At least in Corporates, the point is not the content usually, or at least not 95% of the content. Usually there are 1-2 key slides per PPT that the audience actually cares about, something like the "Roadmap" slide, where you commit to a timeline on the project (even though nobody understands what the project actually is), or the "Costs" slide, where you commit to a budget (even though it's way too early to say).

This is the point, supported by the signaling of the PPT itself.

The remaining 95% are slides that the audience doesn't care about and/or doesn't understand anyway.

Video is usually more effective for asynchronous presentations. Powerpoint is great for spoken presentations where everyone is in the same room. But they generally suck as summary reports. For thinking and analysis word docs are superior. For asynchronous presentation video is superior. Video allows you to control the timing and framing in a way that a slide deck cannot. The main downside to videos is that they are harder to make. But there is a reason people prefer science documentaries over recorded lectures or lecture slides.

Books beat them all imho :)

While I agree, I think we're almost extinct species.

Most good video presentations include a ppt or the equivalent. A video is just a spoken presentation that’s recorded, like a live spoken presentation it can include visual aids or not, it’s still a spoken presentation. You may confusing categories of things, or maybe I’m too used to seeing ppt with slides containing embedded video.

Just as a movie can go far beyond being a recording of a theatrical play, a video presentation can offer far more possibilities than simply being a recording of a slide presentation. It can allude to possibilities that are closer to experience and convey a sense of reality that a slide deck can’t achieve.

You do know that you can just record your PowerPoint slide with all the spoken world and mouse movement and timing and slide transitions and whatever else, right?

On the other hand, there's a good reason that bullet points aren't how formal communication is actually done, which is that they're terrible for actually doing the job of conveying information. For that, you need sentences in paragraphs, and PPT can't really do that.

The best option is probably just an html doc — mix text (real text, not bullet points) with whatever media you want. Can be viewed on every device in the world.

I think what the GP comment is conveying is the cultural factor of a PPT. It’s not good for information communication when not paired with a human being giving the presentation that would say those sentences shown in bullet form. If you have the human, writing full sentences on a slide deck that they just read out is the worst.

But the cultural factor is you signalling “I want to PRESENT something to you”. It implies this is a pitch, and you’re only seeing the notes. It’s a way to say “come talk to me”.

The information density being so low is kind of a feature.

> On the other hand, there's a good reason that bullet points aren't how formal communication is actually done …

You clearly have not met my grad school classmates who used PPTs to lead seminars, but used slides as their full-sentence speaking notes.

Slideshow presentations work, but execution is key.

There's really no need to limit yourself to bulletpoints in PPT. Powerpoint offers so many other ways of illustrating information. I really like powerpoint as it's one of the simplest tools to do visual animated story telling.

[delayed]

I usually just scroll up and down a formatted document

> I still think PPTs are the best way to convey concepts.

Man I wonder how humanity was able to function with concepts before the PPT format was born. Surely this resulted in an explosion of productivity?

If you can't see, it may be that you're not a player /s

Yep. I think things like Jupiter are really just imitating ppt. It’s generally the same concept, a linear series of information chunks, mixing text and graphics, the formality of written prose stripped away, just enough for one sitting. PPT are great, it’s the people who only use PowerPoint, often for nefarious ends, that I am distrustful of, not the modality itself.

> I can‘t even think of an alternative to this other than adhoc whiteboard drawings which can‘t match PPTs on any axis except if you‘re just (collaboratively) developing an idea/concept

I think this is a major part of the problem. Powerpoint is so commonplace now that we cannot even conceive of different ways of presenting information to groups. If you cannot figure out how to express an idea in the medium of Powerpoint or slideware in general, then that idea is difficult to express nowadays. That limits the kind of information you can share, especially complex information that is not so easily conveyed in bullet points or in sparse infographics. "The medium is the message", in other words.

Maybe I'm old, but I remember going over a lot of information in group settings without the use of Powerpoint. Here's a few examples of alternatives:

- overhead projectors (common when I was in elementary school)

- slide projectors

- lectures and speeches

- live demonstrations

- field and laboratory work (can be very hands-on learning)

- panel discussions and debates

- group discussions (after everyone reads a book or report)

- displaying a written report on a screen rather than distinct slides (I do this myself sometimes)

Some of these aren't going to work that well if you need to convey Q3 sales figures, for example, but my point is that there are other options out there even though Powerpoint has flooded the arena. Note that you can even combine these with Powerpoint or slideware and get the best of both worlds too for that matter. I'm not against Powerpoint as much as I dislike how it is conventionally used.

(I must also note that many people, myself included, hate the "slow crawl" of having information revealed progressively. It might work sparingly for dramatic effect but having been in so many meetings with bad speakers, it is far too easily abused and always makes me ask myself "When will the speaker get to the point?").