 GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:20 | 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 |
|
|
|
| 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 |
|
GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:20 | 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 |
|
| 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 QuintronResident Mouth BreatherPremium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:2
 ·TekSavvy DSL
 ·WIND Mobile
 ·voip.ms
| 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 |
|
GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:20 | 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 |
|
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 |
|
GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:20 | 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 |
|
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
 ·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
| 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. |
|
| 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 $50. The technology for XBMC and Android on a TV is still developing so that's why I'd recommend getting an HTPC. |
|
brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | reply to Guspaz
said by Guspaz:Windows 7 can only use the browser app, which is Microsoft VC-1, while the Windows 8 Metro app presumably uses h.264 (the same encoded files as all their STB streams).
Wonder how much they're getting from M$ to promote Win 8 like this. |
|
 mlernerPremium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5 | said by brad: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. |
|
| 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.
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 $50. The technology for XBMC and Android on a TV is still developing so that's why I'd recommend getting an HTPC.
--
Everything Apple |
|
brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | reply to mlerner
said by mlerner:said by brad:said by Guspaz:Windows 7 can only use the browser app, which is Microsoft VC-1, while the Windows 8 Metro app presumably uses h.264 (the same encoded files as all their STB streams).
Wonder how much they're getting from M$ 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. |
|
GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:20 | 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 |
|
brad
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. |
|
| 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. |
|
GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:20 | 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 |
|
brad
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. |
|
GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:20 | 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 |
|
