And in the current condition of streaming video, it's a service problem AND a pricing problem. If there was a single service that had nearly every title available, that service could maybe be worth 30-40 ish a month. But instead now if you want access to all titles you have to subscribe to a ton of separate services, never know where to find what you're looking for, and would have to pay around a hundred bucks a month. So instead i pirate, where the cost is zero dollars a month and everything is always located in the same place.

[–] dauerstaender@feddit.de 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Imagine paying to not own something and then being unable to watch because your device is unsupported. Whatever that means for a current web browser…

[–] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 11 points 7 months ago

I'm in favor of being able to pay to access a library containing 99% of titles in existence, even though i don't "own" permanent access to them. If i had to pay a higher price to "own" each individual title then i would have access to VASTLY less media. But for that monthly payment it must offer access to 99% of titles in existence, and the price must be reasonable for the amount of entertainment value i actually derive from it. Spotify is a perfect example of a 99% complete library at a reasonable price. And yeah as you point out, the service must be available on all devices, like Spotify is.