105. 720p is choppy for me, and I’m on a high-end computer and cable connection. I’d probably prefer 480p as the “norm” when I hit play. Thanks for asking us!

  106. MamaLana says:

    Oh wow wow wow wow wow!!! HD of course, please!!!!!!! Oh wow wow wow wow.

  107. hmmm… unforunately, i have to go with no. it was gorgeous, but it just about broke my computer trying to load. and i have a pretty new computer.

  108. harmlesslittleflea (Clare) says:

    Soooooo booootiful. The paw twitchingks in the grass made my blood pressure drop, I could feel it dropping, I swear. HD please!

    Folks with slower internet connections can lower the resolution with just a couple of clicks from that resolution menu in the bottom right, without ever leaving CO or having to load another page.

  109. Oh please no!! I already try to lower the quality of videos I watch… Too heavy a load, especially for anyone who still has a slow connection!

  110. I’m going with low resolution…it took wayyyyy too long for that video to load. As a busy graduate student I want to see my cutieness as quickly as possible as a nice short distraction from homework. My computer just about imploded trying to load this and I have no money to buy a better computer!

  111. Low res, even though the HD was pretty cute. The grey kitteh was the cutest I think.

  112. Cat Lover says:

    Absolutely beautiful!!

  113. Low res. The high res took forever to load for me, and when I want my cute I want it NOW.

  114. Standard! I got first–hang up on load, second–error message, third try (the charm) it worked. It was gorgeous. And if you hadn’t wanted feedback I’d have given up and clicked away to something that wouldn’t make my computer barf the first time around.

    When I worked in online content about 300 years ago, we used to default to the least common denominator in technology (and, go figure, when we stopped that, our business model messed the house worse than an untrained puppy). Any user should be able to see your content…with a link up for those that have the machinery to handle it.

  115. I would prefer the standard, as I have an ancient computer and monitor. As I’m sure many people do… right?

  116. Gwen's Mom says:

    I vote for the non-HD option; lower quality, but accessible by more Lovers of Cute.

  117. It was so slow on mine I thought it was a slideshow. When the cat moved, I jumped in surprise.

    PS: Thanks for asking our opinion. :)

  118. low res please! My computer freezes when you use the HD. It’s brand new too!

  119. Elicia Arwen says:

    standard please.

  120. damnit.. high res or not.. that was so not conducive for work. all i want to do now is to curl up with the cats and snoozzzeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    hehe

  121. kibblenibble says:

    Nicole M., I’d never seen a hi def video either, it was beeyooteefull. I think snoozing cats are gorgeous anyway.

  122. I had no problem loading the HD version and I have to say I’m blown away by the quality. I’ve played many youtube videos in HD before, and it’s never been this nice. How do I embed it in HD when I try to share the video? I don’t know how, please teach me!! Thanks :)

  123. Low resolution yes!
    If something is available in HD and I’m willing to suffer the stop-and-start malarkey, I click the little drag-up menu on the video’s toolbar and select the “720p HD” option.

    Not that HD isn’t effing sweet, mind you…

  124. BTW I want to ask something not directly related to this thread – is there a “general discussion” forum for talking about CO but not specific to any specfic blog posts?

  125. Looks great, but it takes too long. Time is precious! Please go back to low resolution.

  126. My laptop unfortunately can’t handle YouTube HD. (This is purely down to Flash being, shall we say, “special”. Normal video playback in HD is no problem.) I can easily change to the appropriate resolution tough, so I don’t have a strong preference either way.

  127. It played smoothly and looked great on my iPod Touch. Amazing how beautiful HD is!

  128. This video was stuttery for me at 720 as well. Played fine at 480.
    Lovely video though. Reminded me of this quote:

    “There has never been a cat
    Who couldn’t calm me down
    By walking slowly
    Past my chair”
    – – – Rod McKuen

  129. HD worked fine for me and opened right away. Looks great!

  130. stopdropreload says:

    My video card definitely can’t handle HD. Took me a while to realize that it wasn’t just a bunch of still images set to music, since the video would skip forward ten seconds at a time. I agree the quality is beautiful, but I’ll be super disappointed if I can’t view CO videos anymore.

