Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet Youtube

Netflix, Youtube Surpass 50% Mark of Internet Traffic 249

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the reading-is-hard dept.
First time accepted submitter sqorbit writes "Netflix and Youtube are gaining ground not only on the competition, such as Amazon, but also over peer-to-peer file sharing. Netflix claims more than 30 million customers and believes it could double that number in the future. Traffic from Netflix and Youtube amounted to over 50% of Internet traffic in September. Meanwhile Bittorrent traffic is down slightly (7.4% from 10%) in Internet traffic compared to last year. Could more people be satisfied with current video offerings or are less people finding useful things to download via file sharing?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Netflix, Youtube Surpass 50% Mark of Internet Traffic

Comments Filter:
  • Build it (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 11, 2013 @08:53PM (#45396359)

    ... and they will come.

    • by Chalnoth (1334923)
      Yup. But sadly, I imagine the movie studios will take away the opposite conclusion: that their anti-piracy efforts are working.
      • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

        Half of YouTube is pirate copyright material.

        Most people don't care about copyright. The MAFIAA have already lost, no-one gives a shit about their poor bleeding profit margins or abstract concepts of intellectual property.

    • 75% is refreshes (Score:4, Interesting)

      by SmallFurryCreature (593017) on Tuesday November 12, 2013 @04:35AM (#45398573) Journal

      Anyone want to bet what percentage of traffic is people refreshing the page because the youtube player got stuck again?

      • by hairyfeet (841228)
        I'd rather see how much of the traffic is from the new "pirate tubes" like viooz because at least in my area more and more have simply started going to them and watching online instead of using BT.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 11, 2013 @08:55PM (#45396373)

    Could more people be satisfied with current video offerings or are less people finding useful things to download via file sharing?

    Or is it something that's not a false dichotomy? An increase in Netflix, YouTube traffic will result in a decrease in the amount of bittorrent traffic in terms of percent, even if absolute usage remains the same. Likewise, a decrease in bittorrent traffic will lead to higher percentages for Netflix and YouTube. That doesn't indicate (or rule out) a relationship between the two (i.e. leaving bittorrent behind for Netflix) except in that it is a relative measure.

    • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

      It would be more interesting to know how much time YouTube and Netflix are taking away from normal TV viewing. I find that the amateur documentary type videos on YouTube are better than what the BBC puts out these days, like that Brian Cox twat or Horizon post 1990.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Unknown1337 (2697703)
      Exactly what I was thinking. Netflix has expanded its coverage of HD and 'super HD' while Youtube has increased the quality/resolution of its content as well. Increased quality comes with increased data transfer, while a 700MB file will always transmit 700MB. The customer base has probably grown and there is likely some relationship between the cost effective viewing and increased usage of these services, but overall they are simply sending more data for the same content which makes this a nearly irrelevan
  • Hoarders (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 11, 2013 @08:58PM (#45396395)

    Could more people be satisfied with current video offerings or are less people finding useful things to download via file sharing?
     
    Could be that most download hoarders are finally coming to their senses that out of the 250gigs of MP3s they've downloaded they're really only listening to about 2gigs worth? That's my guess... that and the fact that you can only beat off so many times a year so having 65 days of pr0n doesn't make much sense either.
     
    Or maybe it's people who've gotten sick of downloading 5 gigs worth of an e-book collection for a single book that's about 6 dollars on Amazon.
     
    I know tons of people who've done the bit torrent stockpiling and I've never seen any of them come close to using a double digit percentage of what they've ripped off. It's like the people who get the high end NetFlix package and rip the discs and return them the next day. How many of those discs never get watched? My guess is a ton of them never see the tray of a DVD player.

    • Re:Hoarders (Score:5, Insightful)

      by FlyHelicopters (1540845) on Monday November 11, 2013 @09:07PM (#45396459)
      Regarding the DVD ripping, I tried that back when Blockbuster had the "unlimited rentals with in store exchange" deal going on.

      They would mail you 3 DVDs, then you would rip them, drop them off at the store the next day and they would give you 3 in store rentals for free in exchange, while at the same time mailing you 3 more.

      When it first came out, they didn't wait for the in-store rentals to be returned before mailing the next set of discs. They changed that at some point.

