261–270 of 317 posts
We embed a Vimeo player but after this announcement we can switch out providers and still have the permalink. Invest on your own infrastructure as soon as you can.
Look at transit prices https://blog.telegeography.com/2021-global-ip-transit-price-... 1mbps a month is 320 gigabyte so 2TB is 6mbps which costs a whopping 3.6 USD in Hong Kong 1.2 USD elsewhere. Where I am wrong? If you don't want to deal with storage, Backblaze B2 is $5/TB/month and the Bandwidth Alliance will reduce/eliminate the egress costs.
How does it eliminate egress cost? It just makes bolting their different services together free, at some point you'll pay for egress eventually, even if just a little.
2TB feels like a really low 99th percentile for a video site. Is Vimeo really that small? I’ve always seen them as more a backend provider for paywalled video content, makes sense they’d lean into that audience
I think Vimeo is doing some creative accounting to come up with the 1% number. It's probably 1% of all users on the site even if the vast majority of users have < 5 views.
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."
Why is Vimeo using an unsustainable business model here anyway? Oh, right. They wanted growth. This is in the same vein of the bait-and-switch that Blockbuster Video did in the early 1990s. Grow unsustainably and hope you can snuff out your competition before you run out of funding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But that's CloudFront, one of the most expensive CDNs out there. (And that's before considering customers like Vimeo can get special rates, even 50% off is common) Another example on the opposite end is a host like Hetzner, where you get 20TB of traffic at 10Gb/s uplink for any cloud VM at $5+/month (or any root server at $40+/month). Comparably, AWS EC2 is $0.17/GB IIRC. On another note -- it looks like Vimeo are us…
You can't compare Hetzner boxes with CDNs. Imagine someone trying to stream a 4K video from your Hetzner box in Finland to Australia. Not the same as directly from local CDN node
In my work, I have to create and share a lot of videos, and Vimeo is superior to YouTube for my needs. Doesn't auto-play some unrelated content when they are done with my videos, I can easily make basic edits like a custom thumbnail or branding, and it doesn't cover it in their own branding like YouTube. Integrates better into my site as well. So yeah - Vimeo is better than YouTube for B2B needs.
Can I just like, buy some file hosting, scp AV1 files to it and embed them on my blog, these days?
You can but you've created a shitty experience. With AV1 you've excluded at least half your potential viewers. Even for people with a browser with AV1 support your files likely have a higher bitrate than your viewers can stream in real-time. 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…
- creators expect no fees or a low fee and no ads - viewers now expect 1080p or even 4k option, and 60 frames/s.
Thanks h265, but even with the best compression out there the math doesn't add up to make a profit.
Perhaps that comes down to the fact feeding data is more expensive, even as a business and at scale, than to pull data as an individual with a home broadband. Unless you are Google, aws, or cloudflare and have leverage over other networks providers.
Decentralized solutions is our last hope. I say hope because it still isn't quite working performance-wise for the use case of streaming.
So I check the Basic plan right now, it's: 5 GB limit for total storage. 500 MB upload limit per week. --- I haven't used it for years, now I know I only use 2.3GB there. Safe from deletion I think.
Is there an agreed upon way to self host videos for less? For those of you that have done this, what would/does hosting and serving large videos cost you a month and how are you doing it?
I still have to implement a few tricks to go over 2 GB per file and add support for streaming. But I'm getting there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Vimeo has no value-add, then that's what people should be doing. It's not like Vimeo is a platform for content discovery like YouTube so it should be no problem for anyone to switch.
Right. Vimeo has a pleasant player. I like it. However, it's essentially the same service otherwise. Point your customers or business partners to a URL and they stream it from there.