 | | Here's why they can get away with it The HD selection right now is very limited, and I believe it's that way on purpose. So people will not be streaming that many HD movies. SD has a wider selection, but I've watched a few movies in SD and they border on unwatchable. I would rather just wait for the Blu-Ray in the mail.
Most people also have caps so they're not going to be streaming 24x7.
This whole streaming thing is simply a way for Netflix to boost subscriber numbers for its regular DVD service. Some people don't even put DVDs in their queue making it even more profitable for netflix.
I was a netflix sub from 2001-2004. I stopped it because I didn't have that much time to watch movies and 3 movies was just too much. I resubscribed when TiVo got it and even got blu-ray access. Without the streaming option I would have probably not gone back to Netflix in such a hurry. | |
|
 |  Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Here's why they can get away with it said by fifty nine:SD has a wider selection, but I've watched a few movies in SD and they border on unwatchable. I would rather just wait for the Blu-Ray in the mail. Your experience with SD is not the norm. SD quality is very good, DVD like for me and most reviewers. The quality will auto-adjust itself down to horrible based on your connection however ...
Regardless, what the article illustrates is that as bandwidth consumption goes up, the cost per bit goes down. Not the other way around as most people would have you believe. | |
|
| | | | Re: Here's why they can get away with it I agree all the non HD content we've watched has been DVD quality. We've actually been very pleased with the service, if only the selection were a bit better.
But, considering it's free on my TIVO and the Netflix service costs about the same as a premium channel like HBO, I call it a win. | |
|
| | | Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Here's why they can get away with it said by Uncle Paul:I agree all the non HD content we've watched has been DVD quality. We've actually been very pleased with the service, if only the selection were a bit better. But, considering it's free on my TIVO and the Netflix service costs about the same as a premium channel like HBO, I call it a win. You sound like me. I still have all the newest stuff come in on DVD/Blu-Ray, but love firing it up to watch older content. I read a review one time that said something along the lines of it being perfect for "Curling up on the couch for a rainy weekend of movie watching." I'd agree that is a great use for it. Especially since it's free! | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Here's why they can get away with it Agreed...the value to me as a Netflix customer is great. I love watching movies from their streaming site. Works fine for me and looks decent enough. The added value it offers me for the Netflix monthly charge is so very well worth the $16 or whatever it is. | |
|
| | | Natoma
join:1999-08-30
Brooklyn, NY | Has no one considered AppleTV? My husband and I rent HD movies all the time to our AppleTV for $3.99-$4.99 a pop. We each have the 160GB version and notice that HD movies from Apple typically reduce our available disk space by about 5-7GB.
So it appears that Apple is encoding their flicks at a higher bitrate than NetFlix.
That said, we have 50/20 FIOS, so we'd definitely love it if someone started streaming movies with bitrates similar to Blu-ray. Talk about a killer app for next generation broadband. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Has no one considered AppleTV? said by Natoma:My husband and I rent HD movies all the time to our AppleTV for $3.99-$4.99 a pop. I get Netflix streaming for free. (Well, technically for a monthly fee.) I hate the PPV model Apple uses, and their walled garden approach, so I don't use them.
As an aside, I've watched Netflix on my Tivo and my Roku box. The Roku looks better. Make sure your TiVO is using HDMI or composite video out if you want best quality. I have a (rock solid) 5MB DSL line, and always get the max quality stream. When I had Comcast, it wasn't nearly as solid. Netflix streaming looks as good as a (standard) DVD to me! | |
|
| | | | | | said by Natoma:My husband and I rent HD movies all the time to our AppleTV for $3.99-$4.99 a pop. We each have the 160GB version and notice that HD movies from Apple typically reduce our available disk space by about 5-7GB. So it appears that Apple is encoding their flicks at a higher bitrate than NetFlix. That said, we have 50/20 FIOS, so we'd definitely love it if someone started streaming movies with bitrates similar to Blu-ray. Talk about a killer app for next generation broadband. your also paying 50-100 dollars for the same amount of movies I pay 16 for... | |
|
| | | | | Natoma
join:1999-08-30
Brooklyn, NY | Re: Has no one considered AppleTV? said by uid1307457:your also paying 50-100 dollars for the same amount of movies I pay 16 for... For a higher quality product? I'll take it.  | |
|
| | | | | |
1 edit | Re: Has no one considered AppleTV? said by Natoma:said by uid1307457:your also paying 50-100 dollars for the same amount of movies I pay 16 for... For a higher quality product? I'll take it. I've watched 72 movies (was on vacation), series, anime, and documentaries so far this month for 99% of the time good quality on my laptop.
