251–260 of 317 posts
Can I just like, buy some file hosting, scp AV1 files to it and embed them on my blog, these days?
If you want to just "upload files" you're going to be encoding a dozen different versions and bundling them as HLS/MPEG-DASH to not have a shitty client experience. You're going to need a fair amount of storage and a big pipe to handle multiple simultaneous streams. Also caching is a Hard Problem since not every version of a piece of content has equal levels of viewership at any given time.
YouTube and Vimeo (and the rest) handle all the storage, bandwidth, and transcoding. It's not something that you're going to do well without a lot of domain knowledge first. The market is littered with the corpses of companies that underestimated the difficulty and expense of streaming video over the web. It's certainly not so difficult as to be impossible, it's just non-trivially difficult and potentially expensive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That 3500 is for a whole year. The per month cost is $300. That's 1.5% of the income that she gets from the videos.
The amount almost doesn't matter (it's definitely on the high side compared to alternatives). They can definitely afford it if they have a reasonable budget. However, how Vimeo has treated them as a paying customer is terrible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Try running an IHOP or the like. You’ll be keeping a dollar or two on that $15 entree.
But that $14 went to 50 different suppliers. Your dairy supplier didn't suddenly decide they are worth $5 all by themselves.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like they tried and found it wasn’t sustainable.
It was surely sustainable their revenue is plus 200mil year and the product haven't changed much over the years. It's not growing enough for shareholders though. But sustainable is not the right word.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except the point seems to be getting her to leave, not giving her a thoughtful way to stay.
"We want you to leave" is a pretty ok thing for them to say. "You have a week to leave" is not. It's sleazy and unprofessional, and it's a signal that it's best for anyone to avoid them in the future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The amount almost doesn't matter (it's definitely on the high side compared to alternatives). They can definitely afford it if they have a reasonable budget. However, how Vimeo has treated them as a paying customer is terrible.
What alternatives have you looked at? It's fair priced imo.
They'll even pay for the videos instead.
This sounds like a potentially great business clarity move: > We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube” But this part -- bait&switch, with only one week to decide or move, (if that's accurate) -- is not what you want from your B2B solution provider: > “I was already paying $200 a year, which I think is pretty expensive,” [...] if she wanted to keep hosting her content on the site, she’d need to upgrade…
> "I was already paying $200 a year, which I think is pretty expensive," In other words, she has no idea what bandwidth or server costs are and doesn't realize Vimeo is definitely losing money on distributing her videos, but still arrogantly believes she is entitled to infinite bandwidth for free because "that's what YouTube does."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What alternatives have you looked at? It's fair priced imo.
Hvae you heard of Youtube? They'll even pay for the videos instead.
Creators don't want to force their paying Patreon supporters to watch ads for content that they paid for, and that can be leaked to the whole world if somebody merely ctrl-vs a bit of text.