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

251–260 of 370 posts

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#251

Post by Gorbzel »

ricardobeat wrote: post #120
unobatbayar wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not as smooth as Apple.

I don’t know if that’s still true. The Music app is still sluggish, Notes has poor UX, almost every built-in app has a better third-party replacement. It has been downhill since iOS 7.

And in all 3 cases, the Google equivalents are worse. History shows they’ll probably just be replaced with a different product to solve the same problem which will be worse in its own ways.

Subjective, but I use both Android and iOS daily. Interesting byproduct of Android being the favorite of those obsessed with customization is that the stock apps are almost universally bad because everyone just replaces them with different niche alternatives.

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#252

Post by dubcanada »

simiones wrote: post #175
KhalPanda wrote: post #130

I think $5 is _beyond_ fair, considering every user will have dropped >$3k on hardware.

Conversely, if I spent $3.5k on a device, I'm not paying a cent more to watch YouTube on it.

You would certainly be in the minority, Apple profits alone state that people are more then willing to pay an excessively large sum of money for products and then buy $1000 stands.

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#253

Post by endisneigh »

sbarre wrote: post #228
yellow_lead wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If you want an open internet don’t use the app and just use the website that works.

Good grief

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#254

Post by zachrip »

makeitdouble wrote: post #203
ewzimm wrote: post #6

This looks beautiful. I think Alphabet just won a more premium app than they might have made by choosing not to play. I hope a Quest port might happen someday.

I might be missing it but I don't see any mention of actual VR videos (180 and 360). It probably would require a huge dev effort to support, but that's definitely a miss compared to the offical Quest app.

AFAIK this is a webview that Christian is hijacking certain navigation events on. So the app itself isn't really native/probably wouldn't support this feature.

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#255

Post by password54321 »

SeriousM wrote: post #231

> Does it block ads? It doesn’t, I don’t think Google would like that, but if you have YouTube Premium you won’t see ads, just like the website. I just realised that a new product means new eco system, means less/no customization possibilities. What a wonderful world...

"Google layoffs x percent of its employees". HN: Fckin Google!

"Here is an option to support a platform you use without watching ads". HN: Go fck yourself!

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#256

Post by speff »

adesanmi wrote: post #148
p-e-w wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The iframe embed API is API access, and YouTube can remove, paywall, or rate limit it any time they want. How old the underlying technology is is completely irrelevant to that.

Unlike Reddit, Apollo was stopping users from seeing ads and Reddit gaining ad revenue from them, so they went to charge the Reddit app devs for this loss in revenue. The YouTube embed API supports ads, and works perfectly with Premium so Google are not losing any potential revenue with this app existing. Sounds like Christian learned his lesson with his experience with Reddit: "don't get in the way of the company's…

That's an interesting way to frame the reddit debacle. Reddit could have mandated ads to be displayed as a part of their TOS of API usage, but just decided not to - for the clear reason of centralizing users to their app. It wasn't /just/ about the loss of revenue - it was also about the metrics they can collect on their platform which they could not do on others'.

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#257

Post by krapp »

password54321 wrote: post #255
SeriousM wrote: post #231

> Does it block ads? It doesn’t, I don’t think Google would like that, but if you have YouTube Premium you won’t see ads, just like the website. I just realised that a new product means new eco system, means less/no customization possibilities. What a wonderful world...

"Google layoffs x percent of its employees". HN: Fckin Google! "Here is an option to support a platform you use without watching ads". HN: Go fck yourself!

Do you think Google pays their employees directly from Youtube ad revenue?

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#258

Post by password54321 »

krapp wrote: post #257
password54321 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Google layoffs x percent of its employees". HN: Fckin Google! "Here is an option to support a platform you use without watching ads". HN: Go fck yourself!

Do you think Google pays their employees directly from Youtube ad revenue?

That is definitely what I implied. /s

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#259

Post by heapoverflow »

hapticmonkey wrote: post #232
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.

The AppleTV YouTube app is so bad that I’m convinced nobody responsible for it owns a TV. It even forces its own built in screensavers to run instead of the OS one if the app is left paused. Who approves that?! What Steve Jobs said about Microsoft in the 90s applies to Google today: They have no taste.

This is because of YouTube‘s obsession to build cross-platform, lowest-common-denominator apps, resulting in mediocre experiences across all the platforms they support, and rarely excellent on any single platform.

Their Apple TV app is basically a web view which doesn’t conform to any of AppleTV’s UI principles. Same as their YouTube TV app. It’s sad.

Re: Juno – A YouTube Client for Vision Pro

#260

Post by stevenwliao »

manquer wrote: post #171
jdoss wrote: post #34

I echo the author's praise of YouTube Premium. When it first came out I was like there is no way I would ever pay for such service. Being an early YouTube user, pre Google buyout, I still was in love with the platform that gave me content from real people. Fast forward to 2020 the US election cycle broke me. I could not stand the amount of political ads that were being shoved down my throat. My kids were perma home d…

it is $13.99 / month in the US now. $150/year is a lot of money - for a product you can choose not to pay and still mostly use.

I'm skipping 2 hours of ads per month for $15. IMO it's a pretty good deal.

(Assumptions: I watch 10 hours of YouTube videos per week, YouTube shows 30 seconds of ads per 10 minutes of video)

Post reply on HN