FYI, watch Totally Baked: Unrated lol | |
|
| | | | | | so you pay 4 for a movie you can rent at a RedBox for $1 and I hope you do not have cable, becouse if not you could have done the same with cable on demand with out buying the additional hardware.
I have a xbox 360 which also allow you to rent movies online. but i wont pay $4 to rent something that I can get for a 1/4 or less ... | |
|
| | | | | Natoma
join:1999-08-30
Brooklyn, NY | Re: Has no one considered AppleTV? said by chemaupr:so you pay 4 for a movie you can rent at a RedBox for $1 and I hope you do not have cable, becouse if not you could have done the same with cable on demand with out buying the additional hardware. I have a xbox 360 which also allow you to rent movies online. but i wont pay $4 to rent something that I can get for a 1/4 or less ... The encode quality is rather terrible in comparison to Apple. Not to mention the fact that Timewarner cable's HD is anything but.
It looks atrocious, particularly fast moving scenes. | |
|
| | | | | | said by Natoma:My husband and I rent HD movies all the time to our AppleTV for $3.99-$4.99 a pop. We each have the 160GB version and notice that HD movies from Apple typically reduce our available disk space by about 5-7GB. So it appears that Apple is encoding their flicks at a higher bitrate than NetFlix. That said, we have 50/20 FIOS, so we'd definitely love it if someone started streaming movies with bitrates similar to Blu-ray. Talk about a killer app for next generation broadband. ah all that wasted money when you could have just downloaded them. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Has no one considered AppleTV? said by DJMASACRE:said by Natoma:My husband and I rent HD movies all the time to our AppleTV for $3.99-$4.99 a pop. We each have the 160GB version and notice that HD movies from Apple typically reduce our available disk space by about 5-7GB. So it appears that Apple is encoding their flicks at a higher bitrate than NetFlix. That said, we have 50/20 FIOS, so we'd definitely love it if someone started streaming movies with bitrates similar to Blu-ray. Talk about a killer app for next generation broadband. ah all that wasted money when you could have just downloaded them. agreed. or stream them I am up to 83 from my other post...i may break 100 this month. | |
|
| | | | | | Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Has no one considered AppleTV? said by uid1307457:said by DJMASACRE:said by Natoma:My husband and I rent HD movies all the time to our AppleTV for $3.99-$4.99 a pop. We each have the 160GB version and notice that HD movies from Apple typically reduce our available disk space by about 5-7GB. So it appears that Apple is encoding their flicks at a higher bitrate than NetFlix. That said, we have 50/20 FIOS, so we'd definitely love it if someone started streaming movies with bitrates similar to Blu-ray. Talk about a killer app for next generation broadband. ah all that wasted money when you could have just downloaded them. agreed. or stream them I am up to 83 from my other post...i may break 100 this month. Stealing is soooo cool. Man, I bet you guys get all the chicks! | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Re: Has no one considered AppleTV? said by Matt3:Stealing is soooo cool. Man, I bet you guys get all the chicks! who said stealing. Im not the supplier. I didnt steal anything. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | said by Matt3:Stealing is soooo cool. Man, I bet you guys get all the chicks! steal? ever heard of instant netflix? | |
|
| | | | said by Matt3:said by fifty nine:SD has a wider selection, but I've watched a few movies in SD and they border on unwatchable. I would rather just wait for the Blu-Ray in the mail. Your experience with SD is not the norm. SD quality is very good, DVD like for me and most reviewers. The quality will auto-adjust itself down to horrible based on your connection however ... Regardless, what the article illustrates is that as bandwidth consumption goes up, the cost per bit goes down. Not the other way around as most people would have you believe. Just out of curiousity, what kind of TV are you viewing it on? I'm using a 56" DLP. DVDs are noticeably better. It's not bandwidth related because I get all of the SD quality bars and I have a 30 meg connection.