    Gorgeous vid, though! Makes me miss my kitties; at least I only have two weeks until I get to see them, once finals (AUGH!) are over.

  131. Yeah … I enjoyed the smooth chunks a lot, but got quite a few hitches. It’s like watching CO with the hiccups. :)

  132. Not that Bob, the other Bob says:

    T o o s l o w !

  133. Lifecoach says:

    Loaded faster than it played, no stuttering, HD wins!

  134. :D I would just LOVE to cuddle all those kitties :D I also enjoyed listening to the music that was being played during this video :D Does anyone know the tune? Please let me know :D Thank you :D

  135. HD! HD! HD! There was no wait….!

  136. ShinyBlueSpaz says:

    I enjoyed the HD very much and it worked great for me. It was gorgeous. However, if a significant portion of the CO world has problems with it, I am fine with standard as well.

  137. The video stopped every three seconds or so to load and it drove me crazy. I love the way the HD looks, but it’s not worth the slow loading time.

  138. O NO (he/she/or it) DI'UNT!!!!! says:

    ooooooo ooooh I have a consideration (I haven’t yet read everything in the comments/ been “takin’ care of ” some personal “bidness” for the past 48 hours so this is my first dip/ CO since (sniff) our dearly? departed Theo’s grand/glorious departure off, into the sunset ……

    I SAY: (NO idea if this is the 30th person to say this or not so forgive me for putting my suggesh, if it repeats others)
    1) If you can find a way to have everyone answer ONE simple item yes or no for maybe 4 days (DURING a weekend, some daytime work hours and also during some weekDAY, evening hours
    *Ask everyone coming to co to answer (me, these questions three) one Question
    *CO editors: Question would read
    “Do you (CO reader) use a HIGHend HD computer screen more often for going to CO? or
    “Do you (CO reader) use an economy model computer screen more often for going to CO?”

    *remember while computers at one’s JOB MIGHT not allow for recreational viewing and someone might only have a 2007 column and screen because they have so many kids (like ol’ mother hubbard) that they can’t “INDULGE” in expensive gadgetry

    *and yet those who are THRILLED w/ only the LATEST MODEL skinniest and snazziest computers and want co to be the same.

    keep in mind how many viewers CANNOT afford the whizz-bang newest loveliest thing that was first released two months ago …

  139. O NO (he/she/or it) DI'UNT!!!!! says:

    (jeez!! I didn’t remember that my comment above was so wordy & long—sorry, folks, I just briefly woke up from my coma state for a quick half/hour of getting back to work on boxes and packing and MOVE– OH MY!!!

    (anybody recognize a familar rhythm to the end of THAT line???? ;) :) )

    Aaaaaaaaaaaaanyway

    to edmundsomething at about comment 29: YES!!! while I am not aware of its current quantity of users….look around (either at the left margins or the top of any CO screen; I seem to recall, that the left margins is the correct location) where OUR GLORIOUS CUTENESS Uberlords have the phrase CUTETALK

    THAT is a chat or message board or whatev’s the politically/ technically savvy word of the decade, is.
    Cuteness peeps can meet ea other there either just browsing topics (SHOPPING with your pet Elephant in Today’s America) …..or post questions (can’t think of an example)

    AM (“Not QUITE”) DED (yet) (gasp) (moan ) GOODBYE GOOD BYE & etc.

    aka (FWIW — not much) Leslie aka O NO has left the building .

  140. I downloaded it first and then played it, because my connection can’t even stream normal definition. But even with it already sitting in a temp file, it still seemed jerky. Gorgeous as a series of stills, but not continuous as a movie. I have not read ALL the comments, but from some of them I gather this may be a function of my video card? I view on a desktop, but it is 5 years old and is not the “gaming” kind with an amped-up graphics card.

