5 ms·

I hate what YouTube has become, but the creators are still there by choice so the viewers are as well. FloatPlane is too expensive (I don’t want to pay per cha

I hate what YouTube has become, but the creators are still there by choice so the viewers are as well. FloatPlane is too expensive (I don’t want to pay per channel). Vessel was great but it’s gone. I’m fine with paying for videos, but there’s just no platform like Netflix for random creators

Hamcha 6y ago
I think floatplane by itself never wants to compete with Youtube, they know they can't scale that much and just want to provide creators with a second option for supporters. If LTT were to disappear from Youtube I bet they'd still find some way to provide a free way to access their videos, even if on another provider.
wayoutthere 6y ago
I worked with a large media company a few years ago on a product like this; long story short YouTube pays the big content creators to stay on YT. Getting a critical mass of content that’s not also available on YouTube is a problem, because you need content to draw an audience and creators don’t want to do a bunch of extra work for no exposure — YouTube is only one revenue stream for the top stars, but it gets them the publicity to monetize their image in other ways on other platforms. So there’s an opportunity cost to using another platform.
- tobyhinloopen 6y ago
  I get the problem, I just wish there was a solution
krageon 6y ago
> by choice If you have two choices, namely no money and some money and you must have money to eat then you don't have two choices. There is no choice, because the other platforms are far too small to compete. What should arguably happen more is uploading to more than one location, but searching for youtube alternatives is almost impossible (at least if you want one that actually has some potential. There is a ton of trash).
- dfxm12 6y ago
  If the issue is money, there are many ways to make money besides relying on YouTube.
  - simias 6y ago
    You need to reach your audience somehow. Even creators who earn a lot from Patreon and other websites had to build their following, often on Youtube. People can complain as much as they want (and sometimes rightly so) but it's a simple technical truth that nobody else can provide a Youtube-quality service for free. The operating costs are just insane.
    - ghaff 6y ago
      I read the parent as saying YouTube is probably a pretty lousy bet if you have no other income stream to eat. Yes, some people do pretty well. So do some actors. And some authors. That doesn't make those occupations good full-time financial choices if you're broke. Most people posting on YouTube have day jobs or other means of support. I'm actually tempted to think that patronage and ad supported models lure a lot of people into thinking they can monetize their hobby in a significant way that they would never think they could if they were playing a musical instrument for tips.
      - dfxm12 6y ago
        You read correctly. :)
      - apostacy 6y ago
        This is just conservative Prager-U corporate toadying. Essentially, if you don't like your job, stop complaining and quit! People invested significantly in YouTube because they were promised that it was a platform for everyone. Now they are gentrifying the platform and driving everyone off who isn't a major celebrity, via gaslighting. If you are a celebrity like Logan Paul, the rules simply do not apply to you. YouTube will fully monetize anything you put up, up to and including violating the terms of service or even committing actual crimes in real life. YouTube is perfectly capable of treating people better, they just choose not to. People can see it is wrong when Uber does stuff like this to contractors who are far less invested in the platform, but YouTube gets a free pass to abuse its contributors.
thesuitonym 6y ago
Is there a reason that Vimeo wouldn't work? Aside from the lack of regular users, which could be fixed over time.
- sct202 6y ago
  Monetization on Vimeo basically requires you to already have a following of some sort to sell subscriptions or pay per view videos. So I've seen some people use Youtube as a funnel to get viewership and send them into other services like Patreon/Vimeo/etc.
- k3liutZu 6y ago
  > Is there a reason that Vimeo wouldn't work? Do they have apps for all smartphones and TV's? I just search the iOS App Store, and the 2 Vimeo apps that are at the top seem to be for creators, not consumers. I watch most Youtube on the TV, if there's no Vimeo app, I wouldn't be able to consume the content.
- virgil_disgr4ce 6y ago
  This is a good question. I have a suspicion that the big difference is actually many tiny UX differences: Vimeo isn't nearly as aggressive with getting you to watch more videos (i.e. automatically playing a video next) with an aggressive recommendation algo; it also doesn't seem to encourage engagement as much. Vimeo's brand (at least afaict) is more on the business/commercial end, a 'prestige' brand (at least to some extent?) with fairly different demographics.
  - thesuitonym 6y ago
    Interesting that we live in a world where these are problems. I mean, I understand why it is, but when you say it that way, it actually sounds like a much better and friendlier experience.
    - virgil_disgr4ce 6y ago
      It is, but it does serve different purposes. You don't go on Vimeo to find cute cat videos. You don't go on Vimeo to reply to strangers' comments about a music video or board game review etc etc etc.
fsflover 6y ago
What about PeerTube? Random creators often include their own advertisements into the videos anyway.
creativeembassy 6y ago
I've been using Nebula more frequently. Only one monthly payment for the whole platform, zero ads. A lot of my favorite YouTube content creators have been uploading their videos there too. And not just uploading the same videos, but higher-quality ones. For example, they're more free to use copyrighted material fairly when doing content criticism, knowing that they're not going to get automatically flagged/demonetized even when they're within their rights. (If someone from Nebula reads this: My only complaint is a lack of a Roku app, which is where I consume most of my content in the living room any more. Please make this happen!)
- benhurmarcel 6y ago
  It's not available for any video creator though, only a few selected by Nebula.
xiphias2 6y ago
I'm on the opposite side, I love what Youtube has become, and Youtube Premium is givinge lots of value. Sure, I'm not happy about authors optimizing for some alforithms, like increasing playtime, allowing thumbnails that have nothing to do with content, and heavy moderation of important words (like COVID), but I live with it.
- ziml77 6y ago
  I have the same feelings about YouTube. There's great content on there and is absolutely worth paying for Premium. That helps support the creators you watch too because a Premium view is worth more than an ad-supported view. Of course it really is the content that is making it worth my money here. There is no platform loyalty. If another platform amassed a significant number of quality creators, I would certainly switch over.
  - xiphias2 6y ago
    For me actually the platform is amazing as well, the iPad app for Netflix is still flaky when internet is not that good, and offline viewing is buggy as well. I'm travelling a lot, and I haven't found anything close to YouTube in a stable source of legal content. Those are the times when I switch to YouTube app, which always works for me, and downloads are working as well. The only thing that I'm missing from it is support for downloading in background, when I'm not running the YouTube app.
tablespoon 6y ago
> but the creators are still there by choice so the viewers are as well. Not really. Network effects keep them all there whether they like it or not. The creators need their work viewed, and that happens where there are both creators and viewers, which is Youtube.

