941–950 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meanwhile in Europe it’s the opposite.
You can still survive without Facebook-crap perfectly. On the other hand it's hard to survive without either an Android or iPhone device.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Similar situation as flights. People complain about lack of space, misc fees etc. But when it comes down to it, people for the most part, still pick the cheapest flight. I think the other factor is a bit of anchoring. I know this impacts me anyways. If there is a "free" alternative, then that's where I'm anchored at. I can watch youtube for free so paying for it seems like a bad deal. Where as there is no free altern…
> when it comes down to it, people for the most part, still pick the cheapest flight. Flight comparators don't show "avaliable legroom" in their metrics. As far as I know some companies charge more for seats near entrances where there's more space, so people are willing to pay more.
Unfortunately those prices are usually not even close to proportional to the additional space (and even that would ignore that seating space is only part of the service).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> when it comes down to it, people for the most part, still pick the cheapest flight. Flight comparators don't show "avaliable legroom" in their metrics. As far as I know some companies charge more for seats near entrances where there's more space, so people are willing to pay more.
> As far as I know some companies charge more for seats near entrances where there's more space, so people are willing to pay more In my anecdotal experience, the people complaining about leg room are precisely those who are not paying for additional leg room. (Similar to how people who compare modern air travel with service in the 1960s aren't purchasing the inflation-adjusted equivalent ticket, which would almost a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> when it comes down to it, people for the most part, still pick the cheapest flight. Flight comparators don't show "avaliable legroom" in their metrics. As far as I know some companies charge more for seats near entrances where there's more space, so people are willing to pay more.
Google flights does - at least as well as they can base don the airline and plane. They'll also compare this to the average. All airlines charge more for exit rows and their extra legroom, typically as "premium economy" seats.
Does anybody have stats on how many people are O.K. paying for their core services, i.e. how many people pay for paid personal e-mail services? I just don't want to believe that our services have to be paid for through proxy by giving huge cut to 3rd parties. The quality goes down both as UX and as core content, our attention span is destroyed, our privacy is violated and our political power is being stolen as conten…
I don’t have the actual stats, but, sadly, it seems like a gigantic chunk of the “i would rather pay a small fee to use a service rather than paying for it with exposure to ads” crowd is mostly all-talk. And I am saying this as someone who genuinely believes in the “small fee instead of paying with ad exposure” approach. The one specific example of this that made me think so is the Youtube Premium situation. So many…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t buy that justification, most people have never and will never spare a thought for “software ownership”. I’d bet the truth is closer to “people don’t see games as software, but as entertainment. Paying for them is no different to paying to go to the movies, buy a song on iTunes, use Spotify, or Netflix”. Apps (“software”) and games are fundamentally different in the public’s perception. Look at the App Store,…
People aren't willing to pay for mobile games any more than for other apps.
The App Store—which, by the way, I was thinking of the one on the Mac—was merely an example to represent how companies understand and separate games from other software. I could’ve also made the point of games being seen as entertainment rather than software by pointing out Netflix has movies, TV shows, and games, but not other apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Taking the YouTube example, and many others like it, I only use it because it is free. If YouTube was subscription only, hypothetically, I would just not use it , and my life would be same as it is now. There are a great many services that are nice to have, but very few I would bother paying for out of my wallet. Given the choice of paying for them or not using them, I would just walk away from most of them.
This would be fine if you also don't use Adblock. You can't say I use the bakery for free as long as I have the backdoor access key and therefore "free".
The truth is that Youtube is a parasite. They don't create free content, they have inserted themselves between regular people creating free videos and you and are demanding that you pay them for access to what would have existed without them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Consumer stance on paying for software has changed drastically now because of AI. Even outside of utility software like Chat GPT, people are paying for image generators etc.
I that paying for software or paying for a service? When I pay Netflix it’s not because of their app.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much do you make per user on ads, and how much is the subscription?
It only generates about 15k a year in ad revenue. It's fairly low revenue because: 1. Users are spread around the world. This isn't a site with 70% US visitors. 2. The majority of users run ad block, and this continues to rise. 3. Ad rates plummet each year. I earn about 5x less on the site now, than in the past, with the same number of active users, and 3x as many advertisements. I've tried all the major advertising…
And honestly, what you could make from users through ads is not what I care about. You are making zero from me through ads because I block them everywhere and that is not negotiable. A reasonable price would be costs + modest margin not how much you could grab out of my pocket.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not interested in paying Google for anything. It's a company too big and powerful through immoral business (ads) I block all ads and wish commercial ads would cease to exist even though it would mean I couldn't use somethings anymore without payment.
I can understand weapons industry or alcohol industry as being immoral. However I do not understand how ads are immoral. It is annoying for some, while for some it is informative. Businesses inform the public about their services through ads. Or do you mean how Google implemented its ads?