14 ms·
Vimeo: “We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube.”
- StreamBright 4y agoI wonder why do I watch only indie content on Vimeo?
- deadalus 4y agoVimeo Alternatives : Centralized : Youtube, Dailymotion, Bitchute, Rumble, DTube, Vidlii, DLive, Triller Decentralized : Odysee(LBRY), Peertube
- beebeepka 4y agometacafe? the true indie tube
- vishnumohandas 4y agoCloudflare Stream[1] might be good fit for some use cases. [1]: https://www.cloudflare.com/products/cloudflare-stream/ https://www.cloudflare.com/products/cloudflare-stream/
- nathanyz 4y agoThrowing in us as well, Swarmify Billing based on views instead of bandwidth
- cronix 4y agoHow much of the video has to be watched to be considered "a view?"
- nathanyz 4y agoViews with us are more comparable to page views than a video play. So definitely higher than actual plays. We give such a generous amount that this is only more expensive than other providers in a limited set of use cases. This Vimeo policy change has been really good for business since we can also automatically convert all existing Vimeo embed over to us.
- hnbad 4y agoThese really feel more like YouTube alternatives. Are there any alternatives to Vimeo as a B2B service (e.g. hosting unlisted videos embedded behind paywalls)?
- KerrAvon 4y agoAs a consumer of Vimeo content from musicians and comedians, I can translate this to English: “We have given up trying to produce a competitive consumer solution because we can’t be bothered to hire a UX designer or do any basic consumer-level testing of our product at all. Fuck if we know how to make things work. But business don’t care.”
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- lelandfe 4y agoI think it's less "because we can't be bothered" and more "because we don't want to compete with YouTube"
- darknavi 4y ago"Can't afford to compete" would also be accurate.
- MattGaiser 4y agoI wonder whether YouTube actually makes money yet or even if it does, would if it were standalone (as they can benefit from Google scale and Google infrastructure).
- KaoruAoiShiho 4y agoEarly on yes, but today YT is at least a $100b company by itself.
- MattGaiser 4y agoDoesn’t mean it makes money.
- TheRealNGenius 4y ago
- yashap 4y ago> She’s uploaded 117 subscriber-only videos so far, and each one only gets around 150 views on average. Her most viewed video has around 815 views. … Her bandwidth usage was within the top 1 percent of Vimeo users, the company said Well that’s telling. Sounds like a company that’s on the rocks trying to squeeze money out of a small number of users to survive.
- unfocussed_mike 4y ago"top 1%" with these figures tells you more about the problems Vimeo have than anything else, surely. Even if they are all very long videos. It sounds almost like they've abandoned any attempt to find cost-savings through scale and they are heading towards being dependent on the services of an off-the-shelf developer-focussed competitor.
- throwaway27727 4y agoApparently her videos are multiple-hour long. So, caveats applied.
- yakak 4y agoIt probably could be expressed in a more resource representative way, but being in their top 1% and therefore needing to negotiate a custom plan apparently only requires 2TB of monthly bandwidth.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- FrenchDevRemote 4y agoTo be fair more than 9 out of 10 of youtube users don't get +10K views too...
- ipaddr 4y ago100,000 views = will come out to 100 dollar payout on youtube.
- 4y ago
- totetsu 4y agoNow I have fomo for all those cool indie films, dances, animations etc, that are going to be deleted before I ever see them.
- ______-_-______ 4y agoThis seems like a job for archive.org. But I don't think even they could deal with the scale of something like Vimeo with only a week's notice. Sad days.
- sltkr 4y agoAnyone can upload their content to Archive.org if they want to preserve it for posterity.
- aceazzameen 4y agoThis is my first thought also. I wish I had all my favorites bookmarked, so I could download them myself.
- Existenceblinks 4y agoSo I check the Basic plan right now, it's: 5 GB limit for total storage. 500 MB upload limit per week. --- I haven't used it for years, now I know I only use 2.3GB there. Safe from deletion I think.
- hirako2000 4y agoThe basic plan was always pretty limited. And you certainly aren't safe from deletion if you hit that top 1% percentile of bandwidth use. Keep your channels unpopular just in case.
- andry1987 4y agoFastoCloud can provide video hosting on your servers. it will cost 25$ per month From your side need to have server near with your auditory.
- gopstoptratata 4y ago
- agumonkey 4y agoWasn't the indie side their original spin ?
