Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why doesn't YouTube have a competitor?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 226 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't YouTube have a competitor?

#101

Post by wodenokoto »

There are some in the Chinese market, but I don't know which are left. There used to be a few real contenders, like Vimeo, but Vimeo simply couldn't afford to host videos to all markets.

Japanese Nico Nico is the 34th most visited site in Japan, so I guess they are still doing okay.

For certain things, I think Twitch is very much a real competitor, and I think the best example to answer your question, on what a competitor would need to get an in on the market - a unique twist on video hosting.

Personally I consider Netflix, HBO and Disney+ the biggest competitors. It's basically the internet version of cable vs terrestrial TV, imho. Youtube isn't so much about sharing your vacation video, as it is a platform to turn amateur content creators into professional content creators (with an odd side hustles of hosting professional music videos).

Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't YouTube have a competitor?

#102

Post by jimbokun »

_hyn3 wrote: post #25

It's interesting that TikTok is a formidable competitor that focused on a different experience and a slightly different format (short form). Tiktok seems to work by choosing for you and only showing a single video at a time (esp on mobile, which is where it's really most at home), but allowing you to quickly reject that choice and learning from your rejections. Is it possible to beat YouTube itself with a different e…

> Is it possible to beat YouTube itself with a different experience but the same, longer-form, format?

Maybe focus on content longer than the YouTube average , like courses and documentaries and in depth video podcasts?

Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't YouTube have a competitor?

#103

Post by snek_case »

jimmaswell wrote: post #92
ageitgey wrote: post #47

YouTube is a huge technical achievement that would require billions of dollars to replicate: 1. It consumes nearly unlimited bandwidth. 2. It consumes nearly unlimited CPU for transcoding and serving media at different bitrates. 3. It consumes massive resources to police, from user moderation to appeasing content owners by building systems and databases like ContentID, etc. 4. It generates endless PR and legal headac…

Sounds like PornHub or similar could easily branch into providing a separate service for general videos if they wanted. They already have all this stuff down for the most part.

You're right that Netflix and Pornhub have both been able to replicate this.

IMO, it might be wise for Netflix to start their own YouTube-like service. For example, subscribe to Netflix, get access to user-created videos on a separate app. The best part is that users would then generate content for a fraction of what they currently pay to produce content, and they could have basically what YouTube has, but ad-free.

Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't YouTube have a competitor?

#104

Post by zokier »

randomdata wrote: post #88
gwbas1c wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The content may have matured, but has YouTube really changed? I always thought the point was to make it easy for anyone to publish an original video? (And then to make it easy for anyone to watch the video.)

> but has YouTube really changed? Unquestionably. If you recall, YouTube originally made its mark by having pirated copies of the SNL Lazy Sunday skit floating around, which quickly saw it become recognized it as the place to watch all kinds of pirated TV shows. Eventually they started enforcing duration limits to quash people uploading entire episodes, but it wasn't until the content ID system was implemented that i…

Which is in part why building youtube competitor is so difficult. Bootstrapping with pirated content is not something that will fly as easily in 2020 as it did in 2005

Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't YouTube have a competitor?

#105

Post by NelsonMinar »

mattl wrote: post #12

Vimeo is the only thing that comes close. All the open source offerings lack the dedicated apps for dedicated media players. To be a serious alternative you’d need apps for Apple TV, Android TV, Roku plus iOS and Android and a solid desktop browser.

Ironically, YouTube is about to lose its Roku app. Contract expires Dec 9 and the two children seem unable to share a playground.

Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't YouTube have a competitor?

#106

Post by IceWreck »

danpalmer wrote: post #24
wheybags wrote: post #7

CEO of vimeo will cry themself to sleep after reading this post

Vimeo seems to have found a good niche – professional video hosting. YouTube is a social network as much as a video hosting service, and for professional applications, embeds in websites, portfolios, etc, it's often a bad idea to include things that will detract from other content or take users away from the site. YouTube embeds are still fairly branded, may show ads, etc. YouTube has no interest in this market, so I…

> Vimeo seems to have found a good niche – professional video hosting.

Yet I prefer websites use youtube to embed content. Whenever I encounter an embedded vimeo video, I'm asked to fill a captcha. This almost never happens with youtube.

Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't YouTube have a competitor?

#107

Post by bdcravens »

1cvmask wrote: post #2

There is a new "free speech" alternative called Rumble emerging. Rumble for now promises Not to become a censorship platform like YouTube is now currently. https://rumble.com/ Even though some high profile civil libertarian and free speech advocates like Glenn Greenwald and Zaid Jilani have chosen Rumble as home, YouTube is still lights years ahead. But if they continue to censor, alternative free speech platform wil…

99% of the users of any platform don't care. They want to see videos of cats, cartoons they can stick in front of their kids, and how to detach the door clips on a 2007 Camry. While I don't agree with the politics of the typical Rumble or Gettr user, I do believe sites like that are a strong part of a free speech society, but they'll never compete with the likes of Youtube or Twitter.

Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't YouTube have a competitor?

#108

Post by Hekioi »

jimmaswell wrote: post #92
ageitgey wrote: post #47

YouTube is a huge technical achievement that would require billions of dollars to replicate: 1. It consumes nearly unlimited bandwidth. 2. It consumes nearly unlimited CPU for transcoding and serving media at different bitrates. 3. It consumes massive resources to police, from user moderation to appeasing content owners by building systems and databases like ContentID, etc. 4. It generates endless PR and legal headac…

Sounds like PornHub or similar could easily branch into providing a separate service for general videos if they wanted. They already have all this stuff down for the most part.

I don't think ph has any relevant similarity to yt.

Video quality is low.

Video amount should probably be 1000 if not 10000 smaller than yt.

I'm not aware of millions uploading hour and hours of high quality videos to their platform.

I myself only go there for a short period of time.

I know plenty of people who keep streams from yt running in parallel.

Post reply on HN