      So you could get up to 12 movies a week if you were swapping them every 3 days or so.

      After a few months, I had several TB of hard drive space full of movies that... frankly weren't likely to ever be watched.

      Then Blu-Ray came out, and the quality there was good enough that it made the ripped copies look like crap. I ended up deleting them. That was a LOT of hours of time wasted.

      So yea, the idea that I'll have this huge horde ended up being rather silly. Now I just put the PS3 or Ruku on and stream more content than I will ever have time to watch and life is good.

      Amazon Prime Video, Netflix, and Hulu Plus might not be perfect, they each have their own issues, they don't have "everything", but boy, they sure have enough stuff to keep my family busy most of the time.

      • Re:Hoarders (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 11, 2013 @11:29PM (#45397273)

        Posting as AC since I don't want the CISPA to allow a newly minted Ministry Of Copyrights to send their secret police in the near future....

        I've stored over a thousand movies either from direct ripping, or downloading good encodes. I have found that on demand (Netflix) does not have a whole lot going in the movie categories. As a result, I have been watching movies again from my archives. I simply refuse to shell out a couple of bucks each time I want to watch something. Fuck them, I paid to see it in the movie theater, I paid to get the DVD copy, how much blood do they want to siphon off me? So, yes, I do store movies to watch them again, or watch them later on with friends and family. Some stuff is just classic.

        It just became a way of life to never ever watch the DVD. In fact, the advertisements and POU's pissed me off so fucking much, I had to rip it first. Actually paying for it (Around 30-40% of my collection are purchases) and being told, "No. You can't skip anything here. Sit down. STFU. Watch the previews".

        Right after I had the physical medium in hand I put it in my system, fired up DVD Decrypter, and made an image of the disc to be mounted afterwards and played. Plenty of media players like the WD TV Live will play an .iso file replete with DVD menus.

        I don't feel that any of the time has been wasted at all. My collection is nearing 100 TB. At this point I rarely use Netflix for anything other than watching TV shows. That's it's real value to me. TV shows with no advertisements or overlays. I can wait a year till the last season is available.

        The biggest failure of Big Entertainment is continuing this greedy war. My offer still stands. I will pay upwards of $50 a month for on-demand viewing of TV shows with ZERO advertisements of any kind. Any other deal they can go fuck themselves with a cactus.

        P.S - I still do a brisk business with the DVDs by mail. After I download a good encode for a movie I queue it up on Netflix and quite often never take it out the package when I receive it. I'm sending them back as quick as I get them. Netflix for me is way to compensate the artists.

        • Re:Hoarders (Score:5, Interesting)

          by FlyHelicopters (1540845) on Tuesday November 12, 2013 @01:20AM (#45397811)
          What is the cost in time and money to maintain 100 TB of videos?

          I used to have eight 3TB hard drives in my home server, storing all my downloaded and ripped videos.

          Back when I started in 2006, it was 1TB drives, then 1.5TB drives (Frys had a deal on them back then, $115!). Then 2TB, then 3TB.

          I looked at upgrading to 4TB drives, then something caused me to do the math. All the money spent to keep up with it? I could have just bought most of it on Blu-Ray and been done with it.

          My local media storage is down to 6.8TB, I've deleted about 10TB worth in the past few months, waste of time, space, and money.

          You know what? I don't miss any of it.

          What I did keep was stuff that isn't easy to find on the popular services. I have a number of old war movies and documentaries that aren't on the various services, those I kept. I have the complete rip of 10 seasons of Modern Marvels, that is pretty cool and nice for the kids.

          Blockbuster movies? Blah, I can stream those, Amazon Prime Video these days looks darn good on the big TV.

        • by Bengie (1121981)
          100TB collection, over 1,000 movies so assuming 1500 movies, that's an AVERAGE of 68GB per movie. That's bigger than the average BluRay including commentaries and extras. Did you partially decompress your videos or do you have 100TB of raw storage, but RAID 6 in 10disk groups or something?

          You are using ZFS, right? RIGHT?!
        • by 228e2 (934443)
          Im glad im not the only one that raised an eyebrow at 100TB of movies maybe 10TB?

