dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
27243
share rss forum feed


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:22
reply to Eug

Re: Buy Blu-ray, to get Netflix SuperHD.

said by Eug:

Actually, a Blu-ray player is one of the best ways of getting Netflix SuperHD.

Plus Blu-ray players are cheap, actually even less expensive than stuff like Apple TV and other TV appliances, and of course will play Blu-ray as well as existing legacy DVDs. Win-win.

Not the best way. The cheapest way, perhaps, but the best way is still the PS3. There's also a chance that, if/when Netflix moves to h.265, the PS3 will still be able to handle it. The PS3 does all the decoding in software, while bluray players do it in hardware.

The downside of the PS3 is the cost. If you're only going to use it for media playback, it's rather expensive. I still believe it to be the best bluray/DVD/netflix player, and that's pretty much the only reason why I bought it (I prefer gaming on my 360), but I'll admit that the PS3 isn't the most affordable way to do so.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org

Eug

join:2007-04-14
Canada

PS3 not best solution for Netflix.

The other downside of the PS3 is lack of stackability (curved top), and the fact it has no IR support - not very friendly in general for Harmony remotes, unless you buy an adapter that costs almost as much as a whole Blu-ray player. The PS3 also use a ton more power. Even PS3 Slim uses several times more power.

H.265 is irrelevant at the moment. People can cross that bridge when they come to it.
--
Everything Apple



Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:22
reply to El Quintron

Re: Netflix Super HD/Open Connect

Stability? You should never stack anything on top of ANY STB. That's a terrible idea for cooling reasons, since they tend to have cooling vents on the top. So the curved top of the PS3 should be irrelevant.

The lack of IR support is annoying, but not critical. My Harmony remote works fine with it due to the overpriced adapter, but the PS3 bluray remote itself works fine.

The power usage is certainly true, but not necessarily a factor. At least not to me, since my rent includes electricity. The current PS3 is down to about 70 watts for playing a bluray, while dedicated players fall into the 15-25 range.

The PS3's upgradability has definitely mattered in the past. There have been three compatibility-breaking standards updates (profile 1.1, 2.0, and 5.0) so far which the PS3 got software upgrades for and existing hardware players were often SOL. The possibility of future upgrades with the PS3 remains stronger than dedicated hardware players.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org


Eug

join:2007-04-14
Canada

Stacking stuff like Bluray players is essentially never a problem because they use so little power. I almost wonder if Sony intentionally made the PS3 so you couldn't put anything on top of it, since it is such a power hog. The current PS3 still actually uses more power than an easy bake oven, and the initial PS3 used several times as much as an easy bake oven. Ouch.
--
Everything Apple



El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
·WIND Mobile

said by Eug:

The current PS3 still actually uses more power than an easy bake oven, and the initial PS3 used several times as much as an easy bake oven. Ouch.

Ouch indeed considering I still have a 20 GIG model, which is one of the originals...
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:22
reply to Eug

said by Eug:

Stacking stuff like Bluray players is essentially never a problem because they use so little power. I almost wonder if Sony intentionally made the PS3 so you couldn't put anything on top of it, since it is such a power hog. The current PS3 still actually uses more power than an easy bake oven, and the initial PS3 used several times as much as an easy bake oven. Ouch.

Stacking bluray players is stupid, because it prevents heat dissipation, and violates your warranty.

The Easy Bake oven contained a 100-watt lightbulb, while the PS3 uses 70 watts. The "ultimate" easy bake oven introduced in the US due to the incandescent lightbulb ban should use roughly the same amount of power, as it switched from a lightbulb to an actual heating element.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org


xxgg

join:2004-01-15

1 edit
reply to El Quintron

PS3 is currently on clearance sale at Futureshop for $179.

Priced like a higher end blu-ray player?

»www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/product/···3701en02

By the way,,, Super HD can't be played on Windows 7 machine? Seriously?

