• yeehaw
    link
    fedilink
    English
    312 days ago

    Yeah but on one hand the price they want I’m not willing to pay, but if I could get it for less then I’d consider it.

    • @iAmTheTot
      link
      English
      312 days ago

      Sounds like the service isn’t quite right for you, then.

      • yeehaw
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        12 days ago

        It’s only worth what people are willing to pay. Already have Spotify anyways and not a fan of googles app killing tactics, learned that the hard way a couple times.

      • @Sethayy
        link
        English
        211 days ago

        Sounds like the monopolized industry isn’t right for the users

        • @iAmTheTot
          link
          English
          111 days ago

          What exactly is the monopoly here?

          • @Sethayy
            link
            English
            511 days ago

            Video content? YouTube’s made it all but impossible to compete with their free offerings, for the cost of server upkeep alone

            • @iAmTheTot
              link
              English
              111 days ago

              How has YouTube made it impossible for another video hoster to allow free viewing with ads?

              • @Sethayy
                link
                English
                211 days ago

                The cost of server upkeep alone

                • @iAmTheTot
                  link
                  English
                  111 days ago

                  How is that Google’s fault? What is your solution to this?

                  • @Sethayy
                    link
                    English
                    210 days ago

                    Same as Walmart killing off every ma and pa shop is their fault, they lowbid the competition solely because they’re able to with their monopolization, solution being actual competition in the industry.

                    Can’t help but feel your goal posts are sentient with how much they’re moving.

              • Pika
                link
                English
                1
                edit-2
                11 days ago

                To add information on that the other person didn’t, YouTube was purchased by alphabet in 2006, it was purchased in a very unstable state, it was bleeding money, but they wanted it because they saw potential in the platform for Data Tracking and video analytics along with the fact that it had a very high traffic ratio.

                When they purchased it one of the first things they started working on was trying to turn it to be green instead of red, but despite this they still didn’t start seeing any real decent change until about 2009, and it wasn’t until 2015 that the platform itself started running in the green.

                All this happened with YouTube being one of the most popular video platform sites out there. YouTube doesn’t have to do anything to actively block competitors from doing it, with their established market dominance, search engine self promotion tendancies(there was an ongoing lawsuit in Australia regarding this) and the amount of sheer money they have, no company is going to try to compete, the closest arguably is likely twitch but they are pushing the reverse direction with streaming instead of video hosting