A vidyo.ai review, written by a rival, starting with the name change
The product you are searching for still exists and is called something else now. Here is what it does, what it charges in, the four things it does that we do not, and who each of the two suits.
A direct competitor — not an adjacent one, the same job
InTheClips turns long recordings into short clips, which is exactly what vidyo.ai was built to do. This is not a review from a tool that happens to do the other half of the work; it is a review from a rival, and that is a reason to read it sceptically rather than a reason to close it.
There is no affiliate link on this page and no tracked link. That is worth saying plainly here, because they run a public affiliate programme — so some of what you find written about this product was written by people who are paid when you sign up, and how much of it, nobody has counted. Nothing on this page earns us anything whichever way you go.
Everything said below about their product is structural — what it is, what it meters, what it connects to — and was read from their own public pages on 22 August 2026. The section on where they are ahead of us comes before any argument for us, because on a page like this it is the only part that shows the rest was written honestly.
vidyo.ai is now quso.ai, and the account came with it
If you searched for vidyo ai and landed on a different name, nothing has gone wrong. The product was renamed quso.ai in January 2025 and the old address now redirects there. Their own page about the change says the plan, the credits, the billing and every project made under the old name are all where they were left — and that the vidyo.ai login works at the new address with the same email and password.
Underneath the name, it is an AI clipper. A long recording goes in; the model marks the moments it rates highest, reframes them vertically, captions them and hands back short clips ready to post. That is our job description as well, which is the reason this page is careful with its adjectives.
What changed with the name was the size of the thing. The clipper is now one module inside a wider platform: a scheduler and posting calendar, an AI content planner, analytics, a brand kit for fonts, colours and logos, and a subtitle tool with a page per language. Their site puts the user count in the millions. If you have been away since the old name, that breadth is the difference you will notice first.
This is the competitor closest to us in intent, so the list of what it does better is the one worth reading twice — and none of these four is on our roadmap.
It posts the clip for you
Publishing and scheduling to TikTok, Instagram Reels, YouTube Shorts, LinkedIn, Facebook and X are part of the product, run from a single calendar. We do not do this at all: no account anywhere is connected to InTheClips, and the way out of our product is an MP4 you post yourself. If the last mile is what eats your week, that is a real reason to prefer theirs, and nothing on our side offsets it.
It takes video from far more places
Their own site lists YouTube, Vimeo, X, Facebook, Twitch, Rumble, Loom, LinkedIn and Zoom as addresses it will pull a video from, alongside Google Drive, Dropbox and ordinary file uploads. Ours takes a YouTube address or an uploaded file and no other source, so a Zoom archive or a shared folder means fetching a file yourself in order to hand it over. Breadth of intake is the part of this category we have not matched.
It captions in fifty-plus languages
Word-level animated captions with filler-word removal, and a subtitle generator across a list of languages long enough to have a page each. Ours transcribes in over thirty languages and times the captions in the language that was actually spoken, and there it stops: no translated track, no dubbing, no gallery of video templates, no brand kit, no logo layer, and no placing a caption block wherever you want it on the frame.
Its free tier comes back every month
Their pricing page gives the free plan 75 credits a month — roughly 75 minutes of video — at 720p, with a short data-retention window. Ours is thirty minutes of source, granted once, no card, and it does not renew. For anybody who wants to keep testing across several weeks before paying, theirs is plainly the better arrangement.
Who it fits, plainly
Three descriptions. If one of them is you, the rest of this page is background rather than a recommendation.
You want posts, not files
The clip, the caption, the calendar and the numbers afterwards, in one tab. If your bottleneck is getting things out on six platforms rather than deciding what to put on them, this is the shape of tool that fixes it.
Your footage lives all over the place
A Zoom recording, a shared folder, an old Twitch archive, a Loom. Handing a tool an address instead of a downloaded file is worth more than it sounds once it is a weekly habit, and they accept far more of them than we do.
You publish in more than one language
Captions and subtitles across a long list of languages are a first-class part of the product rather than an export setting. If half your audience reads rather than listens, that is not a nicety.
The unit is a credit, and a credit is about a minute of video
Their plans are metered in credits, and their own pricing page defines one as roughly a minute of processed video. A search for vidyo ai pricing wants a number, and the number is theirs to publish: it is on their pricing page, it moves, and this site does not copy a competitor’s prices, because one transcribed here is wrong the day they change it. The unit is what you can plan against.
What matters more than the rate is what draws on the pool. By their own description, clipping, captioning and editing all come out of the same monthly credits. So the allowance is not simply the length of the recordings you read — it also covers the work you do to them afterwards. Whether a second pass over a clip you have already made spends the allowance again is the question to put to them before you subscribe, because it is the difference between a fixed cost per recording and a variable one.
Ours draws on one pool too now, which makes the real difference easier to see. InTheClips meters credits as well — 240 a month on Starter at $19 (4 hours of source), 660 on Creator at $49 (11 hours), 1,620 on Studio at $99 (27 hours), with a year costing eight months. One credit pays for a minute analysed; three pay for a clip exported past a generous included batch, and a caption change costs nothing. That is the same shape as theirs — one pool spent on more than one thing — so what actually differs is what draws on it: theirs charges editing as well as clipping and captioning, ours does not.
vidyo.ai against Opus Clip, and the question underneath it
They are the two broadest auto-clippers in the category. vidyo ai vs opus clip is a search of its own, and it is a fair fight: both take a long recording and return finished, captioned, vertical clips with a score on each, both publish to connected accounts, and both accept video from a list of sources longer than ours. Choosing between them is mostly a question of which surrounding platform you want — a posting calendar, planner and analytics on one side; templates, brand work and the longer track record on the other.