Windows 8 does seem to be optimal for HTPC tho~
»www.anandtech.com/show/6674/gett···d-more/3



Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:22
reply to El Quintron

Windows 7 can only use the browser app, which is Microsoft VC-1, while the Windows 8 Metro app presumably uses h.264 (the same encoded files as all their STB streams).
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org


graniterock

join:2003-03-14
London, ON
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to Eug

said by Eug:

Stacking stuff like Bluray players is essentially never a problem because they use so little power. I almost wonder if Sony intentionally made the PS3 so you couldn't put anything on top of it, since it is such a power hog. The current PS3 still actually uses more power than an easy bake oven, and the initial PS3 used several times as much as an easy bake oven. Ouch.

I find mine puts off enough heat after several hours of use that it could be converted to an easy bake oven if left in an enclosed space. I wouldn't want to stack my PS3 on top of or under another heat producing device.


nettles

@teksavvy.com
reply to Guspaz

Having recently bought a blu-ray player for Netflix, I can say it's a good option but not the best. I bought the blu-ray player in particular (Sony S590) because it has a web browser which most don't. However it proved to be useless because the browser did not support flash so no streaming. It does however include youtube (high quality not supported), Daily Motion, and a few other apps including NHL Gamecentre (don't give the NHL your $, spend it on hockeystreams).

The blu-ray player has a good wireless N capability and an ethernet connection as well. Our DVD player also broke and the PS3 is always downstairs so we needed something that could play bluray/DVD hence another reason we bought that.

If you don't need blu-ray/DVD playability then my best recommendation is to get a device that supports XBMC which can include certain streaming players and an HTPC which is a bit more expensive but worth it. The reason is that XBMC can support a Netflix plug-in but can ALSO support a regular Hulu plugin called Real Hulu which lets you get Hulu TV shows that aren't geoblocked. You don't even need this plug-in because there's a 1channel.ch and icefilms plug-in on XBMC along with many TV channels and foreign channel streams. Best way to cut the cable imo is to get an OTA antenna and find a way to connect XBMC. This is getting even easier to do now that Android supports XBMC though it's in beta and connecting android to your TV via something like android on a stick is less than $50. The technology for XBMC and Android on a TV is still developing so that's why I'd recommend getting an HTPC.


34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to Guspaz

said by Guspaz:

Windows 7 can only use the browser app, which is Microsoft VC-1, while the Windows 8 Metro app presumably uses h.264 (the same encoded files as all their STB streams).

Wonder how much they're getting from M$ to promote Win 8 like this.


mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5

said by 34764170:

said by Guspaz:

Windows 7 can only use the browser app, which is Microsoft VC-1, while the Windows 8 Metro app presumably uses h.264 (the same encoded files as all their STB streams).

Wonder how much they're getting from M$ to promote Win 8 like this.

Given they launched the platform on Silverlight, I'm guessing quite a bit. But I have to hand it to Netflix, their streaming platform is the best I've seen.

Eug

join:2007-04-14
Canada
reply to nettles

said by nettles :

Having recently bought a blu-ray player for Netflix, I can say it's a good option but not the best. I bought the blu-ray player in particular (Sony S590) because it has a web browser which most don't. However it proved to be useless because the browser did not support flash so no streaming. It does however include youtube (high quality not supported), Daily Motion, and a few other apps including NHL Gamecentre (don't give the NHL your $, spend it on hockeystreams).

Just to be clear, that statement about the browser doesn't have any relevance for Netflix, since Netflix uses a dedicated app on Blu-ray players.

If you don't need blu-ray/DVD playability then my best recommendation is to get a device that supports XBMC which can include certain streaming players and an HTPC which is a bit more expensive but worth it. The reason is that XBMC can support a Netflix plug-in but can ALSO support a regular Hulu plugin called Real Hulu which lets you get Hulu TV shows that aren't geoblocked.

I'm just running an Apple TV which includes both a Netflix app, and also with the jailbroken version, FireCore Media Player which plays basically everything. I haven't bothered installing XBMC but maybe I'll give it a shot if I can play non-geoblocked Hulu and other stuff.

