Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vimeo: “We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube.”

ymcinema.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 317 posts

Re: Vimeo: “We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube.”

#211

Post by johnnyanmac »

hallway_monitor wrote: post #146
humanistbot wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is also egregious, but Apple and Google are getting away with it because they have a duopoly over mobile phone app stores. Not so with video hosting.

Isn't it so though? What viable alternatives exist?

Definitely educate me, but: what is Vimeo doing for a B2B solution that Youtube can't provide? You can provide unlisted videos (and that is something a few pareon users have done).

It's odd because Vimeo was most known to me for hosting art portfolios, so seeing it denounce it's "indie" status is bewildering. I assume the advantage comes from providing uncompressed videos with extremely high bitrate. Which is an admittedly extremely niche market.

Re: Vimeo: “We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube.”

#212

Post by manquer »

vbezhenar wrote: post #179
NavinF wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meh, I could host it in my data center for under $100/mo. Transit is like $0.1/mbps/month.

Cloudflare (and, obviuosly, vimeo) allows for good scalability and provides plenty of services underneath. You would need to code a lot of stuff to provide scalability (like imagine that your video became virus and thousands of people want to watch it at the same time, that's hundreds of gigabits of traffic). You would need to recode it for different devices. You would need to recode it for different network speeds.…

viral traffic is possible if the video is free and public. Her videos are subscriber only. Scalabity is not a factor.

A simple video tag is good enough, you can store it on object storage (anyone but s3) . This she should do anyway for backup, any provider can kick her out for copyright violations and block her access to her own content.

Transcoding is not that difficult anymore video editing software allows you to transcode for the web directly . Unlike 5-10 years back every brower recognizes mp4 h264 today just one file is adequate.

Re: Vimeo: “We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube.”

#213

Post by asdfaoeu »

spicybright wrote: post #143
bobitsaboy wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$3500 for hosting on top of what they already paid for hosting for the current length of their plan, with 7 days notice to vacate otherwise. And then how much next week? The week after that? How could anyone trust Vimeo as a provider for their business after this?

To add, this is why people serious about their business generally will enter into contracts with other businesses to ensure either side can't screw each other over. And it provides a clear transition plan if one party wants to leave.

For something thats $200/yr no one would be offering that.

Re: Vimeo: “We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube.”

#214

Post by technobabbler »

chockchocschoir wrote: post #205
technobabbler wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where can you get a gigabit host that serves many TB a month for $100? Not being sarcastic, genuinely interested in such a service.

Easy, search for "unmetered dedicated server", bunch of offers all over the place. Many hosters also have "server auctions" where you can rent second-hand servers that are already setup but the one who initially ordered it stopped using it, those are also cheap.

That's awesome, thank you. I did not realize hosting prices were so cheap now... good to know for the future.

Re: Vimeo: “We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube.”

#215

Post by nathanyz »

cronix wrote: post #173
nathanyz wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Throwing in us as well, Swarmify Billing based on views instead of bandwidth

How much of the video has to be watched to be considered "a view?"

Views with us are more comparable to page views than a video play. So definitely higher than actual plays.

We give such a generous amount that this is only more expensive than other providers in a limited set of use cases.

This Vimeo policy change has been really good for business since we can also automatically convert all existing Vimeo embed over to us.

Re: Vimeo: “We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube.”

#216

Post by eigen »

hallway_monitor wrote: post #146
humanistbot wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is also egregious, but Apple and Google are getting away with it because they have a duopoly over mobile phone app stores. Not so with video hosting.

Isn't it so though? What viable alternatives exist?

an alternative is Amazon Video Direct where content providers receive 50% of net revenue. seems like a worse deal than Apple & Google.

https://videodirect.amazon.com/home/help?topicId=G202037410&...

Re: Vimeo: “We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube.”

#217

Post by dlsa »

A clear pivot. Yet it will definitely anger plenty of people. Like... a lot of people. Still, I don't appreciate the apparently short notice they gave. That's a significant change in their terms I'd be wary of in future. Something happened and there was a knee-jerk reaction or decision made. Not sure if I read that right however.

Re: Vimeo: “We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube.”

#218

Post by to11mtm »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #199
gruez wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's not even like the early days of Gmail abuse where people were using it as a cheap web disk, consuming way more storage and bandwidth than Gmail could've reasonably estimated Was this actually a thing? AFAIK even at the start they had hard limits. The only thing "unlimited" about it was that they promised to steadily increase the storage cap.

Right. They announced with a 1GB limit. At the time, this felt unlimited. The competition was offering around 5-10MB.

Yup. And back then upload sites were fairly uncommon... MegaUpload was 2 years after G-Mail, but IIRC you had to pay to do a whole lot without time/bandwidth limits.

And as an idea of scale, no, you can't fit a DVD in 1GB. but you could definitely hold a CD, or something between VHS and DVD quality of a movie.

Me? I just used it to hold on to base drivers for my systems and pictures I wanted to not lose. It worked great for a few years.

Re: Vimeo: “We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube.”

#219

Post by coolso »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #199
gruez wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's not even like the early days of Gmail abuse where people were using it as a cheap web disk, consuming way more storage and bandwidth than Gmail could've reasonably estimated Was this actually a thing? AFAIK even at the start they had hard limits. The only thing "unlimited" about it was that they promised to steadily increase the storage cap.

Right. They announced with a 1GB limit. At the time, this felt unlimited. The competition was offering around 5-10MB.

They also had a “gimmick” where you could literally watch your storage increase down to the billionth percentile or something like that. I seem to remember a counter at the bottom saying my free space available was “1.053746843GB” and it would be moving.

Re: Vimeo: “We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube.”

#220

Post by letitbeirie »

matt-attack wrote: post #206
com2kid wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consumer electronics. Make a device for $5, it'll sell on store shelves for $30, you may get $3-$5 of that. Everyone is super spoiled by the finances behind digital distribution methods.

Try running an IHOP or the like. You’ll be keeping a dollar or two on that $15 entree.

Or a gas station.

Their margins are outrageous but only if they can get you to come inside - they're only making a cent or two off each gallon of gas they sell.

Post reply on HN