YouTube Premium and Music Surpass 50 Million Subscribers

[Muzzakus]

The ad free youtube experience with the music sub is a potent value add. It’s where I’m at.

 

[adib]

It's actually money well spent, and especially so if you have children.

YouTube content is so much better nowadays than anything on TV.

... The "best ones" are much better than broadcast TV, agreed.

But then there are the "worst ones" that are worst than broadcast TV.

All in all, I wouldn't recommend allowing non-adults to watch YouTube without constant adult supervision. The possibility to get addicted to some of the crap content of YouTube tend to outweigh the good ones.

At least Netflix and TV+ tend to control the quality variance to some extent.

 

[Sooby]

I've been a subscriber for quite a while and I love it. Youtube is so much more enjoyable without ads and Youtube Music is pretty good. However, I am hoping that Google will upgrade Youtube Music to lossless audio quality sometime in the near future.

 

[wigby]

I gave in late last year and did the 30 day free trial. FISHED IN. I now practically live in YouTube. It's the best $11.99 I spend a month. If I could have only one streaming service, it would be YouTube. Not even a contest. Nobody's more surprised than me, trust me.

All streaming services have access to the same catalogs. The only differentiator is how much they pay out to artists. Only Napster and Pandora pay out less than YouTube Music.

 

[Uofmtiger]

I have subscribed to YouTube Premium for a while. I only used Google Music a few times. I haven’t even tried it since it changed to YouTube music. I would like to know the number of song plays a month vs the competition. My guess is that it isn’t close. YouTube video is the attraction for most.

 

[adib]

All streaming services have access to the same catalogs. The only differentiator is how much they pay out to artists. Only Napster and Pandora pay out less than YouTube Music.

Incorrect. There are music titles that are available in Spotify but not in Apple Music and vice-versa.

 

[Steeley]

I'd be interested to know how many "honorary Indians" they have on their books 😝

 

[ds2000]

Why do people still not understand the majority of people watch YouTube on their phones, tablets and TVs where the option to block ads doesn’t exist.

I watch youtube on my phone via the brave browser = no ads.

 

[Tech198]

I'll never understand why people subscribe to services instead of buying products. I suppose it's a matter of accepting whatever the neighbour does, because if people used their minds instead of looking at the neighbour, this youtube service would have got below a dozen subscribers, and the transition from products to services wouldn't have happened. It's sad, because the right to own things might have its days numbered, considering how easy has been to fool people.

But it's convenient.... and cheaper... I guess when you have both covered for people, they don't really mind that much when their music gets snatched away.

 

[wigby]

Incorrect. There are music titles that are available in Spotify but not in Apple Music and vice-versa.

Correct but you're missing the point. Contracts change and exclusives come and go so it's impossible for any catalogs to be identical at any given time. 70 million songs in Apple Music and 70 million songs in Spotify. No one cares beyond that unless they need a specific album or track but then why wouldn't you just buy it if you care that much about a specific piece of music?

 

[bwillwall]

YouTube will never get my money no matter how good of a service they make.

 

[asiga]

[...] Some products are still worth having, [...]

This sentence, the fact that you say "are still" instead of just "are", just proves the truth of my point: that we are moving from a model of owning things to a new model in which nobody will own anything. Ownership will cease to exist for everything. And that will be bad, very bad, to Humankind (in fact, if we survive that point, it will need to be undone because freedom without ownership is not possible, but the cost to undo it will be high, very high, and quite likely very long... blood, sweat, and tears).

You can say that your words "are still" were just a slip... yeah, it's a slip, but very telling nonetheless, because it says what everybody actually thinks about this.

 

[ericwn]

This sentence, the fact that you say "are still" instead of just "are", just proves the truth of my point: that we are moving from a model of owning things to a new model in which nobody will own anything. Ownership will cease to exist for everything. And that will be bad, very bad, to Humankind (in fact, if we survive that point, it will need to be undone because freedom without ownership is not possible, but the cost to undo it will be high, very high, and quite likely very long... blood, sweat, and tears).

You can say that your words "are still" were just a slip... yeah, it's a slip, but very telling nonetheless, because it says what everybody actually thinks about this.

The concept of ownership exists to this day. But as explained multiple times over, people don’t want to own certain kinds of media anymore.

 

[Adam-Jobs]

Same boat. YouTube with their ads became ridiculous, didn’t mind a couple. I’ve since signed up to premium via a VPN. £0.80p a month. Can’t argue.

 

[N1noodle]

Proper operating systems allow more effective adblocks.

How do you mean ?

 

[N1noodle]

I would pay for non ads if the cost was less, dont need youtube music or youtube orginal shows.

Hopefully they will release a sub lite or something

 

[ecatomb]

If you have youtube music, the premium price is more than 3x cheaper than the premium lite one... and with more option... So strange