Non-American here. Why are cable and satellite under 2 different categories? Aren’t they the same providers, offering the same services? For example in Australia we have Foxtel, depending on where you live you will get connected to the service either by cable or with a satellite dish, so it wouldn’t make sense to put satellite and cable into different categories. Maybe in the US it’s a different situation?
Streaming video has surpassed cable subscriptions worldwide
61–70 of 105 posts
Re: Streaming video has surpassed cable subscriptions worldwide
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
YouTube has definitely become more and more ad-ridden since its inceptions, and the ads are definitely personalized (though badly). There are now videos with multiple ad interruptions, a bit like ye olde TV. I do think one difference here is that on YouTube, if a video is full of ads, I won't keep watching long unless the content is solid and interesting. I, as a watcher, have a choice as to what I watch. Though of c…
I use YouTube Red, no ads, ever. And you get access to the entire Google music library. Can't beat it for $7.99/month.
Re: Streaming video has surpassed cable subscriptions worldwide
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
YouTube has definitely become more and more ad-ridden since its inceptions, and the ads are definitely personalized (though badly). There are now videos with multiple ad interruptions, a bit like ye olde TV. I do think one difference here is that on YouTube, if a video is full of ads, I won't keep watching long unless the content is solid and interesting. I, as a watcher, have a choice as to what I watch. Though of c…
I use YouTube Red, no ads, ever. And you get access to the entire Google music library. Can't beat it for $7.99/month.
Re: Streaming video has surpassed cable subscriptions worldwide
#64The attitude towards streaming and the whole video on demand idea 10-15 years ago reminds me so much on the attitude towards electric vehicles today: - Quality is too low - speed is too slow - many people want to own their movie, not just rent it - people don’t want to watch movies on a computer - the large studios and cable companies will never allow it And within little more than a decade that all changed.
Quality is still an issue for streaming. Anyone who's ever compared a blu-ray to what Netflix offers knows it's night and day, especially for grainy old films. Netflix so-called "1080p" frequently has compression artifacts, and banding (most visible in dark shots). There's also disturbing aliasing (most visible in logos and on-screen fonts, causing jagged edges) which is more reminiscent of DVD-era MPEG-2 encoding th…
It's marketing bullshit and cost savings, slapping the word HD on everything to lure the customers. Cut the bitrate to save on bandwidth costs.
Many homes don't have the 8+ Mbps required to stream high quality videos, they couldn't get HD even if they wanted to.
Re: Streaming video has surpassed cable subscriptions worldwide
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only thing is, once the streaming market has dominated, there is nothing stopping it to also turning into crap full of advertisements. I remember when cable was cheap and as-free. The transition looks good because it has too (to lure customers away from cable). My bet is that it’s only a matter of time till “personilized ads” are forced upon you.
YouTube has definitely become more and more ad-ridden since its inceptions, and the ads are definitely personalized (though badly). There are now videos with multiple ad interruptions, a bit like ye olde TV. I do think one difference here is that on YouTube, if a video is full of ads, I won't keep watching long unless the content is solid and interesting. I, as a watcher, have a choice as to what I watch. Though of c…
Re: Streaming video has surpassed cable subscriptions worldwide
#66Cable is a stinking pile of sog stuff. 90% of the channels are garbage and the picture quality sucks. I recently put an old-fashioned $40 antenna in my attic. It pulls in 156 channels (I’m in OC, CA about 40mi from Mt Wilson and 80mi from San Diego). Compared with the 148 channels Spectrum provided (about 1/2 where duplicates) the quality is better on the few I watch intermittently (PBS, ABC, CBS...) The crazy thing…
The only thing is, once the streaming market has dominated, there is nothing stopping it to also turning into crap full of advertisements. I remember when cable was cheap and as-free. The transition looks good because it has too (to lure customers away from cable). My bet is that it’s only a matter of time till “personilized ads” are forced upon you.
Re: Streaming video has surpassed cable subscriptions worldwide
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
YouTube has definitely become more and more ad-ridden since its inceptions, and the ads are definitely personalized (though badly). There are now videos with multiple ad interruptions, a bit like ye olde TV. I do think one difference here is that on YouTube, if a video is full of ads, I won't keep watching long unless the content is solid and interesting. I, as a watcher, have a choice as to what I watch. Though of c…
I use YouTube Red, no ads, ever. And you get access to the entire Google music library. Can't beat it for $7.99/month.
Re: Streaming video has surpassed cable subscriptions worldwide
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use YouTube Red, no ads, ever. And you get access to the entire Google music library. Can't beat it for $7.99/month.
It makes me sad your comment is being downvoted. If people aren't happy with ads, they aren't happy paying for anything, then what's the alternative? I don't see any. Those people need to get paid for their work somehow.
Plus, a comment sibling to this one said YouTube Red has ads, so there's that.
Re: Streaming video has surpassed cable subscriptions worldwide
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
It makes me sad your comment is being downvoted. If people aren't happy with ads, they aren't happy paying for anything, then what's the alternative? I don't see any. Those people need to get paid for their work somehow.
It's getting downvoted because paid options grow ads, like most cable channels did. (Not all of them. I think TCM is still ad-free.) Plus, a comment sibling to this one said YouTube Red has ads, so there's that.
YouTube Premium is ad-free, it says so in their frontpage. Are you saying that's a blatant lie?
That doesn't address my point that content producers should get paid.
From YouTube Premium ad: "Ad-free YouTube, and our new music streaming service, YouTube Music. Services: No ads, Downloads, Background play."
Re: Streaming video has surpassed cable subscriptions worldwide
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use YouTube Red, no ads, ever. And you get access to the entire Google music library. Can't beat it for $7.99/month.
I use uBlock Origin. No ads, ever. And you get access to all the music uploaded to YouTube. $0.00/month
I'm clearly not the only one who came up with such an idea: