| reply to tiger72
Re: It's about time! said by tiger72:I've always hoped that this (or something similar) would come out. Didn't Netflix just come out with the Roku box that does the same thing? And you wouldn't have to pay a monthly fee to MS as well as Netflix. Just pay the regular monthly Netflix subscription and you get their movie streaming for free as part of their regular DVD deliver to the home service. The only cost would be the 1 time fee of $100 for the Roku box.
»blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/05/r···net.html
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? |
|
 tiger72SexaT duorPPremium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1
 ·T-Mobile US
| said by fAcEtIOUs:said by tiger72:I've always hoped that this (or something similar) would come out. Didn't Netflix just come out with the Roku box that does the same thing? And you wouldn't have to pay a monthly fee to MS as well as Netflix. Just pay the regular monthly Netflix subscription and you get their movie streaming for free as part of their regular DVD deliver to the home service. The only cost would be the 1 time fee of $100 for the Roku box. » blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/05/r···net.html The problem there is value. That Roku box only does netflix. If something happens to netflix, let's say they merge with another online retailer and their codecs, etc.. change, the Roku will be useless. The 360 however can just update to move with the times, or just move to another carrier.
The XBL subscription is something that provides more than just the Netflix streaming (namely my Rock Band and GTA IV multiplayer).
So, while the Roku unit has been out for streaming netflix to TVs, being a one-trick pony it provides little value to me.
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara |
|
| It would be most valuable to those who already have a regular Netflix subscription and can now get the new streaming service for that one time $100 fee. Especially if you don't already have a Xbox.
|
|
|
|
xargs
join:2000-08-25
Camarillo, CA | reply to tiger72
said by tiger72:The problem there is value. That Roku box only does netflix. Roku is talking to other content providers. They don't have an exclusive agreement with Netflix. |
|
pandoraPremium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·ooma
·Google Voice
·Future Nine Corp..
 ·Comcast
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
DirecTV provides free and fee video streaming with their newer high definition DVR's. The problem with these services is going to be one of internet caps by providers. TWC, Verizon, Comcast, AT&T all provide high speed internet and have their own entertainment offerings over ethernet that they want to push.
Do incumbent internet providers really want to let Microsoft, Sony, Blockbuster, NetFlix, DirecTV or any other provider to ride their service free and provide competing entertainment content?
--
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." |
|
| reply to xargs
said by xargs:said by tiger72:The problem there is value. That Roku box only does netflix. Roku is talking to other content providers. They don't have an exclusive agreement with Netflix. Nor does Netflix have an exclusive with Roku.
Good to see there are other boxes.
I love Netflix streaming. It actually works 100%, even on 768k DSL, and it never gives me BSOD or reboots or any of the usual video / DRM / windows / usb nonsense.
The library is fairly spartan at 10,000 titles, but it provides me with more than I could ever desire to watch.
I'm optimistic that Netflix will figure a way to deal with the licensing for the rest of the titles.
We'll need Netflix, Blockbuster Online, Amazon and Google's combined legal pocketbooks to fight against unreasonable caps. Otherwise, online delivery will go the way of DAT, DCC, Personics, Divx, Beta...
Lets hope Microsoft doesn't find a way to ruin a good thing. |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to pandora
said by pandora:Do incumbent internet providers really want to let Microsoft, Sony, Blockbuster, NetFlix, DirecTV or any other provider to ride their service free and provide competing entertainment content? Where do you get this "Free" idea from? Last I checked, my connection isn't free... This type of service is *exactly* why I pay for broadband in the first place. The people who provide these video services pay for the bandwidth, and we, the users, PAY the incumbents for access just for this type of content. They are plenty compensated.... The idea that "Hey they shouldn't be able to use our network for their stuff" is something right out of at&t's playbook.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
pandoraPremium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:1 Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Future Nine Corp..
·Comcast
| said by KrK:Where do you get this "Free" idea from? Last I checked, my connection isn't free... Free as in free to - Microsoft, Sony, Blockbuster, NetFlix, DirecTV or any other provider.
--
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| said by pandora:Free as in free to - Microsoft, Sony, Blockbuster, NetFlix, DirecTV or any other provider. Why do you think they get it free? Their bandwidth bills are enormous. |
|
pandoraPremium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:1 Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Future Nine Corp..
·Comcast
| said by KrK:Why do you think they get it free? Their bandwidth bills are enormous. I think we are talking over each other. Microsoft, Sony, Blockbuster, NetFlix, DirecTV or any other internet entertainment providers business plan is to have customers with high speed internet. This is assumed as part of their plan and at no cost to them. My point is entertainment content providers who are also broadband providers may not wish to facilitate business plans that detract from their own entertainment offerings. Which is why I suspect we are seeing so much discussion of caps.
--
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." |
|
| Of course, which is complete bull when it comes to a utility that is a natural oligarchy. Content provision shouldn't be allowed to become a similar monopoly simply b/c the guy who operates the toll road [of which there is naturally a limited number of] wants to start his own trucking business. |
|
pandoraPremium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:1 Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Future Nine Corp..
·Comcast
| I tend to agree, we are provided a broadband pipe to use for internet access and should be able to use it as we please. At the same time, there is a bunch of free HD content available on my DVR's that I am concerned about downloading. It may push me over the cap if I do more than a very few on a single DVR.
It's nice that internet use is expanding to include safe, pre-paid / free videos for display on TV sets or PC's, eventually Congress may need to mediate if the caps are set too low. Internet evolution is in my opinion a good thing. I am so happy to see all the free content available on my DVR's available from Internet servers.
--
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to pandora
said by pandora:My point is entertainment content providers who are also broadband providers may not wish to facilitate business plans that detract from their own entertainment offerings. Which is why I suspect we are seeing so much discussion of caps. Yes, exactly. It's not because of a Network management issue, it's a anti-competitive move. (IE protect our Video offerings from Internet competition by hamstringing our customers.)
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