You don't even need this plug-in because there's a 1channel.ch and icefilms plug-in on XBMC along with many TV channels and foreign channel streams. Best way to cut the cable imo is to get an OTA antenna and find a way to connect XBMC. This is getting even easier to do now that Android supports XBMC though it's in beta and connecting android to your TV via something like android on a stick is less than $50. The technology for XBMC and Android on a TV is still developing so that's why I'd recommend getting an HTPC.

I gave up on OTA because it would be unreliable in bad weather and at the time there didn't exist any viable standalone (non-HTPC) PVR solution. I don't know if that's still true, but haven't seen anything yet in a standalone box that would solve this problem.
--
Everything Apple

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to mlerner

said by mlerner:

said by 34764170:

said by Guspaz:

Windows 7 can only use the browser app, which is Microsoft VC-1, while the Windows 8 Metro app presumably uses h.264 (the same encoded files as all their STB streams).

Wonder how much they're getting from M$ to promote Win 8 like this.

Given they launched the platform on Silverlight, I'm guessing quite a bit. But I have to hand it to Netflix, their streaming platform is the best I've seen.

Silverlight supports H.264. So there is something else going on here. The fact that they're only supporting an OS that essentially no one has as opposed to what everyone else has is pretty ridiculous. I don't use Windows so I personally couldn't care less but this is a pretty big FU to their Windows using customers.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:22
reply to mlerner

said by mlerner:

Given they launched the platform on Silverlight, I'm guessing quite a bit. But I have to hand it to Netflix, their streaming platform is the best I've seen.

Or maybe you guys are paranoid, and it doesn't make sense for Netflix to support higher bitrates on the Silverlight client?

Think about it. Netflix has three encoding profiles, mobile, STB, and PC. The PC is a small minority among platforms; more Netflix users stream on the PS3 alone than the PC, and that's not taking into account all other mobile and STB devices.

SuperHD introduced three new bitrates. That means that they have to re-encode every single piece of HD content in their library to those three new bitrates (which takes time and money) and store the resulting extra tens (hundreds?) of terabytes of data. And they store their data on S3, where 100TB of content costs $78,000 a year just to store. The amount of SuperHD content on Netflix has been rapidly increasing as they transcode content, but what would YOU prioritize to come first? The STB h.264 profile that covers the vast majority of Netflix usage, or the PC VC-1 profile that covers a much smaller portion of users?

Face it, even if Netflix wanted to do SuperHD for the PC browser client, and even if they thought the extra cost for transcoding and storing was justified, they couldn't even do it until they finished transcoding everything for the STB profile.

Somehow, prudent business practice becomes an evil agenda where they've been bought off by Microsoft...
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

said by Guspaz:

said by mlerner:

Given they launched the platform on Silverlight, I'm guessing quite a bit. But I have to hand it to Netflix, their streaming platform is the best I've seen.

Or maybe you guys are paranoid, and it doesn't make sense for Netflix to support higher bitrates on the Silverlight client?

Think about it. Netflix has three encoding profiles, mobile, STB, and PC. The PC is a small minority among platforms; more Netflix users stream on the PS3 alone than the PC, and that's not taking into account all other mobile and STB devices.

SuperHD introduced three new bitrates. That means that they have to re-encode every single piece of HD content in their library to those three new bitrates (which takes time and money) and store the resulting extra tens (hundreds?) of terabytes of data. And they store their data on S3, where 100TB of content costs $78,000 a year just to store. The amount of SuperHD content on Netflix has been rapidly increasing as they transcode content, but what would YOU prioritize to come first? The STB h.264 profile that covers the vast majority of Netflix usage, or the PC VC-1 profile that covers a much smaller portion of users?

Face it, even if Netflix wanted to do SuperHD for the PC browser client, and even if they thought the extra cost for transcoding and storing was justified, they couldn't even do it until they finished transcoding everything for the STB profile.

