Yes, a family plan makes it cheaper. You won’t see any ads on your devices, from your TV to your PC, and you can listen to YouTube videos even when your phone is locked. It also includes YouTube Music. It’s a great deal, and I’m not sure why some people don’t see it that way. Sure, you could get a different YouTube client for your phone, install an ad blocker on your PC, block ads on your router to get rid them on your smart TV, and listen to music on Spotify for free. But the value of a good service is that you pay a reasonable amount of money and get all these features without any additional work on your part.
If you already have a paid spotify/apple music subscription, and already have a buttload of streaming apps subscription (netflix, apple tv, etc), suddenly the prospect of adding $13.99 youtube subscription into your list of monthly subscriptions seems a lot less appealing.
Yes, and you could even switch from Spotify/Apple to YouTube, because it essentially offers a similar service, but with added benefits. That’s their proposition. It’s up to you to decide whether you want to accept it or not. However, I find it hard to agree with the common online sentiment that YouTube Premium is worthless.
It’s not that easy to migrate from Spotify premium to Youtube Music, especially with how Spotify somehow got more and more podcasts into exclusive contract. I also use spotify premium on various 3rd party clients as well, not sure if youtube music support that use case. But yeah, from pricing alone, youtube premium which includes youtube music sounds like a good deal if you’re ok with switching away from spotify/apple music.
I’d argue YT Music is worthless, but that’s just me. I hate that you’re required to bundle it because I have 0 intent to ever move away from Spotify and I’m being forced into paying for a service I don’t need to not have ads on my tv, where I watch the majority of my YT.
But you don’t have to have all those subscriptions. You get YouTube Music included so you don’t need a separate music subscription. You also don’t have to worry about working out the latest app/add-on/plugin/site that lets you play YouTube without ads. It’s pretty good value actually. I get more from it than I do my Netflix subscription. I rotate my other subscriptions based on the shows I’m watching. I always have a YouTube subscription and don’t foresee stopping it just coz I can’t go back to ads haha.
I wonder if most of the complaints of ads on YouTube are coming from people who subscribe to something like Netflix, but spend just as much (or more) time streaming YouTube.
I wonder if most of the complaints of ads on YouTube are coming from people who subscribe to something like Netflix, but spend just as much (or more) time streaming YouTube.
Actually I don’t watch YouTube that much, probably just one video per week or even less. But everytime I tried to watch a video in YouTube app, I got bombarded with ads. So what should happen to people like me who don’t watch YouTube that much but don’t want to see ads? Clearly paying the full subscription price is not worth it in this case, especially when I already have a Spotify family subscription.
I’m not sure I see the problem. Is there a reason you expect to be able to use the service for free and even ad free?
I might only listen to a few songs a week. Is it fair that I have to sit through ads when I try to listen to them on Spotify? I don’t really want to pay for a subscription, especially because I already pay for YouTube. Clearly paying the full subscription cost for Spotify isn’t worth it in my case.
Edit: Don’t mean to sound like a smart ass. But as you can see, you can basically swap Spotify for YouTube in your argument. Spotify is just more valuable to you, which is fine. That doesn’t mean you should get the other thing free. Just like I shouldn’t expect to get Spotify ad free.
That’s where I disagree. YouTube got this big because it’s been free for so long, it practically squeezed out all of its competitors. Now that it no longer have competitors, YouTube started charging subscription, even raising the price now.
Also, you can’t exactly compare YouTube subscription with Spotify subscription, because Spotify got its content mostly by paying records companies. YouTube on the other hand got majority of its contents for free from their users, just like Reddit and Twitter. Even if you subscribe to YouTube premium, the majority of those video owners will never get any money from YouTube.
YouTube Music is more comparable to Spotify, but why bundle it with YouTube premium and raised the subscription price instead of offering it as a separate product and keep the base YouTube subscription cheap so it’ll make more sense for most people.
But YouTube still is free. This article isn’t about YouTube not being free, they’ve just increased the price of their subscription (like Netflix and Spotify do routinely). You just expect to get it for free and without ads. I’m confused at who you think is paying to store and stream all those videos if it was entirely free?
Going down the rabbit hole of YouTube getting it’s content for free is a slippery slope. I see what you’re saying, but YouTube is hosting and streaming that content for those content creators. That isn’t cheap. It’s a double edged sword. Because you likely wouldn’t know or have access to those content creators if they weren’t able to upload those videos to YouTube and not have to pay to provide that service themselves. Is it perfect, no. But name another completely free streaming service.
And I’d argue it’s not entirely comparable to Reddit and Twitter. Both in cost incurred to store and stream that data, and they pay those content creators who generate a lot of views. Again, another rabbit hole in terms of what payment is fair etc. But it’s not a fair comparison to put YouTube in the Twitter and Reddit bucket. It probably sits somewhere in between Spotify and those social platforms.
Edit: I forgot to point out the biggest issue with your comparison to Reddit and Twitter. You seem to forget that those platforms also have ads.
