this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

Technology

61227 readers
4025 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
0
All the ways streaming services are aggravating their subscribers this week (arstechnica.com)
submitted 9 months ago by ForgottenFlux@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
2 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Below is a look at the most exasperating news from streaming services from this week. The scale of this article demonstrates how fast and frequently disappointing streaming news arises. Coincidentally, as we wrote this article, another price hike was announced.

We'll also examine each streaming platform's financial status to get an idea of what these companies are thinking (spoiler: They're thinking about money).

Netflix starts killing its cheapest ad-free plan in June

Sony bumps Crunchyroll prices weeks after shuttering Funimation

Peacock is raising prices

Fubo cuts 19 channels

In a seemingly desperate push, many streaming services prioritize revenue and profits ahead of building the best streaming service for customers.

We could go on about how this might force people to reconsider their subscriptions, but we should publish before another service makes yet another policy change.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] FortuneMisteller@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

They let people believe that streaming is cheap, but it is not. A server can send streams to many people at the same time, but not so many as it seems and sever up time is a cost, in terms of energy and in terms of sysadmin time. Maintenance of the network is also expensive, especially in the US where most of the people live in low density neighbourhoods.

To that you have to add the cost of the big data servers that check everything people look at and profile their customers.

The dirty cheap subscriptions were meant to attract new customers, the service was heavily subsidized. The companies looked profitable just because other companies bought more ad space than necessary. Overadvertising is the preferred method to give stealth subsidies, but it is a cost for the other businesses of the network. After a while they have to shift those costs to the customers.

[โ€“] MSids@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

When I worked at an internet provider, Netflix sent us a cache (I'm sure they have several at that ISP now). I can't imagine it cost them more than a few thousand dollars, as it was just a bare bones box full of hard drives. We gave them free power, internet, and rack space in our data center. Every night during the slow period it would fill up with whatever they thought would stream the next day.

There was nothing to do with neighborhoods, the cache served customers all over Maine and they didn't pay us anything. Netflix's costs are more likely content and licensing.