- corobo 4y ago2TB feels like a really low 99th percentile for a video site. Is Vimeo really that small? I’ve always seen them as more a backend provider for paywalled video content, makes sense they’d lean into that audience
- nacs 4y agoIt's not much at all in the days of 1080p @ 60fps and 4k videos. I think Vimeo is doing some creative accounting to come up with the 1% number. It's probably 1% of all users on the site even if the vast majority of users have < 5 views.
- mjburgess 4y agoAm I the only one thinking, "fair enough" ? Vimeo has transitioned through different strategic directions, and seems to have settled on B2B -- if this doesnt work for a platform user, move platform.
- bobitsaboy 4y agoGiving the creators a week or less notice and demanding such a sharp increase in fees is nothing less than a shakedown. Had they given them a 30 day heads up, I can't see much room for criticism.
- rdtwo 4y agoI think that’s the point. If you are running b2b services it’s a shakedown of small business clients
- sgc 4y agoI think a lot of people here offer b2b services that are not shakedowns.
- rdtwo 4y agoYou misunderstood. The small b2b are the ones getting shook down. Small b2b content providers are getting hit with huge cost so they can buy time to migrate off
- sgc 4y agoIf you meant that Vimeo is shaking down small business clients, that might be true. But the way you phrased things it sounded like you were saying small business services in general are a shakedown, and Vimeo was just another example of this.
- lelandfe 4y agoThe scenario with Channel 5 was even more silly, since Vimeo was just a service that Patreon was using. This not only looked like a shakedown, it was from a hosting platform the group wasn't even directly using. https://www.patreon.com/posts/vimeo-is-holding-61514364 https://www.patreon.com/posts/vimeo-is-holding-61514364
- m3kw9 4y agoThey seem to host a lot of recorded webinars and courses that can be made behind paywalls or memberships
- rdtwo 4y agoI think it’s a shakedown of those users. They probably think they can get a big cash infusion while those people migrate out. If you had a business hosting training videos then 1 week isn’t enough time to migrate you might end up eating a month or 2 at extortion pricing
- cinntaile 4y agoThis doesn't sound like a good long term strategy, you're losing a lot of goodwill from your small paying customers and they'll jump ship when the opportunity arises.
- rdtwo 4y agoIt’s a good short term play. If you extract 3k instead of 70/month you basically get paid for 3 years in one month. Clients are lost but good will isn’t that valuable when you have given up on growing and moved to extraction
- judge2020 4y agoThis is a response to the Patreon story from last week[0]. The thing with Vimeo charging that much for videos is that it doesn’t look like they actually needed Vimeo. Ya, it’s nice to have rich analytics, but it sounded like they would have been just fine simply distributing the MP4 to subscribers via some file transfer service, eg. WeTransfer. 0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30686704 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30686704
- bobitsaboy 4y agoAh, did not see this one, sorry!
- judge2020 4y agoThat one didn't have vimeo's response IIRC so this is still useful.
- ohgodplsno 4y agoNobody wants to download a 20GB 4K video when you could just watch it online and have a bookmark.
- BbzzbB 4y agoUnlisted YouTube video or Patreon's native video sharing both sound more appealing than some direct download.
- slenk 4y agoUnlisted Youtube Videos aren't great for content producers though, because if the URL ever gets posted publicly you are screwed.
- shuckles 4y agoFor what it's worth, I think Vimeo doesn't have great authentication support. Most of the Patreons and Kickstarters which I know used it for distribution had a single word password to gate access to content.
- sandbags 4y agoI find it ironic since they essentially booted me off their platform for creating some vaguely-commercial content (I was a paying customer at the time). Left a very sour taste in my mouth esp. since other people they seemed to ignore.
- dna_polymerase 4y agoSo according to the cited creators Patreon she is now using Patreon's homegrown video hosting. [0] If 117 videos with about 800 views are 99th percentile of bandwidth usage among the customers I'd argue the company is dead. All the standard plans on their website are (according to the article) useless, since they get cancelled if you actually make use of the platform. Leaves the question which companies would rely on Vimeo for their videos. YouTube does it for free... [0]: https://www.patreon.com/loish https://www.patreon.com/loish
- neilv 4y agoThis sounds like a potentially great business clarity move: > We are a B2B solution, not the indie version of YouTube” But this part -- bait&switch, with only one week to decide or move, (if that's accurate) -- is not what you want from your B2B solution provider: > “I was already paying $200 a year, which I think is pretty expensive,” [...] if she wanted to keep hosting her content on the site, she’d need to upgrade to a custom plan. Her quoted price: $3,500 a year. She was given a week to upgrade her content, decrease her bandwidth usage, or leave Vimeo.