          The thing that jumped out at me was your point of Big Entertainment continuing this greedy war and yet you've (supposedly) amassed 100TB's of which less than half you've paid for. Netflix is $10 a month, my cable package lets me DVR all I want for less than $40 a month, then theres Hulu, RedBox and a bunch of other services i've never heard of but are equally as cheap. I have an easy 2TB's of movies over the past 10 years i'
      • I have focused on making sure my video system can patch up any holes in the streamers lineups, rather then a massive bulk collection.
      • by rikkards (98006)

        I was doing the same thing with zip.ca up here for a while but stopped after a bit. Zip is another company that is bringing out streaming real soon now (which they have been saying for over 4 years which is why I went to Netflix.ca).

        My biggest issue with netflix is they need to have a way of limiting out movies that went straight to DVD. Trying to find a good horror movie that I haven't seen and pretty much all of them are done with HD handi-cams and contain porn-level acting at best.

        On a side note, of the

      • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

        These days torrents are fast, and of course there is Usenet. Some stuff I had to work a little to get I keep, but if I decided I wanted to watch almost any modern movie this evening I could have downloaded before I get home from work.

    • Re:Hoarders (Score:5, Insightful)

      by nurb432 (527695) on Monday November 11, 2013 @09:30PM (#45396591) Homepage Journal

      When the commercial outlets drop something out of existence you want due to low demand, you will thank the so-called 'hoarders'.

      • The problem with that idea is that the easy to download stuff on TPB is current popular stuff.

        If I want to download The Hunger Games, that is easy.

        If I want to download some rare TV movie from the 80's, my odds are very low that I'll find it.

        The hoarders don't keep their entire collections up all the time. That is the great limitation of torrents, you can't really keep 5,000 torrents running all the time.

        • Netflix to the rescue! Offer to share your disks in exchange for borrowing someone else's stuff. Does Amazon have a used copy? Ebay? Check Redbox when the Library doesn't have it and can't get it.
          If you really want something, find it and make your own copy. Don't wait for someone else to just give it to you.
        • by nurb432 (527695)

          True, people with obscure collections are not up 24/7, but they at least have a copy safely stored away and it can be returned back to the community pool at some point.

    • Re:Hoarders (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ifiwereasculptor (1870574) on Monday November 11, 2013 @10:40PM (#45397001)

      I was a hoarder. For me, I guess what happened was that my broadband capacity finally reached a point in which I feel comfortable with stuff being in the cloud. If I wanted to watch Star Trek six years ago on my 800Kbps connection, I'd have to torrent every episode. Then I'd burn discs because, in case I wanted to watch again, I didn't want to go through the trouble of redownloading everything - it took days. Now Netflix and Youtube mean that a lot of what I want is permanently (and readily, thanks to a 35Mbps connection) available and I have no reason to hoard anymore, so my torrenting has decreased a lot. Steam sales and Humble Bundles also meant I have essentially stopped pirating (except for good titles with annoying DRM, like Bioshock 2) - I just give it a year of two for games to come to a reasonable price and leave my library on the cloud. I think that's what happened to a lot of people - and, in third world countries, quite recently.

      • Steam has not been kind to my credit card. :)

        Those steam sales are addicting! But you know what? I no longer pirate games. I used to have hundreds and hundreds of games stashed away for the day I *might* play them, and I did play some of them.

        I haven't pirated a game in years, just wait a year (sometimes 3 months), Steam will have that $50 game on sale for $20 (or less).

        As of this minute, my Steam account has 1,638 games in my "all games list".

        I've probably actually played 10% of them, but some o

    • by hodet (620484)

      I don't get digital horders. I have a friend who has TB's and TB's of downloaded crap saved on DVD's and USB Hard drives. Why? He will never watch a fraction of this stuff. All those drives aren't cheap either. I have a $7.99 netflix account and can watch reruns of Star Trek TNG (or thousands of other things) if I feel like it. All at the tip of my fingers 24x7. No need to download 7 season's, and the interface on Netflix is much easier then dicking around with finding an episode you may want to watch

      • Re:Hoarders (Score:5, Insightful)

        by EdIII (1114411) on Monday November 11, 2013 @11:37PM (#45397319)

        As a "hoarder", I've documented my collection pretty well. I never burn anything to DVD's or USB hard drives. Everything is networked and available to all devices.

