網路科技不斷進步，服務創新與商業模式陸續推出。線上影音分享網站為目前當紅的領域，但對於網站該如何設計以及使用者為何使用影音分享網站都未有明確準則。因此本研究藉由科技接受行為相關理論的回顧，配合影音分享網站之特性，以Davis(1989)的科技接受模式為基礎，結合相關重要變數，提出概念性架構。目的為找出可能影響網站使用者的相關變數、並瞭解Web2.0影音網站使用者之使用意圖。 實驗方法採用線上問卷方式，在回收的501份問卷中，得到492份有效問卷，以結構方程模式進行研究模式分析。分析結果顯示，研究模式之適配度均達到應有標準。 研究結論章節中會說明本研究之管理意涵，並將研究結果提供給未來欲設立Web2.0影音分享網站的設計者，在網站建立初期，將有限資源投注在重要的變數上，使網站可達到最大效益。 / As the advance of Internet technology continues new business models are emerging in the market. Online video sharing website is the hottest application nowadays, but there is little study on designing the website and why the users using the website. In this research, we propose a conceptual model based on the technology acceptance model developed by Davis (1989) and this model integrating the important variables due to the extant research of relevant theory of technology acceptance and characteristics of video sharing website. The data collection was used the online survey, and we got the 492 eligible data and the analysis was used the Structural Equation Model (SEM). According to the result, the model fit was qualified. This research will give some management implication for designers who want to set up a video sharing website, this research provides the information on how to invest the limited resource on the critical variables in order to maximize the service value in the conclusion section in this paper.

Web2.0締造了許多創業神話與熱潮，但是往往能夠迅速火紅的網站鳳毛麟角，因此本研究以網際網路史以來使用者擴散最快的網站- YouTube做為核心個案，共12個研究個案，研究兩個問題： 1. YouTube使用者能迅速擴散、人氣起飛的原因為何？ 2. 類似的概念許多影音分享網站比YouTube先做、有的和YouTube同時做，為何是YouTube第一個吃下市場，而非所謂有先進者優勢的創新公司？網路是服務複製十分快速的產業，面對後起者的大企業挾金彈攻擊模仿，YouTube為何仍能屹立不搖？ 早在1997年，在頻寬成本都還很高的時候，ifilm就已經開始了線上影片上傳的服務，後續也推出免費上傳影片。Break(1998) 也以主打男性幽默，累積了很高的影片數量，然而當時相關環境卻還不成熟，部落格和線上相簿分享都不普遍。。在2003~ 2005年間，同時有Metacafe(2003)、Grouper(2004)、Sharkle(2004)、Vimeo (2004)、Veoh (2005)、Revver (2005)等影音分享網站各自以精緻影評、P2P、藝術取性、利潤共享等概念切入市場。從YouTube(2005.2)的成長可看到一段不斷嘗試錯誤的過程，從一開始主打美女影片概念、「你的數位儲藏庫」、「上傳、標籤並與世界分享你的影片」、最後出現富有Web2.0精神、彰顯自我的「Broadcast your self」，Slogan改了四次，使用者介面設計也有大幅的改變，程式上也對處理遽增的流量做了大量調整。 資源豐富的大公司Yahoo! 在面對YouTube的成長無所知覺，堅守影片搜尋，錯失先機；而Google雖然比YouTube早推出，但卻仍從搜尋出發，並且對使用者上傳有嚴格的限制，歷經轉型線上影片商店失敗，最後以16.5億美金收購YouTube收場(2006.11)。YouTube發展出「嵌入影片」的功能 (2005.6)，使用者以病毒式擴散，MySpace成為其流量的主要來源 (超過20%)，引發MySpace自家推出MySpace video (2006)，誓言複製一個YouTube。但YouTube腳步並未因為複製而停下，隨著創意影片越來越多，持續針對使用者需求開發新功能，不斷快速設計、測試與修改，YouTube是與使用者共同開發、一同成長，成為YouTube魅力所在。 本研究發現：（一）在嶄新的產業或原創的領域中，學習對象並非專家或權威，而是市場。對於願景的堅持，不斷的針對市場修改，才是持續成長的原因。（二）連結比產能重要，應同時啟動網絡效應與間接網路效應：找到巨人的肩膀，有效利用外部資源，專注自己的核心（三）網路產業複製迅速，先進者難有優勢。優勢來自於企業能夠快速跟上環境脈動的反應力和市場觀察力。並且從利基市場出發，與使用者共同演化完整商品（四）草根策略：大量試驗以聆聽使用者的聲音，速度比正確重要，追求「夠好」而非「最好」，培養能讓創新不斷生長出來的土壤。（五）如果不能有效的輸入知識，核心能力=核心僵固。 / “Web2.0” creates lots of entrepreneur legends and becomes a new trend. But only few of the Web 2.0 websites can grow and become very popular. Therefore, this study picks “YouTube”, the fastest growing website in the Internet history as its core case, and it includes 12 study subjects in total. The two research questions are listed below. 