- bryans 4y ago> "I was already paying $200 a year, which I think is pretty expensive," In other words, she has no idea what bandwidth or server costs are and doesn't realize Vimeo is definitely losing money on distributing her videos, but still arrogantly believes she is entitled to infinite bandwidth for free because "that's what YouTube does."
- hackernewds 4y agoI wouldn't read it as entitled since other companies have found models that can successfully support revenue scaling with distribution
- gundmc 4y agoNot for free, for $200.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- technobabbler 4y agoBut should it be her job as a content producer to understand Vimeo's costs and margins? Vimeo is one of those who liked to advertise seemingly unmetered bandwidth behind an fine-print fair-use policy, luring people into a cheap pro plan with the hopes that most of them won't take off and become viral. That was their bet, one that they're now regretting. They could've just easily put a bandwidth meter on every account and let people decide what to do if they get close to that limit. It's not even like the early days of Gmail abuse where people were using it as a cheap web disk, consuming way more storage and bandwidth than Gmail could've reasonably estimated. This person is just using Vimeo as they intended: hosting and serving videos. She wasn't trying to abuse the service, just using it the way they sold it to her, as a place to host videos for $200/year. Whose fault is it that they underpriced their plans as loss leaders on purpose, and the bet didn't quite pay off? If they want to up their price because they want to change their business model, you know, more power to them... but sheesh, at least give her 60-90 days to figure out next steps. Some home internet connections can't even download all those videos and reupload them within 7 days. (edit: to be clear, Gmail didn't offer unlimited disk, just a LOT of disk)
- kfarr 4y agoFYI Update from Vimeo CEO posted Friday https://vimeo.com/blog/post/improving-policy-on-video-bandwidth/ https://vimeo.com/blog/post/improving-policy-on-video-bandwi... (disclaimer I am a Vimeo employee)
- Aeolun 4y agoAm I the only one that thinks 2TB is pretty low for a plan that costs $75/month?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- detaro 4y agoBandwidth pricing is always a difficult topic. E.g. one comparison: 2 TB traffic out of AWS CloudFront is $85-120/month (first TB free, per TB cost as listed for the second TB, depending on region), and that's traffic only, no storage, processing, ... Of course AWS traffic is not exactly cheap, but Vimeo is an all-in-one service handling more than just traffic.
- candiddevmike 4y agoThere are plenty of cloud providers without insane bandwidth fees, or Vimeo could host their services on premise. Netflix doesn't stream content from AWS, Vimeo needs a more cost effective architecture.
- detaro 4y agoI didn't claim Vimeo uses AWS.
- candiddevmike 4y agoI was just pointing to an example of not streaming from the cloud. Vimeo uses a combination of GCP and Fastly I believe https://cloud.google.com/customers/vimeo https://cloud.google.com/customers/vimeo
- coward123 4y agoIn my work, I have to create and share a lot of videos, and Vimeo is superior to YouTube for my needs. Doesn't auto-play some unrelated content when they are done with my videos, I can easily make basic edits like a custom thumbnail or branding, and it doesn't cover it in their own branding like YouTube. Integrates better into my site as well. So yeah - Vimeo is better than YouTube for B2B needs.
- spacechild1 4y agoAnother key feature: I can replace the file and keep the URL!
- arkitaip 4y agoVimeo is dying. There is no way they can stay afloat abusing their tiny and shrinking user base with an increasingly exorbitant pricing.
- MattGaiser 4y agoIBM disagrees.
- arkitaip 4y ago"Nobody ever got fired for choosing Vimeo" isn't a thing.
- johndfsgdgdfg 4y agoI have switched to Twitch and have been encouraging people to switch to Twitch. Twitch is a better platform in every aspect, not to mention boycotting spyware company like Google, which keeps users hostage for money.
- fareesh 4y agoWe have used Vimeo for some corporate clients' customer facing websites. This is because Vimeo's embed offers: 1) No recommendations at the end 2) Customisable player controls 3) Control over where it can be embedded, etc 4) No ads The downside is that they don't have much transparency over TOS / content policy removals. We had a random violation in one instance where the uploader recorded a screencast of something. Our best guess is that the system flagged it because the screens showed a UI with a user's profile and some dummy information which was likely understood to be real private information.