  141. Mary (the first) says:

    I don’t think I care HD vs. non-HD. Cats might not have been the best “test” though, they’re just gorgeous in any resolution. (Ok I might be biased.)

  142. I vote for lower res. This was too slow & stuttery to even watch.

  143. would much rather have the lower res which loads quickly…can always go in search of a high def version if there is a need

  144. The HD runs perfectly and looks great on my iMac, even on full screen! And the kitties are adorable.

  145. my kitty died last month…this made me miss her

  146. HD is definitely a good choice, kitties are just so infinitely cuter in hi-res. :)

    It’s also fine if you embed the lo-res version and tell that HD is available, it’s not a bother to switch between resolutions. Anyway, I vote for HD.

  147. Very slightly jerky but the cats / kittens were so beautiful – liked the Rod McKuen quote
    I am in favour of HD if it is this good
    Thank you for your offering

  148. Often with standard videos, they’re hard to see. This was perfect in HD

  149. That was so beautiful it almost made me cry with joy. :)

    Watched it on 19″ monitor in full screen. Gorgeous. And it was fine loading on a 10mb connection.

    And ….. OMG KITTEHZ!!!!! :D

  150. O NO (he/she/or it) DI'UNT!!!!! says:

    @ sophie (sorry I moved too fast wanting to comment to you & didn’t check the comment # but it’s probably about $130 or so)

    everybunny @ CO will snuggle (if appropriate) encourage, understand, affirm etc.
    to any time or amount of it, that you find you might need.

    WE DEFINITELY get it! And I’m sure you made the feline quadruped of your life, the happiest possible every single day.

    He might/ possibly has already met my wonderful ex-cat aka Salinger
    (after the author, not the political academic or ambassador/ Canada– I never quite recall accurately his position but I’m including 3 categories there; one of those three is pretty close to the correct)

    Anyway: wherever there is peace near you, may it come knockin’ at your door at least 3 x daily

    ONE LOVE

  151. O NO (he/she/or it) DI'UNT!!!!! says:

    GAAAAH

    comment # 130 NOT $130!!!!

    (Heck, it’s been an entire WEEK since I even had $130 in the same ROOM with me, never mind wanting to GIVE it to someone who obvy knows where true value lies, our beloved circle as you are.)

  152. As wonderful as these are (the little orange one looks just like my Scrappy did when he was a baby), I don’t think it’s worth leaving out a fair amount of people who use the site and have older, slower computers that can’t handle the bandwidth.

  153. @ Laurie – You have the right of it Sweetie – neither should we leave anyone out, I am fortunate in that I have a splendid PC with good graphics and everything but I would hate to think of someone being left out because they did not – it would be so unfair
    Bless All
    Patti

  154. This whole discussion is just bizarre. The video quality selection button is clearly visible at the lower right corner of all Youtube videos, so what does it matter what the default is? Seems like half the people writing to this thread haven’t noticed the playback controls at all!

  155. Post in Standard, we can choose HD if we want it, like Oliver mentions.
    Lovely vid but we need more guineas pigs, please :)

  156. Richard Featherstone says:

    The grey cat at 1:51 is dreaming, it’s got twitchy paws.

  157. Please leave your front page vids in normal resolution and include links to HD; there’s no reason to force more bandwidth use on all the front page embeds, in my opinion. Plus, some of us browse from junky little netbooks and HD doesn’t help. :D

  158. They looks delishous, HD or not HD.

  159. Beautiful in HD! I’d love this quality for everything. No hinkiness at all here.

  160. Aww. Amazing kittens. I’d vote for HD, as it works fine for me with my reasonable new PC and high-speed Internet. But I think the best videos are where you can choose resolution; that way everybody can see it any way they want. :)

  161. Dragonpearl says:

    I vote for low res as well. my vid card is hitchy.

  162. I want to be a cat in the next life.

  163. Kitties happy where they are happiest – outside!
    HD all the way baby!!! No problem loading here. Thanks for my morning Prozac. Sigh.