Somehow, prudent business practice becomes an evil agenda where they've been bought off by Microsoft...

Ya, high bitrate content plays fine locally and for Blu-ray's but its magically an issue for the Netflix player. uh huh.

The STB encodings of the H.264 content could playback just fine on PCs.

It doesn't make sense to support a user base of something like 5% vs the other 95% of the user base for Windows.

vikingisson

join:2010-01-22
Mississauga, ON

I don't know how many of the "facts" are true or just speculation but in my house 100% of the Netflix users are on a pc browser. It won't be the first time a company has abandoned a platform and lost me as a client.



Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:22
reply to El Quintron

I'm operating under the assumption that the browser player will eventually get SuperHD bitrates... That there isn't some giant plot against Windows 7 users, and that there is a legitimate reason why they haven't done so already.

It's in Netflix' best interest to give their customers the best possible experience they can. They face strong competition.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org


34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

said by Guspaz:

I'm operating under the assumption that the browser player will eventually get SuperHD bitrates... That there isn't some giant plot against Windows 7 users, and that there is a legitimate reason why they haven't done so already.

It's in Netflix' best interest to give their customers the best possible experience they can.

I would hope so but either way it still looks bad on Netflix.

said by Guspaz:

They face strong competition.

If they do I haven't seen it.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:22
reply to El Quintron

Hulu Plus? Amazon Prime? iTunes? VOD services? Traditional television services? Rental stores? PVRs? IPTV startups? Aereo? Piracy? RedBox Instant? HBO's upcoming VOD service?
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org


34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

said by Guspaz:

Hulu Plus? Amazon Prime? iTunes? VOD services? Traditional television services? Rental stores? PVRs? IPTV startups? Aereo? Piracy? RedBox Instant? HBO's upcoming VOD service?

Depends on perspective..

A lot of these services lack hardware support which is where Netflix has done a great job. They might be fine if you're Ok sitting in front of a PC.

Some of these are limited in regional availability or limited by the ISP such as IPTV (.e.g. Zazeen).

VOD requires cable/IPTV.

Rental stores stores are not streaming, don't count.

So almost all of these are not competition for me.

I see you included piracy. I consider legal services as competition. Of course you could pirate practically everything.

Provide a service like Netflix with the good hardware support and widespread availability and I would consider that competition. RedBox Instant has the possibility of being that second option but they'll need to work on the hardware support, lot more content and of course actually being available here.

vikingisson

join:2010-01-22
Mississauga, ON
reply to El Quintron

I'll go along with all the numbers speculation and reasoning behind supporting or not supporting various platforms. I don't think the Flix has nearly the problem people think they do of being available on a software app vs one black box or another. It's all moot if they would simply allow proper apps on the multitude of media players such as XBMC, all the variants of XBMC, and all things technically capable. It costs them nothing to do it.

The classic examples are Boxee and SageTV. Both applications are dead after finally admitting that things such as Netflix will never be allowed. The PC and now even the smart phone is more capable than a black box for things like Netflix. It isn't a technical issue and it's not about a perceived small market segment.



Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:22
reply to El Quintron

Am I missing something? Boxee supports Netflix, and SageTV doesn't exist anymore...
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org


vikingisson

join:2010-01-22
Mississauga, ON

said by Guspaz:

Am I missing something? Boxee supports Netflix, and SageTV doesn't exist anymore...

Boxee the software app that runs Boxee *Box* doesn't exist anymore. That's an entire saga in itself.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

said by vikingisson:

Boxee the software app that runs Boxee *Box* doesn't exist anymore. That's an entire saga in itself.

No, it's Boxee the software that runs on Windows. It was out of their hands anyway.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to vikingisson

said by vikingisson:

I'll go along with all the numbers speculation and reasoning behind supporting or not supporting various platforms. I don't think the Flix has nearly the problem people think they do of being available on a software app vs one black box or another. It's all moot if they would simply allow proper apps on the multitude of media players such as XBMC, all the variants of XBMC, and all things technically capable. It costs them nothing to do it.