We have written about the other half of that question already. Our Opus Clip review is built the same way as this one, by the same interested party, with the good parts first. The alternatives page beside it sets out what actually changes if you move away from that shape of tool. Between them they cover the Opus Clip side better than a paragraph here could, and they will not tell you anything this page has not already admitted about who wrote them.
The third answer is that neither may be what you are choosing between. If the hard part of your week is getting clips published, one of those two is the answer and this page has now said so twice. If the hard part is deciding which forty seconds of two hours deserves anybody’s attention, the field is narrower: we hand back a ranked list of candidates before anything is cut, and nothing is posted anywhere on your behalf, ever.
Where the two products differ in shape
Included because you are on our site and it would be odd to pretend otherwise. Sentences rather than ticks, and a difference of shape rather than a scoreboard.
| What differs | InTheClips | quso.ai (formerly vidyo.ai) |
|---|---|---|
| What arrives first | A ranked list of candidates — four pillar scores, timecodes and the sentences each was drawn from. Nothing is rendered until you approve it. | Finished clips, reframed and captioned, each carrying a virality score. |
| What the score tells you | Hook, flow, value and travel scored separately, beside the transcript they came from, plus a cold-read pass that flags a cut you cannot follow without context. | A single composite figure between 75 and 99, built from four categories their help centre describes. |
| What is metered | One credit balance, spent on minutes analysed or on a clip exported past a generous included batch. Changing a caption means re-exporting, and that is an export like any other. | Credits — roughly a minute of processed video by their own definition — drawn by clipping, captioning and editing alike. |
| Ways in | A YouTube address, or a file you upload up to 8 GB in mp4, mov, mkv or webm. You confirm the video is yours to use before an import starts, and link imports are capped by the day; uploads are not. | A much longer list of sources by address, named on their own site, plus uploads. |
| Getting it posted | It hands you the MP4 and stops. No account anywhere is connected to it. | Scheduling and publishing to six platforms from one calendar, as part of the product. |
| The free tier | Thirty minutes of source, once, no card, and it does not come back. Its exports carry a small mark; the paid plans do not. | A monthly free plan of 75 credits at 720p by their pricing page, which refreshes. |
Read from their own public pages on 22 August 2026. Anything that has changed since is theirs to state and not ours to guess at — check the two rows that matter to you before you pay for either. Their column is from quso.ai (formerly vidyo.ai)’s own public description of the product, read on ; ours is from the code that runs this one.
Four questions, and they are about this whole category
Not about one product. Every one of them can be answered before the first charge rather than after the second, and every one of them applies to us as well.
Work out what the unit buys you
Credits, processing minutes, export minutes and clip counts are four different units, and two tools quoting the same figure are usually not measuring the same thing. Convert whichever it is into hours of your own footage before you compare anything.
Ask what a second pass costs
Where editing draws on the same pool as clipping, re-doing a clip is not free. Whether a re-caption or a re-cut spends the allowance again is a one-line answer from support, and it changes the arithmetic more than the headline rate does.
Ask whether a renewal is announced
A charge that arrives with no warning is the most common complaint written about subscriptions in this category. The question is simply whether an email goes out before the money moves. Ours does not yet, and a page telling you to ask owes you that.
Read the recent reviews by date
Sort the public review sites and the Product Hunt page by newest and read the low-scoring entries in full. On a product that has changed its name, older reviews may be describing software that no longer exists — which cuts both ways, and is a reason to read them by date rather than to skip them. We are not going to characterise what you will find.
Questions
What this search is usually standing in for.
Is vidyo.ai still around?
Yes, under another name. It was renamed quso.ai in January 2025 and the old address redirects there. Their own page about the change says accounts, plans, credits and past projects carried over untouched. If you remember the tool from a year or two ago, what you remember is now one module inside a wider social platform.
Where is the vidyo ai login now?
At their new address rather than the old one. Their rebrand page says the same email and password still work and that nothing about the account changed. We are a competitor with no view into their systems, so if a sign-in fails, their support is the only place that can help — and this page has no login of theirs to send you to.
Is vidyo ai free actually usable?
Their pricing page gives the free plan 75 credits a month, which is about 75 minutes of video, exported at 720p and kept for a short retention window. That renews, which ours does not: we give thirty minutes of source once, with no card, and it does not come back. Whether a free export carries a mark is the one thing worth confirming on their page on the day you sign up, because reviews written under the old name disagree with each other about it. Ours marks trial exports and no paid plan.
vidyo ai vs opus clip — which one?
Close enough that the honest answer is to put one real recording through both free tiers and compare what comes back rather than what is claimed. Broadly: Opus Clip has the longer record and the deeper template and brand work, quso.ai wraps the clipper in a scheduler, a planner and analytics. Both will show you their answer on your own footage for nothing, which is worth more than either of our opinions.
What does it cost?
Their tiers are on their own pricing page and this site does not copy a competitor’s prices, because one written here is wrong the day it changes. What is worth understanding before you look is the unit: a credit, defined by them as roughly a minute of processed video, and drawn by clipping, captioning and editing alike. Count the hours of recording you put through a tool in a month, then add the editing you do afterwards.
Does it post the clips for me?
Theirs does — scheduling and publishing to six platforms is part of what you are buying. Ours does not: no account is connected to InTheClips, and the MP4 in your library is where our part ends. If that single difference decides it for you, this page has already told you which way to go.
Is this review biased?
Yes, and it says so at the top rather than in a footer. This is a direct competitor rather than an adjacent one, which makes this the version of the page most worth distrusting. Use the structural claims — what it meters, what it connects to, what it accepts — because all of them are checkable on their own site in about two minutes. Distrust every adjective, ours first.
The rest of the reading
The other product in this comparison, and the wider field.