  164. I vote for the lower resolution. I saw more of the little whirly circle that indicates loading than I did of the cats.

  165. HD HD!! That vid was so cheesy but soooo CUTE!!! Defo better in HD =D

  166. Gorgeous kitties! Love the HD, but even with full buffering, the video was still stuttery for me. I vote standard res with notification of HD availability, thanks! (Also, NTMTOM, I love that your Comments are background-highlighted so I can find you quickly!)

  167. WOW. I thought, “tssh, I don’t see how HD will make any difference”. It sure did! That’s gorgeous picture. I love it. I didn’t load slowly for me for some reason (usually any video loads slowly). Maybe HD is a good thing for my computer.

  168. HD all the way… it loaded instantly, faster than reg. utubes…
    and the cats looked like i could reach out and touch and
    cuddle and kiss and etc. those adorable little cuties.

  169. Jacksonian says:

    I loves me some HD kittehs!

  170. HD HD – please, our little ones look great in HD! Awesome Video!!!

  171. Gorgeous, but too slow. I need my cute fast–and I mean now! Maybe high-def in a few more years, and for now give a link to high-def versions or a reminder about them?

  172. Biscuit Tin says:

    Please leave low res as default. I’m turning 50 this summer. How many years do I have left? 25? 30? That’s enough time for MAYBE three HD videos to load on my lap top.

  173. I vote for HD. I had no problems with the video loading and the images are beautifully sharp.

  174. wow-thats awesome! I vote HD

  175. HD! Beautiful! Most likely the best 2 minutes and 20 seconds of my day, no, my week! Nothing like seeing content kitties, I can hear each and everyone of them purring now.

  176. “My concern was whether I should force 720p as the default, which I can do when embedding videos into a post.”
    – No. I mainly come here for the pictures, and rarely ever look at the vids, so this doesn’t apply to me. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if many view this site during low points at work, and having to wait longer for a HD vid to load by default isn’t the best IMO.

    “It may be better to leave the resolution at standard, and tell readers when an HD version is available.”
    – Yepper.

  177. Dudesmama says:

    Maybe offer in both. HD ran too slow for my computer. Cats looked like they where moving in Sllllooowww motion. LOL

  178. Colonel Jenna says:

    Low-D! Go for the common denominator for the default setting, offer a button to push if you want HD.

  179. mrsgilmore says:

    it’s not even caturday, nomtom.
    my work dell had no problem with the HD, my ancient mac laptop was another story. my vote is for standard res with HD notification. it is ridiculously easy to switch to the HD version, so why make it more difficult for those with slower machines?
    yummy cats, though, and i’m not really a cat person.

  180. Angry Mandalorian says:

    Some of us rely on low-cost, low-speed connections for our intracranial internet administration. Having to pause the video for buffering is quite irritating. If someone wishes to experience the High Definition Kitty Experience (HDKE), then he/she can find the higher quality video his/herself.

  181. Standard, please. Too slow on crappy internet.

  182. I vote for Low-Res with a link/button for the Hi-res. That way noone gets frustrated.

  183. @Oliver…the point of the discussion here is that the kind Providers of All That Is Cute have asked our input for what we’d like them to use as the standard for providing video. Hence, our input. Kthx.

  184. Since I think it’s already been decided, I will not comment on which I prefer…but will say, WOW, what a stress reducing video!! It’s been quite a stressful week, and wow, that video just brought me down to Zen level. The HD was so beautiful…I was captivated by the twitching ears on the sleeping kitties. Aaaaaah.

  185. i would also vote for lo-res simply because i didn’t get to watch the whole cat video here because it was too slow!!!

  186. Lower Resolution!! the videos load slow enough already! Not everyone has crazy-super-fast internet.

  187. BostonPeng says:

    I think using low def is a good option for here on the blog. There’s a user setting on YouTube to show highest quality available (My Account > Playback Options) for those of us who want the HD vids so it could make the perfect option to please everyone. I’m not sure if the YouTube setting affects how videos show up on blog posts (I suspect it doesn’t) but it’s easy-peasy to see vids on YouTube when we want to see a video with higher quality.

