I do not get why the level of criticism is rising so high in some of the messages.
I have nothing to say about more "philosophical" aspects of the issue but would like to comment from a more pragmatic point of view: I am completely happy with the *structure* of site (*visually* it may get better, I agree): You choose your topic, go to the relevant page, select among the video series and start watching at anyone video (ie any level) you want. I think those of you criticising may be in some kind of rush hence not being able to get this "structure". Or maybe visual hints are more important than I think. And you can do nothing about the content being too "simple". But me personally I learned something more than None (see eg blender tutorials). You should read the exlanations put below the videos more carefully anyway! I did not get any broken link (and I visited quite a few videos), or login requirement. Am I talking about another site? A last, more subjective, comment: I think we must be more constructive in our criticisms. Regards. On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Jeremiah Dodds <jeremiah.do...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:48 AM, Banibrata Dutta <banibrata.du...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Personally, I faced some despair with a large number of the free >> ShowMeDo tutorials, example the one on WxPython, where for the first 4 >> free tutorials, the tutor hardly progresses to any bit of programming, >> and what is demonstrated was too basic, too slow - to hold my >> attention. > > I must agree here. I'll add that the vast majority of video tutorials or > lectures that I've seen are way too slow to hold my interest, with the > exception of google tech talks, and stuff like OCW from MIT. (These are at > http://research.google.com/video.html and > http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/home/home/index.htm respectively). > > However, I do really like the idea of showmedo, especially for people who > like learning through not-so-dense video on the introductory level. I > haven't been incredibly impressed with the quality of the free stuff there > either, but I also haven't looked at any of the paid stuff. I don't think > that it's safe to assume that it's of a substantially higher quality. > > > > > -- > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > > -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list