It could be that:
I'm using a 56" HDTV
I'm using an upconverting DVD player for DVDs (Sony)
Or it could be that I haven't watched a SD movie in a while. I know they've had some really bad encodes in the past. | |
|
| | | Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Here's why they can get away with it said by fifty nine:said by Matt3:said by fifty nine:SD has a wider selection, but I've watched a few movies in SD and they border on unwatchable. I would rather just wait for the Blu-Ray in the mail. Your experience with SD is not the norm. SD quality is very good, DVD like for me and most reviewers. The quality will auto-adjust itself down to horrible based on your connection however ... Regardless, what the article illustrates is that as bandwidth consumption goes up, the cost per bit goes down. Not the other way around as most people would have you believe. Just out of curiousity, what kind of TV are you viewing it on? I'm using a 56" DLP. DVDs are noticeably better. It's not bandwidth related because I get all of the SD quality bars and I have a 30 meg connection. It could be that: I'm using a 56" HDTV I'm using an upconverting DVD player for DVDs (Sony) Or it could be that I haven't watched a SD movie in a while. I know they've had some really bad encodes in the past. I watch on a 42" plasma mainly. I also have an upconvert DVD player as well as a Blu-Ray player. The quality really is very good, but I have noticed that some movies just suck. Deep Blue Sea is a great example ... but I think it's because the source material is crap. I even had them send me the DVD because the stream quality was pretty bad, but the DVD was actually WORSE.
It seems the newer stuff that is added is great quality, but once you start getting into some of the first online offerings the quality goes downhill. I wonder if at some point they started encoding with higher quality or a better codec? | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Here's why they can get away with it Could be just the older encodes then. I remember Pirates of the Caribbean Dead Man's chest was simply unwatchable. Realplayer back in 1999 would have been better. | |
|
| | | | |  funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6 | Re: Here's why they can get away with it said by fifty nine:Could be just the older encodes then. I remember Pirates of the Caribbean Dead Man's chest was simply unwatchable. Realplayer back in 1999 would have been better. I wish these streaming video outfits would actually try their products on different connections. They might work in the lab, but on a very latent 3G or satellite connection, they often suck rocks.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- World Traveller -- KJ7RL
... Do something! ... | |
|
| | | | | | | | Re: Here's why they can get away with it It's not my connection:
 | |
|
| | | | | | | Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | Re: Here's why they can get away with it Speed doesn't mean jack. You could have horrible routing to Netflix but not that speedtest server. Run TCPView while streaming a Netflix movie, figure out if you are being routed across the country or not. They have servers in CA and WDC I believe and a LOT of people are routed to the CA servers rather than the WDC servers.
I've watched Dead Man's Chest btw and it's one of the best quality SD movies they have. I bet you are being sent across the country. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Here's why they can get away with it said by Matt3:Speed doesn't mean jack. You could have horrible routing to Netflix but not that speedtest server. Run TCPView while streaming a Netflix movie, figure out if you are being routed across the country or not. They have servers in CA and WDC I believe and a LOT of people are routed to the CA servers rather than the WDC servers. I've watched Dead Man's Chest btw and it's one of the best quality SD movies they have. I bet you are being sent across the country. Not really. I have no problem with viewing any of the HD content. My connection is fine. PenTeleData has a pretty good network and they are peered in several places. Furthermore, since it's LLNW you are not far from a peering point. (We also use LLNW for our content).
It was definitely due to the quality of the encode.
Come to think of it, I've just figured out why I got the low quality encodes. There were encodes that were problematic with TiVo (it would cause the TiVo to crash and reboot) so they pulled them for TiVo users and gave us the lower quality ones for a lot of movies. Dead man's chest was one of those that they pulled so we got a lower quality one.
The last SD movie I watched was Frequency which was pretty good quality. I don't have the DVD so I can't compare though. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Here's why they can get away with it I have a Tivo HD unit with a HD Mitsubishi 52" rear projection. It will only do 1080i, but we keep it tuned and it delivers a really beautiful crisp picture in HD.
The streaming shows look DVD quality over an ATT 3mb DSL connection. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Here's why they can get away with it It will "only" do 1080i?  | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Here's why they can get away with it LOL no, only HD res it does is 1080i. | |
|
| | | | | | Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by funchords:said by fifty nine:Could be just the older encodes then. I remember Pirates of the Caribbean Dead Man's chest was simply unwatchable. Realplayer back in 1999 would have been better. I wish these streaming video outfits would actually try their products on different connections. They might work in the lab, but on a very latent 3G or satellite connection, they often suck rocks. It should work fine on a satellite connection once the stream starts. 3G is a different story though, although I have a friend who can watch SD content on his 768Kbps RR connections ... although it is borderline.