Yes, a family plan makes it cheaper. You won’t see any ads on your devices, from your TV to your PC, and you can listen to YouTube videos even when your phone is locked. It also includes YouTube Music. It’s a great deal, and I’m not sure why some people don’t see it that way. Sure, you could get a different YouTube client for your phone, install an ad blocker on your PC, block ads on your router to get rid them on your smart TV, and listen to music on Spotify for free. But the value of a good service is that you pay a reasonable amount of money and get all these features without any additional work on your part.
If you already have a paid spotify/apple music subscription, and already have a buttload of streaming apps subscription (netflix, apple tv, etc), suddenly the prospect of adding $13.99 youtube subscription into your list of monthly subscriptions seems a lot less appealing.
That’s where you get rid of the other streaming services and check [email protected] how to get your TV series ^^
Yes, and you could even switch from Spotify/Apple to YouTube, because it essentially offers a similar service, but with added benefits. That’s their proposition. It’s up to you to decide whether you want to accept it or not. However, I find it hard to agree with the common online sentiment that YouTube Premium is worthless.
It’s not that easy to migrate from Spotify premium to Youtube Music, especially with how Spotify somehow got more and more podcasts into exclusive contract. I also use spotify premium on various 3rd party clients as well, not sure if youtube music support that use case. But yeah, from pricing alone, youtube premium which includes youtube music sounds like a good deal if you’re ok with switching away from spotify/apple music.
I’d argue YT Music is worthless, but that’s just me. I hate that you’re required to bundle it because I have 0 intent to ever move away from Spotify and I’m being forced into paying for a service I don’t need to not have ads on my tv, where I watch the majority of my YT.
But you don’t have to have all those subscriptions. You get YouTube Music included so you don’t need a separate music subscription. You also don’t have to worry about working out the latest app/add-on/plugin/site that lets you play YouTube without ads. It’s pretty good value actually. I get more from it than I do my Netflix subscription. I rotate my other subscriptions based on the shows I’m watching. I always have a YouTube subscription and don’t foresee stopping it just coz I can’t go back to ads haha.
I wonder if most of the complaints of ads on YouTube are coming from people who subscribe to something like Netflix, but spend just as much (or more) time streaming YouTube.
Actually I don’t watch YouTube that much, probably just one video per week or even less. But everytime I tried to watch a video in YouTube app, I got bombarded with ads. So what should happen to people like me who don’t watch YouTube that much but don’t want to see ads? Clearly paying the full subscription price is not worth it in this case, especially when I already have a Spotify family subscription.
I’m not sure I see the problem. Is there a reason you expect to be able to use the service for free and even ad free?
I might only listen to a few songs a week. Is it fair that I have to sit through ads when I try to listen to them on Spotify? I don’t really want to pay for a subscription, especially because I already pay for YouTube. Clearly paying the full subscription cost for Spotify isn’t worth it in my case.
Edit: Don’t mean to sound like a smart ass. But as you can see, you can basically swap Spotify for YouTube in your argument. Spotify is just more valuable to you, which is fine. That doesn’t mean you should get the other thing free. Just like I shouldn’t expect to get Spotify ad free.
That’s where I disagree. YouTube got this big because it’s been free for so long, it practically squeezed out all of its competitors. Now that it no longer have competitors, YouTube started charging subscription, even raising the price now.
Also, you can’t exactly compare YouTube subscription with Spotify subscription, because Spotify got its content mostly by paying records companies. YouTube on the other hand got majority of its contents for free from their users, just like Reddit and Twitter. Even if you subscribe to YouTube premium, the majority of those video owners will never get any money from YouTube.
YouTube Music is more comparable to Spotify, but why bundle it with YouTube premium and raised the subscription price instead of offering it as a separate product and keep the base YouTube subscription cheap so it’ll make more sense for most people.
But YouTube still is free. This article isn’t about YouTube not being free, they’ve just increased the price of their subscription (like Netflix and Spotify do routinely). You just expect to get it for free and without ads. I’m confused at who you think is paying to store and stream all those videos if it was entirely free?
Going down the rabbit hole of YouTube getting it’s content for free is a slippery slope. I see what you’re saying, but YouTube is hosting and streaming that content for those content creators. That isn’t cheap. It’s a double edged sword. Because you likely wouldn’t know or have access to those content creators if they weren’t able to upload those videos to YouTube and not have to pay to provide that service themselves. Is it perfect, no. But name another completely free streaming service.
And I’d argue it’s not entirely comparable to Reddit and Twitter. Both in cost incurred to store and stream that data, and they pay those content creators who generate a lot of views. Again, another rabbit hole in terms of what payment is fair etc. But it’s not a fair comparison to put YouTube in the Twitter and Reddit bucket. It probably sits somewhere in between Spotify and those social platforms.
Edit: I forgot to point out the biggest issue with your comparison to Reddit and Twitter. You seem to forget that those platforms also have ads.