3 ms·

I agree, but im curious what you mean by it not being efficient? Is it not entirely dependent on how we interact with audio? Like you said its extremely popular

• dvfjsdhgfv 2y ago
  I worked for a project that was a kind of mix of Netflix and Audible, just a few orders of magnitude smaller. Earlier, we were selling these multimedia products as digital downloads. That was simple for both sides, but with increased numbers of products and their weights customers started to complain their iPads etc. don't have enough storage to keep them (basically they would delete them and then request a new download link...). But the amount of things you need to deal with in the subscription model is huge. Everybody expects Netflix-like experience, instantaneous playback and searching etc. We can do that for N simultaneous streams; for more we need to add a slight delay - and that is noticeable. In any case, the same file is streamed multiple times, sometimes dozens of times a day for the same client. This is what I mean terribly inefficient. And although you can probably cache a few audio files, it doesn't work well for videos. From my point of view someone just wastes the bandwidth for not having to store a file locally. Yes I know this is how it is supposed to work, but still.