| reply to Dominnanaimo
Re: Shaw no support new Super HD from Netflix, boo! Everything I see, seems to be about saving Netflix money.
Peer with the bigger ISPs, so that Netflix doesn't have to pay transit moving their data - and this won't necessarly help with poor quality due to poor speeds/congestion.
I'm courious how Netflix got into the Peering centers, and how many HD streaming customers it will take to saturate their connection.
--
Yes, I am not employed and looking for IT work. Have passport, will travel. |
|
|
|
| I can see why it would be unfair for Shaw to degrade a competing video product. That is obvious. I'm not sure what the financial incentive would be for them to help improve netflix? :P |
|
| »signup.netflix.com/superhd
Your Internet Provider is ready for Super HD!
Your Internet Provider is part of the Open Connect network, a free partnership with Netflix. Netflix will automatically play movies and TV shows in Super HD on a supported device if your connection is fast enough.
Sometimes it says this other times it says not supported |
|
| you using regular shaw dns? |
|
| Am using unblock-us |
|
fender
join:2007-07-23
Vancouver, BC | reply to kevinds
said by kevinds:I'm courious how Netflix got into the Peering centers, and how many HD streaming customers it will take to saturate their connection.
Because Netflix traffic is a considerable and measurable percentage of overall traffic.
Peering makes sense for all parties involved.
»www.sandvine.com/news/pr_detail.asp?ID=394 |
|
Reviews:
 ·Shaw
| said by fender:said by kevinds:I'm courious how Netflix got into the Peering centers, and how many HD streaming customers it will take to saturate their connection.
Because Netflix traffic is a considerable and measurable percentage of overall traffic. Peering makes sense for all parties involved. » www.sandvine.com/news/pr_detail.asp?ID=394 It depends on your point of view. Why would a cableco want to make it easier for people to use an alternative video service? It's supporting the competition? I'm not surprised shaw isn't in a rush to support it. Let's spend extra many to setup this infrastructure to make netflix better so people have an even bigger reason not to use our cable services... lol |
|
fender
join:2007-07-23
Vancouver, BC | Because people are going to use it anyway -- so why not eliminate the transit costs and lower the overall cost of doing business while raising the monthly rates every 6 months for the end user? |
|
| reply to fender
Yes, but I wasn't aware that Netflix had their own fiber network, this was the first I've heard of it.
--
Yes, I am not employed and looking for IT work. Have passport, will travel. |
|
fender
join:2007-07-23
Vancouver, BC | Tons of them have their own fiber. Facebook even bought dark fiber and lit it. Google popularized that activity. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Mobilicity
 ·voip.ms
| reply to zod5000
said by zod5000:It depends on your point of view. Why would a cableco want to make it easier for people to use an alternative video service? It's supporting the competition? I'm not surprised shaw isn't in a rush to support it. Let's spend extra many to setup this infrastructure to make netflix better so people have an even bigger reason not to use our cable services... lol
Shaw doesnt care. You have to take cable from them anyways to get their Internet. They got their share already.
--
Bell Canada: It is “Preposterous" that consumers should get content they want on their cellphones. |
|
| said by xtachx:...You have to take cable from them anyways to get their Internet...
Actually, no. I have Shaw internet at home without any Cable TV service. You don't even have to do anything special, just sign up for internet...that's it. If you don't ask for TV you don't get TV. |
|
| reply to fender
I wasn't aware that Netflix had their own fiber, but that would be how they got in the peering centers... I admit I don't follow that company as closely as some others.
My first thought was they added a content mirror into the peering centers.
--
Yes, I am not employed and looking for IT work. Have passport, will travel. |
|
Reviews:
·Shaw
| reply to xtachx
said by xtachx:said by zod5000:It depends on your point of view. Why would a cableco want to make it easier for people to use an alternative video service? It's supporting the competition? I'm not surprised shaw isn't in a rush to support it. Let's spend extra many to setup this infrastructure to make netflix better so people have an even bigger reason not to use our cable services... lol
Shaw doesnt care. You have to take cable from them anyways to get their Internet. They got their share already. That was my point (and I do think cableco's would care). This would save them pennies a gig (they still have to use their infrastructure to deliver, but it would save them the bulk bandwidth internet costs). What's that going to save shaw on average? 10 bux a month for netflix customers? Do you think they'd rather have your 50-60 dollars cable subscription or save 10 bux on bulk bandwidth? hmmm....
The last thing Shaw wants is people to only subscribe for internet.. lol.
edit: ok 2nd last thing. the last thing they'd want is for you to not use any of their services. |
|
brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | said by zod5000:That was my point (and I do think cableco's would care). This would save them pennies a gig (they still have to use their infrastructure to deliver, but it would save them the bulk bandwidth internet costs). What's that going to save shaw on average? 10 bux a month for netflix customers? Do you think they'd rather have your 50-60 dollars cable subscription or save 10 bux on bulk bandwidth? hmmm....
The last thing Shaw wants is people to only subscribe for internet.. lol.
edit: ok 2nd last thing. the last thing they'd want is for you to not use any of their services.
People will do that anyway. This doesn't make it any "easier". They can choose to be stupid and not take advantage of a cost cutting measure or do so and make a smart business decision.
Also its a lot more than 10 bucks a month on bulk bandwidth. They're consuming at least a few 10Gb links worth of bandwidth for Netflix alone. |
|
brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | reply to kevinds
said by kevinds:Everything I see, seems to be about saving Netflix money.
Peer with the bigger ISPs, so that Netflix doesn't have to pay transit moving their data - and this won't necessarly help with poor quality due to poor speeds/congestion.
I'm courious how Netflix got into the Peering centers, and how many HD streaming customers it will take to saturate their connection.
It's about saving both sides money. Reducing the amount of transit required for the ISPs is reducing their cost of delivering those bits to the customer.
Netflix will peer with and/or provide the caching appliances to anyone that is able to peer with them at the appropriate locations and meets certain minimum traffic levels. It depends on where the speed/congestion issues are.
They got into the Internet exchanges just as every other ISP/hosting provider/service provider/CDN does. It's not as if there is a fixed limit to the amount of bandwidth they have. Just like everyone else they monitor their links and upgrade well in advance of the links being saturated. |
|