- neurostimulant 4y agoIf you just use vimeo for video embeds, you can upload the videos into cloudflare stream instead as it supports embedding. Interestingly, some schools block cloudflare stream though. Not sure if it's a common occurrence. > 3) Control over where it can be embedded, etc Is it still working now as most browsers are no longer sending referral domain on iframe requests?
- ryanSrich 4y agoWe've been using Wistia for 2 years for our business that serves Security Awareness Training content directly in Slack. It works perfectly fine. The pricing isn't that bad either. It seems like Vimeo is going after this type of market. Which is totally fine. I think the biggest issue with the current situation is just how little notice Vimeo gave the client in question. 90 days is a pretty standard price increase notice for B2B. They should have just done that.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 4y agoWait, so Vimeo removes videos of paying customers, and does not even tell you why/let you talk to a human about it to understand and appeal the decision? It's one thing when a free service does this, but a paid provider?!?
- Joeboy 4y agoCan I just like, buy some file hosting, scp AV1 files to it and embed them on my blog, these days?
- giantrobot 4y agoYou can but you've created a shitty experience. With AV1 you've excluded at least half your potential viewers. Even for people with a browser with AV1 support your files likely have a higher bitrate than your viewers can stream in real-time. If you want to just "upload files" you're going to be encoding a dozen different versions and bundling them as HLS/MPEG-DASH to not have a shitty client experience. You're going to need a fair amount of storage and a big pipe to handle multiple simultaneous streams. Also caching is a Hard Problem since not every version of a piece of content has equal levels of viewership at any given time. YouTube and Vimeo (and the rest) handle all the storage, bandwidth, and transcoding. It's not something that you're going to do well without a lot of domain knowledge first. The market is littered with the corpses of companies that underestimated the difficulty and expense of streaming video over the web. It's certainly not so difficult as to be impossible, it's just non-trivially difficult and potentially expensive.
- hirako2000 4y agoThis. And it seems the cost of networking is on the rise. Not per kb of course, but relative to the media economy at play. I don't see how a small player can enter the market: - creators expect no fees or a low fee and no ads - viewers now expect 1080p or even 4k option, and 60 frames/s. Thanks h265, but even with the best compression out there the math doesn't add up to make a profit. Perhaps that comes down to the fact feeding data is more expensive, even as a business and at scale, than to pull data as an individual with a home broadband. Unless you are Google, aws, or cloudflare and have leverage over other networks providers. Decentralized solutions is our last hope. I say hope because it still isn't quite working performance-wise for the use case of streaming.
- johnohara 4y ago89.26% of its shares are now owned by 375+ institutional investors. Their expectation of growth and success is well-understood by the Board of Directors and the Executive Team. In less than a year, the IPO is complete and Elvis has left the building.
- hitovst 4y agoConsidering the practices of Youtube, Vimeo, and the like, I don't understand why bittorrent feeds aren't used more often.
- egypturnash 4y agoCan you tap a link to a torrent and watch the video it contains on your phone? If the answer is “no” then I think this is the answer to your question.
- worldmerge 4y agoWith webtorrent JS, yes.
- lillecarl 4y agoBut it doesn't have the infrastructure to handle different resolution delivery based on connection speed and such, on good connections sure but on unreliable connections it's not the same story.
- egypturnash 4y agoalso: subtitles (human-applied and machine-generated), variable speed, arbitrary skipping around the timeline...
- hannasanarion 4y agoYeah, it's almost like people who make things for a living want to be paid for things they make or something. Don't they know that I deserve everything for free because I know how to apt-get transmission?
- 0898 4y agoI also use Vimeo as a B2B solution and the “indie YouTube” side really frustrates me. Every time I search my own videos to find something, Vimeo defaults to scouring all its public videos and throwing up all kinds of twee college projects and thumbnails with laurel wreaths from film festivals. Now Vimeo is grown up I wonder if it’s time it decided what it’s going to be.
- ximus 4y agoFeels like Vimeo missed an opportunity to be the home of creatives. They had the right brand perception for it, and were there early. A video producer friend persevered hard to continue using it from 2012 to 2019, but out of chronic frustration with its product design, sadly moved to youtube. I got the sense of a general stubborn "we know what's right for you, you don't" attitude in their product design. And it seemed to satisfy no significant public well. Great to see them be more clear, wish them the best.
