Brightcove vs. Wipster

It works very nicely for our company site because it can easily and seamlessly embed into the site and email HTML pages. It also has picture in picture, sharing, closed captioning (CC) as basic functions. It will also show the time of the video. Because these are short-term-use videos or might get updated frequently and also are just targeting a specific audience, being able to hide or not able to show the number of views or date published (unlike YouTube) actually helps us.

Incentivized

When a project reaches the point where an editor is ready for feedback, he or she uploads it to a Wipster folder. In this initial rough stage, it is typically only shared with the internal team for review. We want as many wrinkles ironed out as possible before the faculty gives their feedback -- again, they typically don’t have a lot of time to engage in a process requiring multiple revisions and versions of content. Once all parties are satisfied with the final product, we finalize and export. In general, I will leave content on Wipster for a couple of months in case we ever need to refer back to previous comments/feedback.

Incentivized

• Ability to easily output a JSON response for requested video data. This makes it easy to work with Brightcove as partner.
• The read APIs are very flexible and can the output can be easily customized using cgi args. This provides great customization of the output and sorting and filtering mechanisms to find the videos you're looking for.
• The ability to add captions to videos is good, especially with the regulations requiring video captioning. DFXP support works great as long as the player is given the exact XML format it is looking for.

• Wipster was one of the first applications to allow for frame-by-frame video feedback. This provided a unique opportunity to make feedback far more intelligible than before. Before Wipster, we needed to reference phone calls, notes, emails, and messages, as well as communicate verbally with our project managers. A lot of information can get lost this way, but Wipster places the feedback directly with the video, which makes it super easy to understand what the client desires for their video to look like.
• Wipster allows for a client to select a location on a frame where their feedback is referencing. It's fairly archaic, but it works. Client feedback sits next to the playback window so it's somewhat easy to reference what the client wants.
• Wipster also allows for integration with editing software like Premiere Pro, which speeds up the editing process as well.

Incentivized

• Online support could be more accessible to the layman (non-techy users can get a bit lost in the help resource library)
• Multiple user logins for the account (with different levels of access) would be useful - we work with many off-site videographers and editors
• The ability to link to an individual video within a player on our website would be great.

• There is sometimes a lag when navigating a timeline/leaving comments, which makes me wonder if actions are being recorded correctly.
• The admin interface seems to be slower than it should be.
• There's no closed captioning feature as far as I know (some of our clients are deaf/hard of hearing).

Incentivized

It took quite some time to upload and organize our video library. The amount of time it would require to relocate all this information outweighs any negative aspect I personally have with the experience. They have been pretty good to work with and from speaking with my Brightcove rep, I know some of the issues I have listed are currently being addressed and tested for future releases.

Wipster has become a must-have tool to do my job!

Incentivized

Very usable! I don't see any major flaws

We are notified often of downtime, and I have not heard from a support rep for over a year. It really makes it hard to learn what new things are coming out and how we can take our video to the next level when there is no contact from the team on a regular cadence.

Incentivized

While the technical issues we have encountered with Wipster have been very low in the time we've used the service, the few instances where we have needed assistance were met promptly and effectively by Wipster's Support Team. This support even extended all the way from the platform's founder, as I received help from him, which really impressed me.

Incentivized

Marketing department favors it because EVERYONE uses YouTube. Overall, YouTube offers decent features and functionality. But Brightcove offers the ability to brand and style players, and control what our users see (and so much more) and YouTube does not. For instance, on YouTube, users are presented with other videos (which could contain competitor videos).

After my experience with Wipster at my old job, when I started a business I knew I needed to look into alternatives. Despite the areas it failed, Wipster still made it easier to do my job. At this point, I've switched to Frame.io and it's hard to look elsewhere. Frame.io does everything Wipster does but heaps better. It's easier to use, easier to organize, cleaner interface, and accomplishes my goals at a reasonable cost to the business.

Incentivized

• Again, there has been a huge cost savings which significantly improved our ROI
• There has also been less time spent on learning new technologies and training additional staff on maintaining a video server.
• Less time spent on the previous two points has allowed me to focus on other areas within the department that needed improvement.

• No calculation I have noted but too many intangible benefits after using it , over all that is ROI
• I don't remember any negative feedback but in-app , working is very tricky
• customer supper and media management is good

Incentivized