1. Why did YouTube grow so fast? 2. The concept of video sharing which YouTube provided appeared frequently. Some of the websites started their service first; some of them did similar things at the same time. Why not the other competitors who had first mover advantage could win, but YouTube won? One of the characteristics of Internet Industry is “easy to copy”. When facing the competition of big companies which duplicate their idea and attacked with abundant resources, why did YouTube still survive? Ifilm (1997) started its online video sharing business when the cost of bandwidth was still very high. And it served online videos for free afterwards. Break (1998) featured male’s humor, attracted a large number of videos. However, the related environment was not ready. Blog and online photo sharing were not popular at that time. In 2003 to 2005, lots of similar competitors such as Metacafe (2003), Grouper(2004), Sharkle(2004), Vimeo (2004), Veoh (2005), and Revver (2005) established. Some of them used P2P technology; some of them had great editor reviews, and the others provided revenue sharing model. On the other hand, YouTube’s growth came from continuous try-and-error. It failed to be a hotties video sharing website in the begining, and then tried to be “Your Digital Repository”, “Upload, Tag and Share Your Video Worldwide”, and now positions itself as a website for “broadcast yourself” which represents the spirit of Web 2.0. The slogan of YouTube has changed for four times, and the user interface has also changed dramatically. When facing increasing users and videos, YouTube tuned their program very often as well. Yahoo! lost the timing of catching up. Because it stayed in its core capability- search. Although Google video got online a little bit earlier than YouTube, it still started from video search. Moreover, the upload policy is too strict. Google ended up with acquiring YouTube for 1.65 billion dollars after the failure of operating an online video store (2006.11). YouTube developed “Embed” feature and caused a viral spread. MySpace became its main upstream (over 20%). That made myspace build its own “MySpace video” service and vowed to duplicate a similar service as YouTube. Neverthless, YouTube was not stopped by MySpace’s reaction. As creative videos became more and more, YouTube continued developing new features to fit users’ needs. It rapidly went through the cycle of “build-design-test”. Because YouTube grew with its users, co-development with the users became its charisma. The findings are as following. (1) In a developing industry or a new field, the gurus are not experts or authorities, but are the market audience. The insistency of vision and the will to change with the market are the reasons why YouTube continues to grow. (2) Both network effect and indirect network effect should start and be used simultaneous. Linkage is more important than productivity. Take advantage of external resourses efficiently; especially take advantages of those giants in the other industry. Concentrate on company’s own core capability. (3) Because duplication happens often in the Internet industry, the first mover advantage seldom exits. The real advantage is from the ability of quick reaction and deep consumer observation. (4) Grass strategy: using a large scale testing to hear the voices of consumers. The changing speed is more important then accuracy. Pursue “good enough” solution, not “the best” one. The formation of enterprise strategy is like growing grass. The point is keeping the soil fertile and keeping it free to grow. (5) Core capability will be core rigidity if one company can not input knowledge into its organization.