- tinus_hn 4y agoSounds like they tried and found it wasn’t sustainable.
- omnimus 4y agoIt was surely sustainable their revenue is plus 200mil year and the product haven't changed much over the years. It's not growing enough for shareholders though. But sustainable is not the right word.
- dbbk 4y agoBut they’ve been losing money for the last 3 quarters. They’re not profitable right now.
- fullmetalpower 4y agowelp! time to forget about Vimeo... forever that is...
- skizm 4y agoYouTube was losing over a billion dollars per year for a long time. It is going to be tough to take them head on as a direct competitor.
- sofixa 4y agoFor all we know, they still do. Alphabet don't publish YouTube specific expenses.
- whiddershins 4y agoWhat is the YouTube alternative, then?
- Tretiotrr 4y agoYeah that's why people like to underestimate that paying for YouTube makes sense. Being able to provide that mich storage and video transcoding and traffic is not a cheap thing to do right. Even yt reduces video resolution for less watched videos.
- sprayk 4y agoThis has been happening for the better part of a decade already. Back around 2012, I had already stopped seeing Vimeo come across my browsing history completely, but I was reminded of it's existence at a film festival where I heard about and saw vimeo being used to screen most of the more independent films. When I asked some of the festival organizers about how movies were screened, they said there were two ways (again, back in 2012): Digital Cinema Package (DCP) for more mainstream films (a DRM-laden harddrive package that was carried around to the screening location in a locked, nondescript hardcase), and password-protected Vimeo. Since then, the only time I've interacted with Vimeo was to watch episodes of IKEA Heights[0], as at the time this was the only place where it was officially distributed (i.e. in original quality, rather than re-encoded and re-uploaded to youtube). Great, weird, short series if you are interested. The play between the drama/acting, and then being brought back to reality by being caught, is very fun. If I recall correctly, this was around when they removed recommendation type features from their site, which was the first sign that I saw, personally, that they were moving away from something consumer focused. The DCP system was intriguing to me. They made DCP sound like a pain in the ass, requiring expensive projection equipment and some kind of special internet connection (they weren't familiar with that part) to receive films not distributed physically or to receive updates to films. Later, I looked up DCP on Wikipedia[1] and found it enlightening. The thing that stood out to me was the use of asymmetric encryption to ensure a particular DCP distribution was only able to be played on a particular projector, thanks to a symmetric key for the film being encrypted with a projector's public key, and decrypted using the private key stored on some kind of FIPS compliant HSM. [0] https://vimeo.com/channels/ikeaheights https://vimeo.com/channels/ikeaheights [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Cinema_Package https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Cinema_Package
- ModernMech 4y agoOh man, I love Randall Park. Thanks for this it's hilarious.
- MattGaiser 4y agoIs there an agreed upon way to self host videos for less? For those of you that have done this, what would/does hosting and serving large videos cost you a month and how are you doing it?
- hirako2000 4y agoCosts me zero, hopefully for a while. https://hirakosan.surge.sh/what-am-i-up-to https://hirakosan.surge.sh/what-am-i-up-to I still have to implement a few tricks to go over 2 GB per file and add support for streaming. But I'm getting there.
- chx 4y agoLook at transit prices https://blog.telegeography.com/2021-global-ip-transit-price-trends https://blog.telegeography.com/2021-global-ip-transit-price-... 1mbps a month is 320 gigabyte so 2TB is 6mbps which costs a whopping 3.6 USD in Hong Kong 1.2 USD elsewhere. Where I am wrong? If you don't want to deal with storage, Backblaze B2 is $5/TB/month and the Bandwidth Alliance will reduce/eliminate the egress costs.
- kolanos 4y agoI was curious what this would cost with Cloudflare Video [0]. They charge $1 per 1,000 minutes streamed and $5 per 1,000 minutes stored. 117 videos * 150 average views * 90 average minutes / 1000 = $1,579/month for streaming (!) (117 videos * 90 average minutes / 1000) * 5 = $50/month for storage It sounds like these are long form videos, so I just put an average of 90 minutes each. Still, video streaming seems very expensive. Lets say these 90 minute videos were stored in multiple formats: 480p - 500MB 720p - 1.5GB 1080p - 3GB S3 charges $0.023/GB for general storage. 117 videos * 5 gb * 0.023 = $13.455/month for storage AWS charges $0.05/GB for outbound transfer. Lets say the streams are worst case, 1080p. That's 52.65TB in monthly transfer. 117 videos * 3 gb * 150 average views * 0.05 = $2,632.50/month for transfer (!) So AWS is about 1/4th the cost for storage, but almost double for transfer. Suffice to say I'm not sure I understand the economics around video streaming. [0]: https://www.cloudflare.com/products/cloudflare-stream/ https://www.cloudflare.com/products/cloudflare-stream/
- pictur 4y agoa better alternative to vimeo is pretty easy to create. It's weird that they take themselves so seriously.
