1309
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] JshKlsn@lemmy.ml 28 points 1 year ago

It increased a couple months ago to like $25 CAD lmao. Still worth it, though. I watch so much YouTube.

It's weird how people are fine paying for Netflix, Hulu, CrunchyRoll, Twitch, etc, but draw the line at YouTube, the platform that has infinite more content and actual value.

It's still less than my parents pay for satellite. Also comes with YouTube Music if you wanna ditch Spotify. Kinda a 2 in 1 deal.

[-] dingus@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's weird how people are fine paying for Netflix, Hulu, CrunchyRoll, Twitch, etc, but draw the line at YouTube, the platform that has infinite more content and actual value.

I see your point, but I think there's a psychological reasoning behind this.

YouTube in its early days ONLY had a free option whereas services like Netfix have always only had a paid option.

YouTube in its early days certainly had a ton of ads, but they were non-obtrusive. Things like banner ads and ads on the side of the video. Then slowly, they added in-video ads. Iirc it started out only as a single pre-roll ad, but in its current form it has devolved into multiple pre-roll ads and an ungodly amount of imcredibly jarring and obtrusive mid-roll ads that violently break up the content you are consuming. YouTube then has the gall to say that if you want to consume the platform how you used to, you have to shell out money. YouTube hasn't added anything with its subscription service. Instead it wants you to pay them money to return the service to the usability it had prior.

Discord Nitro has a subscription feature that ads something. They didn't take away say, the ability to voice chat, and lock a feature it used to have for free behind a paywall.

We can also examine Spotify with this. Unlike YouTube, Spotify has always had both a free tier and a paid tier. The free tier has between song ads and the paid tier has always had no ads. It's less jarring to have to pay for something if it has always been there. Imagine also if Spotify started putting ads in the middle of a fucking song and forced you to pay to remove them even though there never used to be ads in the middle of a song.

Tl;Dr - A twofold issue. 1. YouTube sort of shot itself in the foot in a way by not starting out with a paid tier. 2. YouTube did not really ad anything with premium, but instead is making you pay to use the service as you used to be able to for free. Obtrusive in-video ads are cancer and one of the worst types of ads.

Who in the actual fuck still uses satellite? Are they also still on dial-up? Do they have a rotary phone at home in lieu of cell phones?

[-] JshKlsn@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago

What? millions and millions of people? Do you realize not everyone lives in a city? Satellite TV is insanely popular in Canada. Every single provider offers it.

They have WISP and Starlink also. Both using satellites.

Not sure why you think a satellite is some ancient technology lmao. It's the norm outside of cities.

[-] TheBlue22@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Because you can always just use adblock... for free

[-] JshKlsn@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

See my comment here: https://lemmy.ml/comment/1807420

Ad block isn't really a solution.

[-] MrFlamey@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I'd pay money to break my Youtube addiction completely to be honest. There is good content, but I don't like the way it's served. Not just ads, but recommendations. I don't get addicted to Netflix in the same way, though I do sometimes binge watch shows. Certainly wouldn't pay for Youtube, and if they made it impossible to watch for free without ads by preventing ad blockers working I think I'd rather just quit entirely and pay for Nebula, since it focuses on the kind of content I value more and don't get as addicted to watching.

[-] madcaesar@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I'd pay 5$ a month just for YouTube, I don't want all the extra bullshit. YouTube doesn't produce any content themselves, they don't have to hire actors writers and make big budget movies.

They are literally just hosting content and paying creators cents. Yet they want to charge Hulu / Netflix money.

Gtfo with that. I cancelled Netflix earlier this year because it was getting too expensive as well for what it was providing.

[-] loakang@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

They might not produce anything, but on the flip side they also are the only ones on that list that have to be prepared to increase data storage by hundreds of hours per minute! And that doesn't include multiple copies for different quality etc.

Honestly YouTube is probably one of the few companies that deserves to be able to raise their prices unless they start deleting old content en masse so they don't have to infinitely scale.

That being said, I wouldn't pay $14. It's just taking advantage of matching all the other streaming services raising their prices, something being done purely out of greed in the name of profits. Everything is overpriced now, I hate this.

this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
1309 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59517 readers
2742 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS