First of, this site is really great. I do not know whatever happened to videos from MSDN, but channel 9 seems to be just as good and even better.

I do have some problems with the videos though.

1) Names. Could you perhaps give each download a meaningful name? Like "conference"-"topic"-"presenter". Something like that. Maybe quality in the end - I do not know whether you need that. (Reason: I do not like online streaming, I typically download for later watching.)

2) Quality. Some still have bad audio - I really wonder about that. Sometimes the voice sounds like metal. I know someone could do better there. In some recent videos, video quality has been bad, too.

3) Quality again (this time encoding). I am really surprised about how inconsistent the encoding is. With aspconf I was surprised to find very high quality, low size wmv files after downloading everything as high quality mp4. (From what I had seen before, mp4 was superior in quality and size regarding your offers.) Maybe you could introduce a category for us Windows (yeah!) users who want to have a small download with the highest quality. I do not care about container format, but a consistent link saying "greatest encoding for PC" would be great. You can make awesome quality videos now (h264/aac) with something like 300MB per hour. If it is a movie. If it is just stills (showing a desktop), it should be less than 100MB per hour for great quality. If you invest a little extra upfront in encoding, you would save a lot of confusion on the side of your users and also quite a bit of bandwidth.

Still, I greatly love your site, especially now that all the conferences that are around the globe come (at least partially) do my home/office.

Thanks!

1.)  I will take into consideration the naming convention you specified. I usually upload the conference videos from C9Live with the name of the session, but i will start adding the name of the conference as well as speaker.

2.) which videos have bad audio? I know everything shot in the studio has had great audio quality in the last few months (since I am recording them ) are you refering to content contributor by others? Channel 9 is still a site for most Microsoft employees to upload videos to, we can't control every contributors video uploaded. But videos featured on the homepage are usually of the highest quality. There might be a few conferences where there are no audio mixer supervisors but those are usually the free conferences but we still find the content to be great so we upload them. Would it be prefered to not upload the videos then if they had poor quality? i.e. http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Lang-NEXT/Lang-NEXT-2012 

3.) this can be answered in my above response. channel 9 doesn't film/encode everything. and for the aspconf i know volunteers helped out with those videos. but for the future, I will see what our team can do to filter out anything of poor quality.

I think the "Full Stack" videos had bad quality, but I will specifically report if I come across bad quality.

In general: good for internal and external use, you could put up a guideline on what equipment/codec etc. to use. This should - long term - result in consistency, even from different contributors.

Oh, and I am thankful for all content online. Tough ocasionally I skipped a video since I simply could not get any value from it (not being able to hear anything, not seeing the code, ...)

And thanks for the great support here!!