- hirako2000 4y agoPlease go ahead. A cousin comment says the economic is against you, and I heartedly agree with that.
- pictur 4y agomy comment has nothing to do with economy. vimeo hasn't been doing anything good for years to gather users. it's just weird that they describe themselves as a movie site just because someone is uploading their amateur movies.
- hirako2000 4y agook you meant about Vimeo being stale for many years, with that I fully agree. They could have easily become the indie creators platform, and the top end of that. I even think they could even have become by now a serious threat to YouTube because creators is what makes the platform in the longer term, mainstream audience follow the elite eventually.
- sireat 4y agoI have over 500 unlisted (meaning you need to have the link to watch it) tutorial videos (30-180mins each) on Youtube. They are used for various programming classes that I teach. Each gets 10-100 views depending on class size. I know that Youtube is a ticking time bomb for those not monetizing the videos to Google liking. Enough horror stories from HN and friends. So I would love to find an alternative but each time I investigate alternatives such as Vimeo I go back to Youtube. Of course, I could self host, but dealing with various transcoding issues is not the best use of my time.
- DenseComet 4y agoNo harm in staying with YouTube for now, as long as you have a local copy of all your videos.
- Ir0nMan 4y agoSelf hosting is a fairly straight forward option: A simple VPS (linode, digital ocean, etc) and upload your .mp4 videos. If your videos are in a weird format all it takes is a single pass through Handbrake to make them stream-able friendly. You will have native HTML5 playback in the browser and have full control of your files and links.
- nickjj 4y agoVimeo felt like a good solution for someone who might be selling video courses. This is a use case where you might have 400-500x 5-10 minute videos spread over a few courses that were streamed to folks who purchased one of your courses using Vimeo's embedded video player that's sitting in a custom site you've built. I think their old plan was like $200 / year (I didn't use them personally since I didn't have a custom platform running) and it felt reasonably priced for that use case. When I eventually release my custom platform I was planning to use them and be happy about it. Thankfully I haven't gotten to the video playing component of the platform yet because I wouldn't want to use them under this new pricing strategy. Wistia's pricing plans aren't much better (they are a competitor to Vimeo). It's $1,200 / year but also 25 cents per video on top of that. If you have a lot of small videos you get crushed. Suddenly 400x 5 minute videos means another $100 / month ($2,400 / year total). I don't understand why they would make their pricing model based on something that punishes folks who make smaller videos. Breaking up a single 50 minute video into 10x 5 minute videos shouldn't cost you 10x the price IMO. It's unfortunate because it might take you years of producing videos before you even make a few hundred bucks a month, $150-300 a month on day 1 is a ton relative to that especially since that's only 1 component of your costs, then there's web hosting, payment provider transaction fees, refund fees, various taxes, etc.. Kind of makes it hard to get into a position to succeed unless you're able to invest many thousands of dollars up front.
- mcintyre1994 4y agoSo basically they want Patreon to be their customer instead of the individual creators? Probably not actually Patreon any more since they’ve upset all their mutual customers, but that kind of deal I guess?
- hyperx1987 4y ago
- jarjoura 4y agoJust a side rant, but Vimeo always had this perception (to me), that it was a Ruby of Rails clone of YouTube. It had that very clean minimalist pastely UI with very easy to understand player, but always felt static. Compared to YouTube with a world of content at my fingertips, either from comments, or the endless recommendations surrounding the pages, Vimeo's insistence on the early Web 2.0 clean aesthetic kept it from ever becoming sticky. I can see how early filmmakers gravitated towards Vimeo for that very reason, but then you're sort of left with just a hosting site for embeddable videos at the end of the day. Unfortunately, Vimeo as a brand never gets any mindshare and it fades into the background of the content hosted on it. That's fine and there's lots of space to explore on the tooling side for content producers, and actually, I see it as very similar to Stripe's business model. HOWEVER, and something a bit more nuanced here, yes, Vimeo can provide all the tools a creator could possibly ever need, except, and a big one, discovery. YouTube also supports non-searchable content, along with its discoverable content. So they can continue to dominate from mindshare alone.