  188. cambridge_rat_mom says:

    I vote for leaving the default at 380 and letting those whose cards can handle it (mine can’t) change up to HD. But it really doesn’t matter, since you can change it any ol’ time you want…if you know how…

  189. I’d personally go with faster loading, unless there’s something about the video that makes the HD really worth it. That being said: The embedded you tube video UI allows me to switch it out of HD and into a lower resolution, so as long as I have that kind of control, I’m not really too worried about the default choice.

  190. I vote slow, my computer is too slow for hi res

  191. Standard works, it’s easier on the bandwidth. However, if you note in the post or the title (with an [HD available] or something to that effect), then those with high-speed connections can link through the video (i.e., by clicking on it to go to youtube).

  192. Cyber Cat says:

    Beautiful cats!!!!! but the uploading is slow indeed but HD is just fine. I am not an expert about all these but I would prefer it faster with no interrruptions.

  193. By default, SD. If user wants to watch HD, then they can click on the number/HD option! Or post both?

  194. I admit that the image quality is nice, but it took a really long time to load (reminds of my dial-up days *shivers*) and my poor computer can’t handle play back (lots of freezing and skipping and my CPU usage was off the scale). I would vote for not defaulting to the HD, please.

  195. Euphemism says:

    I live in a country where we do not have the best internet connections at the best of times, internet connections are routed through other countries making dynamic content sometimes very slow to load. Where I live our internet connections are also charged by data usage, the more megabytes we use the more we pay or our internet is slowed down to a halt. While HD is pretty, it is not a viable option for a large portion of the world and would make it more difficult for visitors of this site. However, those people with good enough connections and no bandwidth limits would not be inconvenienced at all by an extra click.

  196. HDHDHDHDHD go HD! and one of the cats look like my cat silver

  197. I vote for standard res and notification when HD is available. Gorgeous video! Those kittehs are obvy loved, pampered and very secure in their environment.

  198. Standard res, please.

  199. O NO (he/she/or it) DI'UNT!!!!! says:

    HAHAHA @ Biscuit Tin:

    50-something?? Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnn, yew ain’t no Olde Codger yet. Yew gotta LONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG way to go, my man.

    Me own beloved Nana (of Hutt family, orig us @ NYC turn/ century)….was 97 when she “left this department to go shopping upstairs”…..and really, it isn’t even that she was particularly ill. Perhaps she had it scheduled that way to coincide w/ planetary alignment, I dunno

    Soo enjoy whatever you can (with the exception of violence to other peeps or animaux, would be ideal..) and don’t sweat anything that TRIES to put you out in the Nonsense part of the World.

    And so it goes.

  200. Snaktime says:

    It was much easier to reach into the screen to pet snoozled kittehs with the HD version.

  201. Purry sleepy kittties! In HDeee! Yes, pleeeease, and Morrrrrrhhhe!

  202. LOW def pleeeze. My internets are sloooow and it takes forevers

  203. NEITHER! Don’t do Flash. I either block Flash, or turn off plugins and just skip the videos. Clever would be to code the site to use QuickTime or the native video format for an OS, and use Flash only as a fallback.

    The vid was nice on the iPod touch, but amazing in HD. I downloaded the video then watched it in QuickTime.

  204. please please standard res with HD option

  205. crackjob says:

    The HD looks incredible.

    The thing I love most about this video is that it shows the OTHER side of kitties that internet videos don’t usually show – the quiet, serene (and sleepy) side. Cats aren’t always crazy little sink-sleeping maniacs in need of boxhab…

  206. default to lower resolution please! it’s hard to switch from HD to standard on older computers/OSs.

  207. LeAnn (not LeAnna or Lee Ann) says:

    EEN-credible! Beautiful videosity. It started bogging down right from the beginning, so I stopped it, did a little work while it loaded, then went back to it.