I really don't think this service is aimed at the small percentage of 3G home users or satellite users. | |
|
| | | | said by Matt3:Your experience with SD is not the norm. SD quality is very good, DVD like for me and most reviewers. The quality will auto-adjust itself down to horrible based on your connection however ... If you've got a Roku Netflix box, you can lock the quality at whatever level you want as described here: »community.netflix.com/forum/topi···3A186121 | |
|
| | | | | Re: Here's why they can get away with it said by shutrbug:said by Matt3:Your experience with SD is not the norm. SD quality is very good, DVD like for me and most reviewers. The quality will auto-adjust itself down to horrible based on your connection however ... If you've got a Roku Netflix box, you can lock the quality at whatever level you want as described here: » community.netflix.com/forum/topi···3A186121 Yes! I do this. Locked it at the max and it is noticeably better. No idea why. I have 6.5mb cable. | |
|
|  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by fifty nine:The HD selection right now is very limited, and I believe it's that way on purpose. So people will not be streaming that many HD movies. SD has a wider selection, but I've watched a few movies in SD and they border on unwatchable. I would rather just wait for the Blu-Ray in the mail. Most people also have caps so they're not going to be streaming 24x7. This whole streaming thing is simply a way for Netflix to boost subscriber numbers for its regular DVD service. Some people don't even put DVDs in their queue making it even more profitable for netflix. I was a netflix sub from 2001-2004. I stopped it because I didn't have that much time to watch movies and 3 movies was just too much. I resubscribed when TiVo got it and even got blu-ray access. Without the streaming option I would have probably not gone back to Netflix in such a hurry. Get away with what? The streaming is an ADDED feature. It's not like you pay for it separately. Also as the OP said this doesn't include licensing fees.
The bigger question is that if netflix only pays 3¢ per GB how come ISPs want to charge $1 or more per GB overage? And the 250 GB cap that Charter and Comcast have only costs them $7.50 are they telling me it's cost them nearly $60 to provide everything else associated with an internet connection? Hardly. One also has to wonder how mobile companies can get away with $256 and $503 per GB overage fees. | |
|
| |
See 19 replies to this post |
|
| Reviews:
 ·Great Works Inte..
| SD quality has generally been very good for me, but I admit I only watch on a 27" screen. The only really lousy titles have been from the Starz library. Those are encoded rather poorly, not to mention that Starz screws with the aspect ratio and applies dynamic range compression to the sound. The most annoying artifact of the Starz titles is that camera pans become jerky, as if they're got the video encoder set to "quality" and not enough bits to properly do 24fps. This artifact does remind one of Real Video. | |
|
|  old_dawg"I Know Noting..."
join:2001-09-22
Westminster, MD | Just because the wrapping paper is pretty does mean that what's inside is worth watching. "DUMB and DUMBER" is *still* DUMB high rez or not. | |
|
 RobIn Deo speramus.Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3 | Not too happy.. I have the Roku.
When I first got it, it was great. There were so many movies I wanted to watch and didn't want to wait for the DVD.
Now, it's boring. They keep releasing old movies. It'd be nice if they released more newer movies. I check at least 3 times a week to see what new movies were released for instant viewing and it's all stuff that I've already seen, or has been out for 10+ years.
--
C | Y | R | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
| | What does it cost for the Direct TV VOD downloads in data co What does it cost for the Direct TV VOD downloads in data cost?
do they get any real good deals as they are teamed up with ATT now? | |
|
| | | Re: What does it cost for the Direct TV VOD downloads in data co said by Joe12345678:What does it cost for the Direct TV VOD downloads in data cost? do they get any real good deals as they are teamed up with ATT now? free for DVR users | |
|
| | Rates Still cheaper than US Postal Rate | |
|
 FLengineerCCNA, CEH, MCSAPremium
join:2007-06-26
Leesburg, FL | I want Level 3 as an ISP Level 3 is charging $0.03 per GB while Comcast and Time Warner feels $1 per GB overage charges is acceptable.
NetFlix ------ Level 3 ------- Comcast ------- Me
Send 2GB ----- $0.06 ------- $2.00 ------- Recieve 2GB | |
|
|
See 15 replies to this post |
|
| | Why do these stories make the front page? It's nothing but assumptions. There are no facts in this story. Just the ramblings of another self appointed expert. | |
|
|
See 13 replies to this post |
|
1 edit | You're missing the point... Most people have a limited (finite) amount of time that they will spend watching TV. Any online watching will displace watching a mailed DVD.
