This feels like 'racketeering' no ?
YouTube Will ‘Frustrate’ Some Users with Ads So They Pay for Music
101–110 of 170 posts
Re: YouTube Will ‘Frustrate’ Some Users with Ads So They Pay for Music
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not if you're the actual monopoly because of network effects. See youtube, facebook, google, microsoft.
Not if you're the actual monopoly because of network effects. I'd have thought network effects are exactly why companies on the internet can't mess around with their users. If a few people start using another site and share it with their friends, the rest could all follow very quickly.
> If a few people start using another site
But they don't, because they can't. YouTube recommendations are only ever internal links to other YouTube videos. Where would they go, anyway? Self-hosting and ads? They'd miss out on YouTube's monetization.
Some YouTube personalities are quite vocal in how much they dislike YouTube, but they can't really leave. Perhaps if Vimeo looked into advertising monetisation there'd at least be a rival platform.
Re: YouTube Will ‘Frustrate’ Some Users with Ads So They Pay for Music
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not if you're the actual monopoly because of network effects. I'd have thought network effects are exactly why companies on the internet can't mess around with their users. If a few people start using another site and share it with their friends, the rest could all follow very quickly.
Youtube does have a big advantage of video being too large to move around quickly. It would take quite some time to bootstrap a new video service with even a remotely comparable catalog.
> It would take quite some time to bootstrap a new video service with even a remotely comparable catalog.
That's true, but it's a question of adoption - it has nothing to do with file size.
Vimeo are a rival streaming service, and they're very good, but they don't offer YouTube-style monetization.
Re: YouTube Will ‘Frustrate’ Some Users with Ads So They Pay for Music
#104> will “frustrate and seduce” users of YouTube’s free service
Oh look at Google once again thinking of alienating their users once more
Re: YouTube Will ‘Frustrate’ Some Users with Ads So They Pay for Music
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not Spotify?
I should have considered it but I am not someone who streams live content so just a static playlist of music videos was all I was looking for.
Spotify is not live content. You have albums or playlists like YT, but it's made for that and the experience is much better.
Also, you avoid doenloading video content when all you need is audio.
Re: YouTube Will ‘Frustrate’ Some Users with Ads So They Pay for Music
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you run G-Suite for your family? That would be the only reason I can think of to not be using a personal account for this purpose.
For a while you could get a free google apps account for up to 10 users. A free google account + your own domain name which costs you less than 8 bucks a year. If they were smarter maybe they would just offer this as a paid feature on top of gmail. Its not like it costs them more money to deliver email to a different domain.
Because of these issues I abandoned moving my family to G-Suite I had setup and instead use it for forwarding to our free Gmail. Not sure if we're missing out on anything much we would've had from the free tier of G-Suite.
Re: YouTube Will ‘Frustrate’ Some Users with Ads So They Pay for Music
#107I came across iYTBP - injected YouTube Background Playback. It allows one to 1. view 2k 60 fps videos in app 2. background playback 3. download for forever 4. dark mode 5. no advertisement ever 6. VP9 codec 7. loop playback 8. pip mode and much more without rooting your phone. https://forum.xda-developers.com/android/apps-games/app-iytb... This app is also available by Youtube Vanced name in XDA app store for free. A…
Sooner or later, Google is going to come after this guy. The ProTube app on iOS did most of this stuff, and they made him shut it down.
Don't think the same thing will work on android.
Re: YouTube Will ‘Frustrate’ Some Users with Ads So They Pay for Music
#108I have been paying for YouTube Red since 2015. I really like the YouTube Music app and how I can save songs for offline use, and how it's kept up-to-date with songs I like on YouTube (as well as recommended suggestions) whenever my phone goes on WiFi, so my playlist never gets old. You also get other perks like keeping a YouTube video playing in the background on your phone. I prefer using YouTube for music as oppose…
> Since I pay for YouTube Red, I don't get ads. I think the cost justifies it.
Since I have started using ad blockers I don't get ads neither.
> Shouldn't you be paying for services you appreciate? Sure, but if 'lacks advertisement' is the selling point then it sounds like a bad joke that I don't get.
Re: YouTube Will ‘Frustrate’ Some Users with Ads So They Pay for Music
#109This is why I still maintain a digital music library -- backed by a physical media collection that sits in my real live analog house -- that I sync to an SD card in my phone. In 2018, Bandcamp seems to have solved the digital music sales problem that the iTunes music store never could (DRM-free album downloads in lossless formats for less than the retail price of the CD or LP). Everything that isn't there can usually…
Doing a search on Bandcamp for songs that I like.. I was able to find none of them. I'd argue if they only solved the problem, then they solved the subset of the problem which excludes the songs that I would be after.
Re: YouTube Will ‘Frustrate’ Some Users with Ads So They Pay for Music
#110Oh that's amusing to me, since I use uBlock and Disconnect and download things with youtube-dl. I wonder how they'd work on 'frustrating' me. All I'd do is add a userscript into Greasemonkey or uBlock to get past their nonsense and be on my way again.