  208. Could barely watch, too slow. Vote for standard.

  209. Standard resolution, please.

  210. So pretty! But please do Standard by default, so as not to disrupt my wifi-laptop-on-the-couch evenings. Perhaps a link for the HD version, when available?

  211. I looooooooooooved the HD. But if too many people have a slow connection, could you at least let us know if there’s an HD option? So that we of faster connections can enjoy. HD makes all the difference. Just gorgeous.

  212. Lil heavy on the cats lately….More doggies!!!

  213. fly'n bye says:

    Regular needed here! Can’t handle high octane, ’cause definitely LOW TECH and SLOW (just like me – hee hee!)

  214. Definitely vote for standard. Having the HD try to load made my browser slow down too much to load any of the other pictures on the page. Maybe you could post the standards, and link to the HD version if it’s available? That way, us slowies could have our vids, and others wouldn’t have to go searching for the HD?

  215. I would have to cast my vote for HD. This vid was no problem for my L33t b0x.

  216. HD Beautiful cats!! Thanks.

  217. I don’t really care; I love the cats! Kind of sad some are stray. From the creator’s mouth via youtube:

    “Some random HD footage I shot of mostly stray cats that we feed when they come to our home. The only cat that we keep indoor/outdoor is the frosty gray cat Jakers (the one who loves cleaning other cats), and he is 14 years old”

  218. CoconuCheez says:

    I vote for the full HD glory, even if i need to wait for a couple minutes to load them :D

  219. My computer & connection are pretty fast, so I rlly lurve the HD;
    Haowsumebber, I couldn’t totally enjoy it, if other peeps’ viewing are compromised by having this setup only; therefore, it would be best for CO to have standard resolution, with HD as an option…so everybody could enjoy the videos…….

  220. Wow, this is tough…the kitties are extra cute in HD–every whisker and paw-pad is so sharp and clear. But sometimes I’m in a hurry and need a quick CO fix, which means I can’t wait for a longer download. But…the whiskers and paw-pads win–I vote for
    HIGH DEF KITTEHS!

  221. I vote for low res. I can always click the hi-res button if I want to and the hd video is slow to load with my aircard.

  222. thanks for asking. redonc slow loading, can’t handle it, i vote for speed!!!

  223. Verizon.net DSL, here in the SoCal desert, is really slow, because we are too far from the junction box. Wish we had Fios, or even cable…alas. So, HD is not for us.
    Peeps, may want to check their DSL/Interenet/Cable speed at: http://www.dslreports.com/tools
    Slow downloads can be for many reasons. Mac Users, including pre-intel, be sure to keep your desktop clear of clutter, dump cache, cookies, & history, of your browser & if need be run Safari reset. Check to see if a program is hogging CPU.
    Naturally, you are doing regular OS X maintenance, too, right? :]

  224. Ooh! More HD!

  225. Yitzysmommie says:

    HD!! HD!! Please…(makes whiney noise) Looks GEEEEEreat on my brand spanking 2 week od iMac computer. I like to think that Teho would be proud of my turning Appley in my old age.
    PS I am getting nothing done, watching and rewatching the cat vid.

  226. Yitzysmommie says:

    PS – comcast.net hi speed innerwebs lives up to its name – loaded instantly, no problemos.

  227. Well, I’d never again be able to see CuteOverload on my home computer with its archaic dial-up connection. But I’d still get you at work….

  228. Couldn’t watch it, it stopped every few seconds.

  229. standard res, please

  230. psychethos says:

    I was petting my screen just now. Seriously.
    HD works for me, and it looks amazing.

  231. Really slow to load. I’d be happy with regular old video.

  232. Compromise is best says:

    HD gives the animals the crispness they deserve, but it would be unfair to the many people out there that do not have high-speed internet.

    Standard setting and notification of HD option is best.

  233. Standard! In the name of all that’s cute and holy, standard!

    I can’t stand this HD-craze. Whether it’s audio or video, I notice about a 1% difference in quality between high-def and regular, but I notice about triple the loading time/space used. Please, standard quality all the way: we don’t -need- HD.

