I mean, this is quite fine in my opinion. 1080p is plenty of quality, and if you can afford a 4k display you can probably pony up for youtube premium. 4k is pretty much a "premium" content resolution anyway.
You can argue that it is a premium content feature and NetFlix would certainly agree. But today you can shoot 4k on a new mid-tier cellphone, or for even less money on an older used flagship phone, and edit 4k video on just about any used business laptop of the last 5-8 years. It feels weird to call this premium with how accessible creating 4k video is.
Personally, I'm more annoyed at their increase in ads recently than at this limitation. I don't know what the acceptable limit is, but 5-10 ads at the beginning is clearly way too many and much more of a problem. I really want reasonable competition. I don't consider Floatplane or Vimeo to be that competition.
You can, but you aren't really gaining any substantive clarity on a cellphone because the lens is the resolution limiter more than the sensor.
That's pretty much what I'm arguing, really. From a sensible viewing distance (8-10ft), 1080p and 2160p do not have huge differences in quality, and a lot of these TVs have some form of upscaling that achieves varying degrees of success in making lower-resolution content look better. Of course, it's not "4k" 4k, but I feel really this marginal gain is pretty much the perfect kind of thing to put behind a premium paywall.
> Personally, I'm more annoyed at their increase in ads recently than at this limitation.
Agreed, that is awful.
> Floatplane
is a competitor to Patreon if anything, in my opinion.
Vimeo is just too far behind to ever be serious competition.