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

Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

christianselig.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 370 posts

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#221

Post by wodenokoto »

thrdbndndn wrote: post #67
jdminhbg wrote: post #25

So nice to see a YouTube client that makes sense on the platform it’s on. Compare to the official YT client for iPad, for example, which bizarrely uses the same tiny Material touch targets as on phones.

> which bizarrely uses the same tiny Material touch targets as on phones I personally think iPad YouTube app's touch is not too bad; but in general (not limited to YouTube), I think the UI design of web video players are all too fixated on the existing design. For example, when not in fullscreen mode, I don't see why all the controls need to be confined to the video frame and disappear when not hovering. While this d…

And extra controls appear when pausing. I get that most of the time when you pause it’s because you are not watching, but it completely obscures the use case where you want to look at a still frame.

Worst though is YouTube shorts where you can’t rewind

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#222

Post by reportgunner »

quic5 wrote: post #50
xyst wrote: post #49

Only a matter of time until G blocks access to whatever API he is using or throttles it. YT invests a shit ton of money to ensure you use the official YT app to make sure you view their stupid ads, pump their ad profits, or buy YoUtUbE PrEmIuM looks good though! Won't be adopting the apple vision pro for awhile. but the developers pushing their apps to this ecosystem will definitely be awarded for early adoption unti…

> At its core, Juno uses the YouTube website itself. No, not scraped. It presents the website as you would load it, but similar to how browser extensions work, it tweaks the theming of the site through CSS and JavaScript.

So kind of like adblock works

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#223

Post by swexbe »

danjc wrote: post #211
jazzyjackson wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'they' is a great pronoun for ambiguous cases of sex & plurality

It's a terrible pronoun since that usage is a retrofit of a word intended to be used as a plural.

So just like "you"? What's þi problem?

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#224

Post by Mindwipe »

erk__ wrote: post #93
spiderice wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that? Obviously they don’t want a third party app to be that experience, but they make native apps for everything else. Also, Christian can’t help himself but attach his apps to large companies that can cut him off overnight. Haha.

A example would be Windows phone where they just not only did not make a YouTube app they denied access to the YouTube app made by Microsoft.

That app literally broke YouTube's agreements with the music labels though (by allowing free downloads etc), which this one doesn't.

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#225

Post by sbarre »

BlindEyeHalo wrote: post #131
ftio wrote: post #27

Christian isn’t charging enough! This could easily be $10 or more. I still grumble every time I use the Reddit app. RIP Apollo.

In general I would agree but charging $10 for something that can be shut down tomorrow just because google doesn't like it seems a bit much.

He admits it uses the official embed API, doesn't block or skip ads and generally plays nice with their systems. He's not trying to circumvent anything, he's just filling a gap left by Google themselves.

It would be quite the precedent for Google to shut someone down who is technically playing by all their rules.

(Yes I'm sure the ToS allows them to do this if they want to - but it would be a bad look).

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#226

Post by Mindwipe »

jack_pp wrote: post #36
justworkout wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but they make native apps for everything else. They do. But it's difficult to call anything they make "smooth." Google does some decent backend stuff but their frontend experience is not.

the android youtube / music app is much better than any other audio / video app i have including spotify, netflix

Come on.

The YouTube Music app blocks you from navigating to a different song at the same time as playing a track if it decides that the track is primarily aimed at under 18s (such as the theme from a retro cartoon).

It's UI might charitably be described as a total catastrophe.

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#227

Post by wodenokoto »

danjc wrote: post #211
jazzyjackson wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'they' is a great pronoun for ambiguous cases of sex & plurality

It's a terrible pronoun since that usage is a retrofit of a word intended to be used as a plural.

Do you also avoid “you” when referring to just one person?

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#228

Post by sbarre »

yellow_lead wrote: post #205
yard2010 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it matter?

It would matter to me, or maybe a Vision Pro user. If Google is holding out as a negotiation tactic, there may be an official app in the future, if Apple compromises on revenue share. If it is contempt or another reason, maybe the possibility if an official app is less likely.

Again, as a user, why is this our problem?

Let's all stop picking sides when trillion dollar companies fight each other at the expense of an open inter-operable Internet.

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#229

Post by Mindwipe »

imiric wrote: post #128
jdoss wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, I'll bite. What are some alternatives besides advertising or paying a fee to get no Ads?

It's not my role to come up with consumer-friendly business models, or to vouch for any specific ones. I'm just saying that, as a consumer, I don't want Google's business. If someone is selling apples in exchange for punching me in the face (and actually watching me and doing that while I eat, for a more accurate analogy :), then I wouldn't like going to their store. I would prefer going to the farmers' market and bu…

> It's not my role to come up with consumer-friendly business models, or to vouch for any specific ones. I'm just saying that, as a consumer, I don't want Google's business.

"The many monetisation models I claimed exist go to another school. In Canada."

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#230

Post by sbarre »

tiborsaas wrote: post #185
imiric wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are you so against Google charging a minimum fee for doing that while still giving you the opportunity to watch for free in exchange for being shown a few ads? I'm against it because advertising is not the only business model that works at scale. Google effectively introduced itself as a middleman between content creators and consumers, which they continue to do whether you pay with your attention/data or cash.…

What would be your ethical business model alternative to maintain YoutTube's staff, engineering, energy bill and hardware costs? Just to break even.

Not to mention paying the creators!
Post reply on HN