I just dont like cases and take the risk. Phones are nicer looking without.
No doubt, but I don’t have that kind of cash to burn on the aesthetics.
Neither is a good split, he is charging as much as spotify for content he did not create and keeping half.
Hosting and maintaining an application actually has some pretty non-trivial cost associated with it. If it’s half of revenue, then MKBHD actually isn’t taking very much at all.
I dont know what the sticky hands comment means.
I’m not brave enough to use my phone without a case, because I know I’ll drop it. Either you’re braver than me, richer than me, or you have better grip than me.
Fifty fifty is what MKB said was the split, which is a predatory figure.
50% of the revenue or 50% of the profit? Because if they’re paying the artists first and footing the bill for hosting the app out of the other 50%, that’s a pretty good deal.
There are a lot of people walking around with cracked screens who would seem to disagree.
Im not rich and I use my phone without a case
I guess you could also have fairly sticky hands.
and watch some of those reviews.
Yeah, sometimes I do too, if only for the novelty of it. But they’re certainly not for us.
The app is a bad idea with a bad deal for artists.
Citation needed. Do you have any data on the app’s profit share structure? Because at the price they’re charging, if they’re passing on a decent share of it to the artists, it sounds like it’s not a bad gig.
There’s also this infamous story. And also this one. I recognize that anecdote is not the singular of data, but there’s a pretty substantial paper trail on Fiverr.
Marques has a decent chunk of his fan base that’s…kinda rich? That’s the only thing that can explain why he reviews supercars and expects people to use their phone without a case. So if he’s directing some of that fan base’s money toward artists, I’m all for it, assuming the profit sharing is reasonable (and I have no reason to believe it’s not).
I mean, I’m not going to pay that sort of money on a wallpaper (I almost always use photos of family or friends anyway). But if the people who buy it like it, and the people who sell art for it are treated well, you go MKBHD.
Fiverr is the worst. They enable abusive clients to find victims, and AI con artists to find marks.
They have to maintain backwards compatibility for 40+ year old applications so that they don’t lose big corporate and government customers, but they also have to chase the newest trends in order to keep their shareholders happy. They built their business on selling their software, but most of their competitors are giving functionally-equivalent programs away for free. Their software runs without incident on literally billions of devices for decades, but one or two high-visibility bugs or design missteps and public perception of their brand totally tanks.
And so, their business model sucks. Moving Windows to become a data-harvesting SaaS was a terrible choice, their pivot to AI is going to crash and burn, and rent seeking software subscriptions are a scourge.
But I think they’re just too big and too vertically integrated to actually be any better at this point. I just don’t think it’s possible for their executive team to make good decisions anymore, not because they’re dumb, but because the good decisions literally don’t exist. It’s like a black hole, where the closer you get to the event horizon, the more possible paths point toward the singularity; likewise, the bigger Microsoft gets, the more possible decisions point toward “devastatingly bad.” They honestly should have been split up 25 years ago; for the industry’s sake and for their own.
Yeah, I’ve been trying to make a switch over to Linux for a lot of reasons, but honestly Paint.NET is the one thing that keeps me tethered to Windows that I’m not super grumpy about (Adobe also keeps me tethered to Windows, but that makes me angry every time I think about it).
If *Nix has a decent image editor with layers that isn’t super over-engineered like GIMP is, I haven’t heard of it yet. Maybe that’s all become web-based.
Yeah, I still use it too, almost weekly.
I don’t think so. He just said that he had evaluated it and it wasn’t a good fit for the application. I remembered it was in our Popular Feature Requests thread, and I looked back and (crazy enough) it’s still there.
Ahh, right. I’ve made the classic mistake of thinking my usage was normative.
Interesting. We don’t upload many pictures, either; though admittedly I hadn’t thought about it, and that probably doubles my total.
I’ll have to check my math again. But are people uploading more than that? On my friend server, with 50 people, we’ve had about a dozen uploads all year, and they’re all pretty small PDFs and images. Everything else is rich links.
“Storage management is expensive”
It’s really not, though.
//////
ETA: I stick by my premise and my conclusion (storage management isn’t expensive, and it’s probably a Nitro thing), but my math may be wrong and my usage is apparently not normative. The costs are probably not so negligible, but I would still assume they aren’t as low as they want us to think.
/////
Discord has 200,000,000 MAU. If every single one of them uploaded a file every month (of pretty much any size) and Discord tossed it into an AWS S3 IA bucket, it would cost them $500 to store that data. Their total S3 bill for storage would be five hundred US dollars. Storage is dirt cheap. AWS doesn’t even charge per gigabyte on that storage type, it’s so cheap; they charge for downloads.
So, ok. Let’s talk downloads. If each of those files were 25GB and downloaded twice (probably an underestimate, but not everyone is uploading files, so I’m going to make the completely unfounded assumption that it’ll all shake out), it would cost them a couple hundred thousand dollars. Which, ok, that’s much more significant than $500. But Discord made $575 million last year—so the S3 download costs would be 0.03% of their total revenue. They probably spend 2-3 times more on coffee.
Storage management is emphatically not expensive.
My guess? They just saw that the higher upload limit was eating into their Nitro subscriptions.
I think the bigger issue is that IP rights can be held by corporations at all. Yes, it should be shorter, but it should also only be able to be owned by individuals.
Copyright and patents, at least. I guess trademarks make sense to be owned by companies.
“Well yes, but actually no”
Yeah, that’s pretty standard for the Y, but that’s the cost for everything–weights, track, courts, swimming pools, most classes, personal training, childcare. As opposed to Peloton, which is $50 for just the spinning class.
Yep. The “always open in container tab” gets a little fidgety because Reddit uses a whole bunch of different domains (some of which it only flips to for an instant while redirecting elsewhere), so it takes a bit of work, but I’ve been able to successfully silo off Reddit, Xwitter, Meta, etc. into their own distinct containers that are independent of everything else I do.