Hamcha 6y ago

I think floatplane by itself never wants to compete with Youtube, they know they can't scale that much and just want to provide creators with a second option for supporters. If LTT were to disappear from Youtube I bet they'd still find some way to provide a free way to access their videos, even if on another provider.

wayoutthere 6y ago

I worked with a large media company a few years ago on a product like this; long story short YouTube pays the big content creators to stay on YT. Getting a critical mass of content that’s not also available on YouTube is a problem, because you need content to draw an audience and creators don’t want to do a bunch of extra work for no exposure — YouTube is only one revenue stream for the top stars, but it gets them the publicity to monetize their image in other ways on other platforms. So there’s an opportunity cost to using another platform.

tobyhinloopen 6y ago
I get the problem, I just wish there was a solution

krageon 6y ago

> by choice If you have two choices, namely no money and some money and you must have money to eat then you don't have two choices. There is no choice, because the other platforms are far too small to compete. What should arguably happen more is uploading to more than one location, but searching for youtube alternatives is almost impossible (at least if you want one that actually has some potential. There is a ton of trash).

dfxm12 6y ago
If the issue is money, there are many ways to make money besides relying on YouTube.
- simias 6y ago
  You need to reach your audience somehow. Even creators who earn a lot from Patreon and other websites had to build their following, often on Youtube. People can complain as much as they want (and sometimes rightly so) but it's a simple technical truth that nobody else can provide a Youtube-quality service for free. The operating costs are just insane.
  - ghaff 6y ago
    I read the parent as saying YouTube is probably a pretty lousy bet if you have no other income stream to eat. Yes, some people do pretty well. So do some actors. And some authors. That doesn't make those occupations good full-time financial choices if you're broke. Most people posting on YouTube have day jobs or other means of support. I'm actually tempted to think that patronage and ad supported models lure a lot of people into thinking they can monetize their hobby in a significant way that they would never think they could if they were playing a musical instrument for tips.
    - dfxm12 6y ago
      You read correctly. :)
    - apostacy 6y ago
      This is just conservative Prager-U corporate toadying. Essentially, if you don't like your job, stop complaining and quit! People invested significantly in YouTube because they were promised that it was a platform for everyone. Now they are gentrifying the platform and driving everyone off who isn't a major celebrity, via gaslighting. If you are a celebrity like Logan Paul, the rules simply do not apply to you. YouTube will fully monetize anything you put up, up to and including violating the terms of service or even committing actual crimes in real life. YouTube is perfectly capable of treating people better, they just choose not to. People can see it is wrong when Uber does stuff like this to contractors who are far less invested in the platform, but YouTube gets a free pass to abuse its contributors.