    It’s like having a meal which has an extra piece of veg and an extra milligram of steak but takes two hours to get to your table. No thanks.

  234. HD! That was amazing!

  235. Jason A. says:

    I vote Standard Definition on page with links to higher definition!

  236. starling says:

    It loads quickly enough and it looks pretty, but my CPU is going in overdrive and the video is really jumpy. *pats CPU fan* there, there. My link is also very slow, the company that was supposed to replace the phone lines went bust halfway through replacing them, so we still have to chase the odd BT engineer up a pole every now and then.

  237. Standard please my pooter is older & slower. In addition as has already been mentioned, not everyone is using a pooter to view these snorglables. I have a wii I like to see thems on.
    Ooh ooh ooh, & could we has mobiles cutes? We like to sit on buses,in cafes & in pubs squealsing at the cute, but the current page noms our memory!

  238. Janet in NYC says:

    HD is preferable! No problems loading at all

  239. Oh, I MUST kiss each & every one of those delicious little faces at least 16 times each.

  240. Donsie_Lass says:

    HD, please. So we can se all the fur-breaks.

  241. Donsie_Lass says:

    So amazed by the HD magic I can’t even type ‘see’ properly!

  242. Christina says:

    HD! As a college student I get very few cats and a solid internet connection

  243. minecritter says:

    I can’t tell the difference in picture quality, but I can tell the difference in speed of loading. I vote for low-res for me, and for mercy to everyone with older equipment than mine.

  244. Wylizzle says:

    I say HD, personally. I’m sure that’ll annoy lots of people though. Better to keep it SD and let people who want HD click the 720p button.

  245. I am stunned at what a great difference HD makes. I say HD, YES!

  246. NutherDeb says:

    21 minutes to load with Verizon Wireless internet…low-res please, with opt for HD. Kitties are adorable, though!!

  247. toriwannabe says:

    Quicker is better, so Standard for me. I hate waiting for vids to load. I usually give up if I get too much of the “loading” symbol. Really, really annoying.

    If I watch something on SD and like it enough, I might choose to look at the HD version, but for the most part, I like my vids to be short and sweet (and, of course, cute)

  248. Elizabeth says:

    Yes, HD! That loaded just fine for me.

  249. This is great! I had to adjust my computer’s settings in order for it to play smoothly, but it was well worth it. I want more HD kittehs!

  250. HD! HD! Finally got a computer that can handle it!!
    p.s. love the video!

  251. That was a perfect way to unwind after a long day! ;-)
    I don’t have HD, so it doesn’t matter to me, as long as CO continues to do what it does so very very well !!!!!!! ;-)

  252. lady jilian says:

    Stay with the standard, please. I don’t have a wide enough band width to watch it without it stopping every few seconds. Thanks. ♥

  253. HD ! No contest.

  254. Is now extra sad she has cat allergy. *Sobs*

    Love the HD but think its best to defalt at standard so no one misses out on such cuteness. A really obvious HD button for the likes of me would be nice though.

  255. FriedBiscuit. says:

    I vote for standard. No everyone has the capabilities to watch HD with no problems.

  256. PLEASE; stick with lo-res for now.

  257. mike from queens says:

    Since you always include the link back to YouTube, those who want to spend the extra time downloading the HD version can do so. The lower resolution should be the default. That said, the HD looks awesome.

  258. im maaddd tired now……… stoopid kitties ;D i want the little orange one

  259. For me the HD is much, much slower. I’m sure it looks great but I won’t watch if it takes forever, and I need my cute dosage to stay sane!!!

  260. hipcheck says:

    HD all the way

  261. wannadance says:

    hd is purty but enough to drive me bats.cain’t stand it. ah want mah cute NOW not later..if we have labeled hd id be skipping them.

  262. LoRes please. Stuttery videos are the opposite of cute.

  263. Yeah, standard please. I waited for the whole video to load, and then when I pressed play I got music fine, but video looked like th i s.
    Fits and starts, and highly frustrating. And I have “high speed” cable internet.

