71–80 of 182 posts
I'm really sad I missed the boat on Vanced by one day. I'd heard about it for a long time and randomly decided to finally start using it only to find all the download links had been removed the day before. Youtube ads have become horrendously annoying. Does anyone know if the apks can be found on any archive site?
I mean, you could just pay to remove the ads...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
YouTube premium is 12 dollars a month. For me, this is worth it to remove ads and add background play and picture-in-picture.
There are some people going around selling a year worth of YT Premium for $20, it works pretty well. You can find them on Reddit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd never heard of Vanced before today. What features did they offer that YT Premium doesn't?
Dislikes are a pretty big feature. Also sponsorblock which is a must for some people. And picture-in-picture mode was great. I could watch the news while seeing how close an uber was to me without having to switch apps.
I really want to know what these "complications" are, this is the sketchiest way I've seen someone refuse to open source something.
> The vanced team will "NEVER" make its source code public. Making the source code available on the internet can cause serious complications for us.
I'm really sad I missed the boat on Vanced by one day. I'd heard about it for a long time and randomly decided to finally start using it only to find all the download links had been removed the day before. Youtube ads have become horrendously annoying. Does anyone know if the apks can be found on any archive site?
YouTube premium is 12 dollars a month. For me, this is worth it to remove ads and add background play and picture-in-picture.
> Vanced is discontinued for "legal reasons" as vanced was infringing the logo and branding of the original YouTube app as the logo resembles the original logo in a similar way and was used without taking prior permission from Google for using the branding. Huh?!? That was the only reason behind the C&D letter and they killed the product when a simple logo redesign could have solved the issue? Or the C&D letter would…
I'm the developer of Cydia, an alternative to the App Store for jailbroken iOS devices, a software ecosystem which was filled with both modifications to existing clients and complete re-implementations of clients, and this is definitely the #1 mistake that new developers would make (much to my annoyance, as it just seems so OBVIOUS of a thing to not do, but people really are idiots): you need to be extremely careful…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does your comment help? YT premium still doesn't give all the Vance's features. I can buy premium and still use Vanced for features that YouTube does not offer. Or maybe I don't support YouTube adding ads to unmonetized videos? Or is it my way to fight back, how they roll over small creators to trolls?
I'd never heard of Vanced before today. What features did they offer that YT Premium doesn't?
I'm really sad I missed the boat on Vanced by one day. I'd heard about it for a long time and randomly decided to finally start using it only to find all the download links had been removed the day before. Youtube ads have become horrendously annoying. Does anyone know if the apks can be found on any archive site?
YouTube premium is 12 dollars a month. For me, this is worth it to remove ads and add background play and picture-in-picture.
> The vanced team will "NEVER" make its source code public. Making the source code available on the internet can cause serious complications for us. How would Google have acted if the source code was open source from the beginning?
My understanding is that Vanced was a patching of the official Youtube App, so already on somewhat shaky ground. If Vanced took advantage of vulnerabilities in the Youtube App, or the source code could point to them, I could see Google reacting poorly to start out with - though afaik (not a lawyer, also not your lawyer) it's legal to distribute source for a patch for a proprietary program and instructions to apply it…
Infact the story itself has quite a interesting turn, so it turned out sometime later Mojang decided to "buy" Bukkit. (aka pay it's lead developers to give up their copyright), and what they (incorrectly) supposed from this was, that they would be allowed to distribute direct bukkit binaries (afterall they own minecraft), that was until one of the Bukkit contributers decided to DMCA the website.
I'm unsure what the current situation around this is, and how they sorted everything out in the end.
>The vanced team will "NEVER" make its source code public. Making the source code available on the internet can cause serious complications for us. What would those complicatiosn be?
Someone else could make a better version of it. But if I had to guess, they are using some internal tools or hacks to make it work the way it does.