thesuitonym 6y ago

Is there a reason that Vimeo wouldn't work? Aside from the lack of regular users, which could be fixed over time.

sct202 6y ago
Monetization on Vimeo basically requires you to already have a following of some sort to sell subscriptions or pay per view videos. So I've seen some people use Youtube as a funnel to get viewership and send them into other services like Patreon/Vimeo/etc.
k3liutZu 6y ago
> Is there a reason that Vimeo wouldn't work? Do they have apps for all smartphones and TV's? I just search the iOS App Store, and the 2 Vimeo apps that are at the top seem to be for creators, not consumers. I watch most Youtube on the TV, if there's no Vimeo app, I wouldn't be able to consume the content.
virgil_disgr4ce 6y ago
This is a good question. I have a suspicion that the big difference is actually many tiny UX differences: Vimeo isn't nearly as aggressive with getting you to watch more videos (i.e. automatically playing a video next) with an aggressive recommendation algo; it also doesn't seem to encourage engagement as much. Vimeo's brand (at least afaict) is more on the business/commercial end, a 'prestige' brand (at least to some extent?) with fairly different demographics.
- thesuitonym 6y ago
  Interesting that we live in a world where these are problems. I mean, I understand why it is, but when you say it that way, it actually sounds like a much better and friendlier experience.
  - virgil_disgr4ce 6y ago
    It is, but it does serve different purposes. You don't go on Vimeo to find cute cat videos. You don't go on Vimeo to reply to strangers' comments about a music video or board game review etc etc etc.

fsflover 6y ago

What about PeerTube? Random creators often include their own advertisements into the videos anyway.

creativeembassy 6y ago

I've been using Nebula more frequently. Only one monthly payment for the whole platform, zero ads. A lot of my favorite YouTube content creators have been uploading their videos there too. And not just uploading the same videos, but higher-quality ones. For example, they're more free to use copyrighted material fairly when doing content criticism, knowing that they're not going to get automatically flagged/demonetized even when they're within their rights. (If someone from Nebula reads this: My only complaint is a lack of a Roku app, which is where I consume most of my content in the living room any more. Please make this happen!)

benhurmarcel 6y ago
It's not available for any video creator though, only a few selected by Nebula.

xiphias2 6y ago

I'm on the opposite side, I love what Youtube has become, and Youtube Premium is givinge lots of value. Sure, I'm not happy about authors optimizing for some alforithms, like increasing playtime, allowing thumbnails that have nothing to do with content, and heavy moderation of important words (like COVID), but I live with it.

ziml77 6y ago
I have the same feelings about YouTube. There's great content on there and is absolutely worth paying for Premium. That helps support the creators you watch too because a Premium view is worth more than an ad-supported view. Of course it really is the content that is making it worth my money here. There is no platform loyalty. If another platform amassed a significant number of quality creators, I would certainly switch over.
- xiphias2 6y ago
  For me actually the platform is amazing as well, the iPad app for Netflix is still flaky when internet is not that good, and offline viewing is buggy as well. I'm travelling a lot, and I haven't found anything close to YouTube in a stable source of legal content. Those are the times when I switch to YouTube app, which always works for me, and downloads are working as well. The only thing that I'm missing from it is support for downloading in background, when I'm not running the YouTube app.

tablespoon 6y ago

> but the creators are still there by choice so the viewers are as well. Not really. Network effects keep them all there whether they like it or not. The creators need their work viewed, and that happens where there are both creators and viewers, which is Youtube.