Difference though is that although video creators are not paying youtube, they are the reason people bother to show up and watch ads there in the first place.
Of course this shifts incentives a lot but it gives you some ground to be legitimately angry.
Right, YouTube buys and sells human attention. I imagine they did a cost/benefit analysis and feel like this change is a net positive for that business.
If users were paying for video hosting with specific features, then legacy support would likely be a higher priority. Different customer, different concerns.
That's not really a matching analogy. YouTube doesn't just store videos, YouTube promotes videos via its algorithm and it monetises them, giving you a kickback on any ads you let it place on them. It's not in the "video hosting business", yes, but that doesn't mean it's not a business.
Content creators aren't the customer, they're more like contractors.
https://xkcd.com/1150/