4 ms·

I can be a petty individual at times, and the thing that convinced me to never pay a cent to youtube was their removing the ability for the app to continue to p

I can be a petty individual at times, and the thing that convinced me to never pay a cent to youtube was their removing the ability for the app to continue to play the clip in the background when switching to another app or locking the phone. I listen to news and podcast-esque things in the car going to work or school drop-off / pick-up, on the way to sport etc. I'd begrudgingly tolerate the ads if the app background-played but it doesn't without paying for premium. I'm somewhere on an "entitlement" scale here, but background-play being a premium feature really feels like it's stretching the friendship. So... alternative front-end it is. Great experience and no ads to boot.

SergeAx 3y ago
The said ability also exists in a premium subscription. So what you effectively saying is that YouTube offers you a valuable feature, but you refuse to pay for it.
- BLKNSLVR 3y ago
  Correct.
- rightbyte 3y ago
  It is fair to not want pay enshittification tax to rent seekers. The said ability exists on the YT website if you use desktop mode on the mobile browser.
  - izacus 3y ago
    Asking you to pay for service costs and content is not rent seeking. That's not what that phrase means.
    - yard2010 3y ago
      No but you have to agree on the enshitification part. Youtube turned to one of the worst UX apps I have on my phone, I hate paying them for such a shitty product and I'm waiting for the time they're off this planet
      - SergeAx 3y ago
        But meanwhile you keep using that shitty awful app, aren't you?
    - laserlight 3y ago
      Given that YouTube is a monopoly, I would call it rent seeking.
      - izacus 3y ago
        Monopoly in what exactly?
- Tepix 3y ago
  YouTube is not offering a valuable feature here. It's an OS feature. YouTube is going out of its way for you not to have this feature, unless you pay them (even though it wasn't them who brought you the feature to begin with). I understand why this upsets people. Imagine Youtube preventing you from adjusting the volume unless you paid. This is similar.
sfifs 3y ago
> removing the ability for the app to continue to play the clip in the background when switching to another app or locking the phone. Do you know that the paid version has this exact feature? This is a limitation of the ad-supported version, because advertisers are paying to actually have people watch their ad.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- BLKNSLVR 3y ago
  Yes
  - izacus 3y ago
    So they didn't remove it did they? You just refuse to pay for that service and spread bs to make you feel better?
    - BLKNSLVR 3y ago
      They removed it from in front of the paywall to behind the paywall. The non-paid version used to do it. It was a memorably jarring experience working out WTF happened when background-play was rugged.
      - izacus 3y ago
        I don't remember it ever playing in the background without a sub, when was that?
conradfr 3y ago
Use the YouTube mobile site within Firefox.

SergeAx 3y ago

The said ability also exists in a premium subscription. So what you effectively saying is that YouTube offers you a valuable feature, but you refuse to pay for it.

BLKNSLVR 3y ago
Correct.
rightbyte 3y ago
It is fair to not want pay enshittification tax to rent seekers. The said ability exists on the YT website if you use desktop mode on the mobile browser.
- izacus 3y ago
  Asking you to pay for service costs and content is not rent seeking. That's not what that phrase means.
  - yard2010 3y ago
    No but you have to agree on the enshitification part. Youtube turned to one of the worst UX apps I have on my phone, I hate paying them for such a shitty product and I'm waiting for the time they're off this planet
    - SergeAx 3y ago
      But meanwhile you keep using that shitty awful app, aren't you?
  - laserlight 3y ago
    Given that YouTube is a monopoly, I would call it rent seeking.
    - izacus 3y ago
      Monopoly in what exactly?
Tepix 3y ago
YouTube is not offering a valuable feature here. It's an OS feature. YouTube is going out of its way for you not to have this feature, unless you pay them (even though it wasn't them who brought you the feature to begin with). I understand why this upsets people. Imagine Youtube preventing you from adjusting the volume unless you paid. This is similar.

sfifs 3y ago

> removing the ability for the app to continue to play the clip in the background when switching to another app or locking the phone. Do you know that the paid version has this exact feature? This is a limitation of the ad-supported version, because advertisers are paying to actually have people watch their ad.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
BLKNSLVR 3y ago
Yes
- izacus 3y ago
  So they didn't remove it did they? You just refuse to pay for that service and spread bs to make you feel better?
  - BLKNSLVR 3y ago
    They removed it from in front of the paywall to behind the paywall. The non-paid version used to do it. It was a memorably jarring experience working out WTF happened when background-play was rugged.
    - izacus 3y ago
      I don't remember it ever playing in the background without a sub, when was that?

conradfr 3y ago

Use the YouTube mobile site within Firefox.