[rgbrgb]

Netflix seems good at not destroying their product... though inherently the vision is kind of a scaled distraction machine.

I agree with the thrust of your comment and wonder how we might get there. Software companies did look more like you describe in the past, and a few like (some parts of) Apple and some game companies still do. Mostly these are companies that ship a chunk of finished software rather than a "service" -- a big release once a year, little post-hoc tracking and engagement optimization. I think there's fundamentally an incentive problem with most (all?) free-to-use software services. If revenue directly correlates to engagement time it's really hard to avoid this trap because it's a very rational path to go down to optimize the business.

[wilsonnb3]

Netflix has a fair amount of BS that has been accumulating for a while.

Refuses to put the categories in a consistent order, even things like "my list" and "continue watching" move around in the UI.

Categories available for you to browse also change randomly.

Autoplay while browsing and autoplay of other content when you finish a show or movie.

Images used in show/movie thumbnails are different for different users based on what they think you are likely to click on.

Mobile app has a tiktok style feed for comedy shows. I believe they are also testing or have already rolled out a tiktok style feed for kids Netflix.

HBO is happy to show me an alphabetical list of all of their content but Netflix will not.

[Gigachad]

Netflix isn't the worst but their site does have some annoyances. After I finish watching something, I have to close the tab as fast as possible because there is no possible way to have the tab open without it auto playing annoying clips with sound. Everything has a hover effect with sound.

[rightbyte]

Netflix has started to hide away "continue watching" for their algo feed crap for me.

[SrslyJosh]

Netflix on AppleTV has done this for a long time, and it sucks. =(

[afterburner]

Netflix, in it's early years, actually had a really good recommendation engine.

But then they figured out there's more money in not just giving you what you'll like best.

[pixelrevision]

It was a really really good one, but I think it has more to do with the shift in business model than anything. When they initially set it up they had you rate almost any content in the world that was available and could recommend that because it was just dvds. Now they have to license any content they stream and are making their own content.

I’d love to pay a small monthly for an app that just used their old recommendations engine. I’m guessing there is not a large enough market for that sort of thing to offset the costs of you leaving their ecosystem.

[kleer001]

> Netflix seems good at not destroying their product.

So far.

I see them frequently flirting with BS tangential solutions to problems that the user doesn't care about. Like, they're hosting games on the phone app now? No thanks. And I'm counting the days until the "play something" button goes away.

[daxfohl]

Netflix isn't free.

[quadrangle]

Neither is Instagram. But you just mean that Netflix uses a paywall model whereas Instagram uses a pay-with-attention-to-ads.

[daxfohl]

I mean the old adage "if something is free then you're the product". For Netflix you're the customer, for Instagram you're the product.

[quadrangle]

I understand, and that's what I meant. However, we need to get past that adage. It suggests to people that we can't have actually free things ever. But there are tons of examples of things that really are free from natural resources that are abundant to the sorts of software that are trivial enough for some volunteers to make and distribute without compromises.

In other words, we can pay with money or by allowing ourselves to be monetized (via attention to ads or other manipulations and invasiveness) *OR* we can actually have things be free. There's negligible cost to enjoying Mozart or Mark Twain, and a few orders of magnitude more stuff could be public domain if that status weren't sabotaged to support our cancerous growth-forever economic model.

Anyway, I agree with you completely about Netflix vs Instagram. And while Instagram can be described as pay-with-attention-to-ads, it's definitely valid to see it as most users are the product for the actual paying customers (the advertisers). The reason I like the "pay-with-attention" framing is to prompt everyone to always be asking "how am I paying?" and sometimes the answer is "I'm not, it's actually free, no catch" as that opens more options to consider than the binary "am I the customer or the product?"