  264. Can we have a choice? I’d watch HD at home but standard on my phone. Get me all technological. :-)

  265. HD HD WE WANT HD! It’s not to slow. It’s time for everyone to upgrade to high speed, its 2010 and there is too much cuteness not to be in HD!

  266. So cute! HD looks awesome.

  267. cat herder says:

    the HD looks gorgeous!
    but even on my broadband home network AND with the video pre-loaded, it was constantly skipping. there were only a few times of normal, smooth playback – and those only lasted a couple seconds each. :-(

  268. I have the same problem as cat herder, even when it’s fully preloaded it will skip constantly, forcing me to pick a lower quality.

  269. mom2twinzz says:

    I agree with the choice to use the Low res version but linky to the HD version if people want to click it. My monitor and video card can handle it on this computer, but my Ubuntu Laptop has issues, although that could be due to the lack of a flash player for 64-bit systems…. :(

  270. My sad little computer just can’t take it. I know I need to upgrade, but my dollars can’t go toward another computer right now. I agree with having the video in low res, with a linky to hd.

  271. MellyS says:

    OMG This video is sooo awesome! It’s like the cats are right in front of me. I even started trying to pet them. The gorgeous blue girl looked just like my Hanzo (albeit a much much slimmer version). I tried to pet her stomach while my boy is curled up in his box. Reasonable substitute when my Hanzo’s occupied as such.

  272. HD cats are beautiful!

  273. I see the cats when I feed them. and walk around when we at work. That they walk around run around climb on the staris in the barn jump up in the stall window, mouse and bats. under cars and hood they hunt.

  274. My computer and connection have no trouble handling the HD videos quickly, so I vote for the HD :)

  275. Please use the HD! This vid made the low res cute look like a telegram.

  276. Lilli Rose says:

    No HD! Couldn’t watch it and there is plenty of cute in the normal one!!

  277. Paunchie says:

    Beautiful vid, I love the kitties sleeping in the grass.

  278. Squibble says:

    Standard res please, my compy can’t handle HD.

  279. Snurfles says:

    Personally, I prefer HD. Even though it can be a bit slow, I just pause it and wait for the bar to load all the way and I’m fine. I understand, though, that not everyone has a computer that can handle it (though they must be really OLD computers because most of today’s computers should do just fine). In any case, to be fair to those who don’t have updated computers, I think you should stick with standard res. Beautiful video though!!!

  280. Vote for force HD.

  281. standard, please

  282. Lovely vid, but unfortunately my computer’s not up to HD and so the vid was very jerky. Not everyone can afford to upgrade their computer (or have skills to do so) or afford a newer model, so using HD only is not entirely fair. Perhaps, if the vid is available in both formats, you could post the HD version but link to the lower res vid as well? If it’s only available in HD, then I guess those who can’t watch it properly will have to cope – but please don’t go 100% HD! Please give us some that aren’t as well!

  283. really jerky video here. too bad.

  284. Well, the HD looks awesome. But it does take a long time to download; at least at regular res I can watch while it loads.

    I’m pretty sure at :30, the cats are saying “WTH is that music coming from??!?”

  285. Nathan says:

    Well that loaded in 2 seconds for me so I vote HD. I put all my vids on youtube in HD anyway.

  286. I just love cats!!! Good resolution. I vote HD. But cats are great no matter what.

  287. Lauren B says:

    Please don’t auto switch to HD! I live in South Africa and you have to pay for internet per megabyte. It’s already tough to watch videos- but HD actually costs us more money. Please keep it normal, and people can always switch to HD!

  288. Joobah says:

    This one loaded faster for me than the one above… so I see no difference other than quality.

  289. whats acoustic soung is this , its beautiful. email me m4monkey90@aol.com

  290. This is just amazing I cuold watch this video over and over, I prefer to wait a little to upload it because de images are so beautiful, I stay with the HD

  291. Bathsheba says:

    HD SO MUCH mo betta!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 14,040 other followers