The classic examples are Boxee and SageTV. Both applications are dead after finally admitting that things such as Netflix will never be allowed. The PC and now even the smart phone is more capable than a black box for things like Netflix. It isn't a technical issue and it's not about a perceived small market segment.

It costs them developer time to develop the apps. That is not nothing. Go find some developers that will work for Netflix with no salary and see how that goes.

I don't care about a smart phone for Netflix and I don't want to sit in front of my PC to use Netflix. I don't use a smart phone as a media player. Then I would need two phones.


nettles

@teksavvy.com

So there's no way to access SuperHD with US Netflix correct? Just the Canadian one?

Also what annoys me is that you can't actually tell if the SuperHD video in Canadian netflix which you're watching is actually in SuperHD/1080p or whatever like you could with a TV signal.

If the internet speed for example slows down or struggles then I know that netflix automatically switches the feed to a lower quality one and it's hard to tell.

Anyways it'll take some time and I shouldn't complain too much. The fact that we have 1080p via streaming is pretty amazing even if it's not working the way we want now.


vikingisson

join:2010-01-22
Mississauga, ON

1 edit
reply to 34764170

said by 34764170:

It costs them developer time to develop the apps. That is not nothing. Go find some developers that will work for Netflix with no salary and see how that goes.

I don't care about a smart phone for Netflix and I don't want to sit in front of my PC to use Netflix. I don't use a smart phone as a media player. Then I would need two phones.

So Netflix is writing the dozens of apps on dozens of platforms now? I don't think so. They give out the spec and API and most importantly the blessing to actually work.

They do not and never will allow the same thing on a software media centre. Technically it is the same thing as every other black box where it does work except perhaps even easier.

Exactly what is the difference between you watching content from your PS3 or whatever box and me watching on my TV that happens to come from a PC? I've been doing it much longer than Boxee Box, XBOX, Roku, Blu Ray players, etc. it's the same thing, my remote control works just like yours and except for most of the bigger commercial providers such as Netflix I'm doing the same thing.

I agree that media consumption on a smart phone is more limited when it comes to video. But my pc as a media centre works just fine except that pay services won't play (actually they do work but I have to switch to a browser for example, pretty easy). The "developers" write hundreds of "apps" to access everything else, they'd be happy to write one to access Netflix if Netflix would let them.

vikingisson

join:2010-01-22
Mississauga, ON
reply to nettles

said by nettles :

So there's no way to access SuperHD with US Netflix correct? Just the Canadian one?

Also what annoys me is that you can't actually tell if the SuperHD video in Canadian netflix which you're watching is actually in SuperHD/1080p or whatever like you could with a TV signal.

If the internet speed for example slows down or struggles then I know that netflix automatically switches the feed to a lower quality one and it's hard to tell.

Anyways it'll take some time and I shouldn't complain too much. The fact that we have 1080p via streaming is pretty amazing even if it's not working the way we want now.

That's a different subject but yes you can watch Netflix in other markets. If SuperHD is available on your chosen box and in the market you want then sure, it can be done. Just not officially. Test it with a switchable VPN/proxy, it just isn't a topic for this thread.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:22
reply to nettles

said by nettles :

Also what annoys me is that you can't actually tell if the SuperHD video in Canadian netflix which you're watching is actually in SuperHD/1080p or whatever like you could with a TV signal.

You can. On the Windows 8 client, hit CTRL-ALT-SHIFT-S and check the bitrate you're streaming at (3000 was the old "HD", anything above that is the new bitrates, 5800 being the highest). On the PS3, hit the Info button on your remote (if you're using a PS3 remote), or one of the other buttons on the PS3 controller if you use that. That doesn't show you the bitrate, but it does say what quality it's streaming in a text description like "Medium/SD" or "High/SD". Many other Netflix streaming devices also let you see the current quality level.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org