- worldmerge 4y agoIs is possible to do password protected torrent streaming? Like uploading your videos as a torrent and having webtorrent stream them only if a password was given?
- remram 4y agoYou could (and should) encrypt.
- tssva 4y agoAccording to Wikipedia as of November 2020 Vimeo had over 200 million users. I imagine most of those users have never uploaded a video, have upload very few for a limited audience or haven't uploaded a video in quite a while. I believe I have a Vimeo account that I haven't thought about for years and might have uploaded a video to years ago upon first signing up. The fast majority of their users are likely using no bandwidth. According to the same Wikipedia article as of November 2020 they had 1.6 million paying customers. I would wager that their paying customers account for the majority of bandwidth usage. 1% of 200 million is 2 million which means it is likely almost the entirety of their paying customers and a good number of active uploading non-paying customers fall within the top 1% of bandwidth users.
- yolodump 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- kristo8888 4y ago[dead]
- radium3d 4y agoIs there a reason YouTube/Alphabet have not entered into the URL-Locked video embed business? Seems like a simple thing they could easily implement in a few weeks.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- alone1987 4y ago
- throwaway984393 4y ago#nerdoutrageporn
- dlsa 4y agoA clear pivot. Yet it will definitely anger plenty of people. Like... a lot of people. Still, I don't appreciate the apparently short notice they gave. That's a significant change in their terms I'd be wary of in future. Something happened and there was a knee-jerk reaction or decision made. Not sure if I read that right however.
- dang 4y agoRecent and related: Popular Patreon creators are being hit with Vimeo price hikes - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30686704 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30686704 - March 2022 (223 comments)
- evancoop 4y agoThere are a few issues here. First, the rather clumsy manner in which this was handled - even if certain customers aren't profitable, asking 'em to suddenly pay 10x what they paid before is a recipe for bad press. Second, if Vimeo is unwilling to exert the effort to handle niche customers, there are folks waiting in the wings like (https://instillvideo.com/ https://instillvideo.com/) for health and fitness folks. Third, long-term incentives suggest growing a customer base rather than short-term plays for larger clients. Curious where these displaced customers land!
- abnercoimbre 4y agoI strongly recommend indie creators use a personal domain link for each video that they publish. For our indie conference -- Handmade Seattle [0] -- we own the link to someone's talk. We embed a Vimeo player but after this announcement we can switch out providers and still have the permalink. Invest on your own infrastructure as soon as you can. [0] https://media.handmade-seattle.com https://media.handmade-seattle.com
- fuzzythinker 4y agoOff topic, but thank you for the link. There are some very good talks there. I'll give a brief summary of 3 I picked to watch. https://media.handmade-seattle.com/roc-lang/ https://media.handmade-seattle.com/roc-lang/ [1], https://media.handmade-seattle.com/metadesk/ https://media.handmade-seattle.com/metadesk/ [2], https://media.handmade-seattle.com/practical-data-oriented-design/ https://media.handmade-seattle.com/practical-data-oriented-d... [3] 1. roc-lang by Richard Feldman. A high level pure functional language with low level language performance in runtime and compile time. Looks like the holy grail, but it seems like it'll be a few years to see if it lives up to that. 2. github.com/dion-systems/metadesk . A DSL/meta-data format that is a superset of json for that is more readable and does not encode data structure like json. 3. Some good tips on designing your data structures for efficient memory usage. I won't call it "Data Oriented Design" based on the things in the talk. The sudden exponential jump in "good" code after years of plateau leave me disappointed overall. I don't see how the code can have an exponential jump in "better-ness" based on topics in the talk.
- PrivateButts 4y agoAt my job we used Vimeo's OTT solution and it's been a pretty bad experience. We were promised features that didn't exist, and working with them has been like pulling teeth.
- supermatt 4y ago2TB egress a month (the quotes figure to be in top 1%) on AWS is ~$200/m. For a full solution charging $300 a month doesn’t seem unreasonable. These ad-supported giants skew peoples idea of cost. They make it harder for others to compete - generating outrage when people compare the relative price to “free”.
- unmole 4y agoAWS prices egress bandwidth at a ridiculous premium. It shouldn't cost a large host anywhere near that.