Since a mailed DVD costs Netflix around a dollar round trip just for postage, watching online is a huge cost saver for them...
edited to clarify | |
|
| | | Re: You're missing the point... said by travelguy:Most people have a limited (finite) amount of time that they will spend watching TV. Any online watching will displace watching a mailed DVD. Since a mailed DVD costs Netflix around a dollar round trip, watching online is a huge cost saver for them... Hmm. I am on the one out at a time plan and I've watched online when I'm waiting for movies (2-3 day turnaround). | |
|
| grumpy3b
join:2001-12-11
Lompoc, CA
kudos:1 | said by travelguy:Most people have a limited (finite) amount of time that they will spend watching TV. Any online watching will displace watching a mailed DVD. Since a mailed DVD costs Netflix around a dollar round trip just for postage, watching online is a huge cost saver for them... edited to clarify actually Netflix likely gets a discount from the USPS for pre-sorting the mailings. I forget the exact discount as I have not use the pre-sort discount for years but it once was very substantial. I imagine the cost to Netflix is around $0.50 round-trip because of presorting.
A funny aside is the PO my better half uses in Seattle actually has a special bin for just Netflix drop off mail. According to the staff they empty that bin at least 3x/day. That is how popular Netflix really is.
Still, as you say, online viewing is a lot cheaper. How much cheaper depends on what the pay for the DVD rental royalties vs. online royalties. Sure both are likely a blanket catalog licensing fee, but some are likely under a different license.
All I know is we use the crap outta our Netflix account. And who cares if we need to wait 6-months to a year (often only a few months these days) to watch something new. I get to use the $100/mo we used to spend on going to the movies as well as the $125/mo on DirecTV for new camera gear as well as a few more day trips for the fun of it.
--
Using Millenicom? Come visit the Unofficial Millenicom forum here on BBR »Millenicom | |
|
| |
1 edit | Re: You're missing the point... netflix also has ads on the inside of the dvd envelopes. ads are not cheap for a company.
i worked for a tv station for awhile, and they were paid $500/commercial for every time it played. The commercial was on 10 times a day...you do the math. | |
|
 Bit00Premium
join:2009-02-19
00000
1 edit | Way cheaper than mailing them... As noted already by handydave  , even with bulk rate mail it costs them way more than that to pull from stock, mail 2 directions and receive back into their stock. Even at $.09 per movie streaming, they could may be able to stream a dozen or more for what it actually costs them to send out and receive a single disc.
Plus how many subscribers (like me) are subscribing ONLY because they offer the streaming. I don't bother with the DVDs at all and I may watch 2 or 3 streamed movies a week on my $9/mo plan. | |
|
| |  oh brother
But in any event, the other reason it's higher is that it gives them more of a profit margin which may make it easier to pay their employees, offer higher wages to attract better management (or better employees) and invest in R&D.
Anyway, I love Netflix, and it's worked quite well for me on my 10 meg connection...I've really only had 3 hiccups, 2 of which corrected themselves eventually....I'm aware it's not the greatest for some users, but hey, this service is not fully developed yet, so I'm sure there's still lots of routing issues and bugs to work out.
Give it time, Netflix will do anything and everything, IMHO to bury Blockbuster once and for all. | |
|
 jsz0Premium
join:2008-01-23
Jewett City, CT | It's cheap... No doubt it's really cheap to deliver massive amounts of data from a super well connected data center(s) The more interesting question would be how much does the same movie cost the ISP in terms of last-mile bandwidth? | |
|
| | | Re: It's cheap... The point is- it ain't going to last, ie. unlimited bandwidth free. Also, don't count on your internet connection working perfectly no matter what the speed while steaming HD, do count on disruptions in your service-happening now- I believe intentionally.
A better solution to HD/Blu ray is what many are doing now with Dish network-record their HD (1080i) to an external harddrive USB 2.0 which is available for any of their HD receivers- DVR or not, as long as it has a usb port.
I now have 121 movies recorded on my 1000G harddrive taking 600G of space, all in 1080i. I figure it will hold nearly 200 HD movies, so for $100 it works out to be 50 cents a movie in storage cost. All instantly available with the remote. All with the normal dish info when you click on a movie.
There is a one time $40 fee per household to turn this on for all HD receivers you have. The picture quality is better than any dvd, upconverted or not since the source is usually bluray downgraded to 1080i.
I have just upgraded to my third HD receiver - for free inc. install,(you do not need the expensive DVR) and 2 more 1000G harddrives. This also gives me another 3 months free of the movie channels. Every year I can usually get 3 months free one way or another. I love not having a million discs to keep track of or pay for bluray. | |
|
| | | ISP costs If the ISP is in a rural area, and is paying $100 per Mbps per month (or $325, as I've seen in some places), the cost is obviously a lot higher. Expect ISPs to start capping and throttling. not because they want to, but because they have to. | |
|
|
|