        It's about saving the really classic stuff. The real jewels of my collection are all the Disney and Looney Tunes cartoons. Stuff that is just not available on market today due their outright greed and insane copyright mentality. Some of the collections like M*A*S*H I ripped direct from the DVDs themselves.

        The real value of my collection? At some point in the future the stuff I have, while classic, will not be readily available. My collection, nearing triple digit TB's, will be easily duplicated and shared.

        My cartoon collection alone is very hard to come by. My younger relatives love to be able to watch Donald Duck and his nephews. Sadly, Disney being the douchenozzles they are have adamantly refused to share those cartoons with today's children.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by spire3661 (1038968)
          This guy gets it. I am doing the exact same thing, hoarding the stuff that greed tries to lock away.
        • by lgw (121541)

          I fear you're right. Netflix just keeps dropping older stuff, both from streaming and from DVD. I just don't get it.

          I don't want to torrent anything! It's just crazy that no one will take my money to stream me the vast back catalog of titles that have entered the digital domain.

          It's time for mandatory licensing of older works. You know what - I'm OK with 100 year copyright if after 10 works fall under some FRAND scheme and all the Netflix's of the world get to stream them for a nominal fee.

          • by EdIII (1114411)

            FRAND would be the most sane thing to do.

            You take world wide distribution digitally at an annual cost of around $100 (adjusting for local economies) and that adds up to a shitload of residuals for the artists. Can you fucking imagine how much money Disney cartoons, The Three Stooges, M*A*S*H, etc. would generate at that volume?

            There is so much good content that has been created that is considered classic, cult classic, etc.

            Unfortunately, they want to force feed you the newer content at ever increasing rates

            • Re:Hoarders (Score:4, Insightful)

              by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Tuesday November 12, 2013 @05:59AM (#45398939) Homepage Journal

              FRAND would be the most sane thing to do.

              The most sane thing to do would be to restore the original term for Copyright. Life moves faster now, but copyrights expire slower. That is obviously bullshit.

              • by lgw (121541)

                Life moves faster now

                Things every generation ever has said.

                There's no need to have a short copyright term (though the recent extensions are silly), instead we need to change what copyright means, so that you can't restrict the distribution or prevent derivative works. I see no problem with the creator continuing to profit for a long time from some creative work, and that was never really the problem (except with children who demand all things for free). The problem comes when copyright blocks further creative progress, and th

      • The netflix version of TNG looks like crap compared to the Blu-Ray re-masters. Also, things disappear off Netflix. After King of the Hill disappeared, i DLed the whole series.
    • Could be that most download hoarders are finally coming to their senses that out of the 250gigs of MP3s they've downloaded they're really only listening to about 2gigs worth? That's my guess

      Your a fool if you only listen to 2gigs worth of MP3's you'll end up hating all of your favorite songs before the year is out.

    • by fafalone (633739)
      As a hoarder, my downloading has slowed down quite a bit. I've downloaded every TV show and movie I'd ever be interested in watching, in HD if available. Now the only downloading I do is new episodes or new movies (and of course when something I like comes out higher quality). I am indeed quite satisfied with my 10TBs of 281 movies and 82 full series.

      But streaming/pay services for video in their current form will never see a penny from me. For the way I consume media, their shortcomings are a deal break
      • All of your points and concerns are fair and reasonable, I totally understand them.

        In my comment, I said that the services today aren't perfect, they are missing some things (like off-line viewing).

        But for most people, they are good enough.

        People like you will always exist, that's fine, the fact that most people just pay Netflix $8 a month means that the media companies might actually start ignoring you at some point, rather than fighting a pointless crusade against you (that they can't win).

        I agree

    • by jxander (2605655)

      Similar theory: the majority of people who are going to torrent already have their libraries full, regardless of how much they're watching said library

      TPB is famous enough that anyone even remotely in tune with the internet at large could easily figure out how to download the complete James Bond collection, or whatever they fancy. But once they have that (and the complete Star Trek collection, Game of Thrones, etc) there isn't as much of a glut. Just steadily downloading new stuff as it becomes available.

    • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

      that and the fact that you can only beat off so many times a year so having 65 days of pr0n doesn't make much sense either.

      Challenge accepted.

    • by Kjella (173770)

      Or maybe it's people who've gotten sick of downloading 5 gigs worth of an e-book collection for a single book that's about 6 dollars on Amazon.

      Actually I think it's the complete opposite, it's the knowledge that yes I'll easily find a torrent that has it and yes the speed will be good, so there's very little reason to hoard it just to have it available or to avoid downloading it again. With the war on piracy it seemed for a while like the good times would come to an end, napster shut down, grokster shut down, winmx shut down, suprnova shut down, grab it now while it's easy because tomorrow it might be harder. With the TPB raid and trial I'd say th

  • Thanks Google (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Powercntrl (458442) on Monday November 11, 2013 @08:58PM (#45396399)

    I was indifferent about YouTube until it inexplicably linked itself to my Gmail account and now wants me to create a Google+ page in order to comment on videos. Now, I'd like nothing more to see it go up in flames, like a Tesla that hit some road debris.

    • by Rick Zeman (15628)

      I was indifferent about YouTube until it inexplicably linked itself to my Gmail account and now wants me to create a Google+ page in order to comment on videos. Now, I'd like nothing more to see it go up in flames, like a Tesla that hit some road debris.

      I compensated for that by deleting my YouTube channel account. I encourage every one else to do the same.

      • by EdIII (1114411)

        Don't just delete your account. That does nothing.

        TRANSFER ALL OF IT TO VIMEO OR AN EQUIVALENT

        One of the biggest things that pisses me off is that I had to deal with the absolute suck that is the YouTube API and develop automated content creation and BI platforms that used YouTube. Google (surprise it has something to do with OAUTH) deprecated YouTube API v2. Now you have zero ability to fully automate anything with YouTube.

        Why did I have to do this in the first place? Businesses are under the impression t

    • Re:Thanks Google (Score:5, Informative)

      by Forever Wondering (2506940) on Monday November 11, 2013 @09:47PM (#45396689)

      Sounds like you're logged into gmail when you go to youtube.

      Logout [of gmail] first [possibly clearing some cookies] and you'll have no problem. I have a gmail account [but I only access it through POP3/IMAP from thunderbird--thus, it's never logged in] and I don't have the same problem. I did have the same problem one time when I was logged into gmail.

      If you'd rather not logout/login on gmail repeatedly, you can create a separate browser profile [Firefox, at least] for youtube, etc.

      • by Solandri (704621)

        If you'd rather not logout/login on gmail repeatedly, you can create a separate browser profile [Firefox, at least] for youtube, etc.

        Or easier yet, use one browser just for logging into gmail, another browser for other stuff.

        • by lgw (121541)

          Or easier yet, cut the cord to the gmail mothership! There are other webmail products (I'm in the midst of switching to outlook.com). Yahoo and MS may have serve ads, but it's vastly less intrusive than googles omni-present tracking

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Inda (580031)
        I never log out of Gmail and Google stopped hassling me about linking YouTube or using my real name a while back. One browser, rarely clear cookies.

        Mountains out of mole hills.
    • Re:Thanks Google (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Nerdfest (867930) on Monday November 11, 2013 @11:20PM (#45397215)

      Out of curiosity, why does it bother you? I consider it a great feature (the single account, not the nagging). I don't imagine it makes much of a difference to Google one way or the other with respect to information collection.

  • by FlyHelicopters (1540845) on Monday November 11, 2013 @09:00PM (#45396409)
    To be honest, I'll admit that a few years ago, I was a frequent user of The Pirate Bay.

    Now? For less than $25 a month, I have Amazon Prime Videos, Netflix, and Hulu Plus. They provide me with, more or less, all the video content I really want. (and more than I could ever watch)

    There are shows and movies that come and go from these services that I'd *like* to have, but there is so much to watch, I can't be bothered to pirate them anymore.

    So finally the media companies are offering a legal service that is approaching *good enough* status. It isn't perfect and yes, there are features we don't have yet that can be had with a pirate copy, but at some point it gets close enough that my time is worth more than messing with it. For the cost of 2 movie tickets a month, we have endless things to watch (and not nearly enough time to watch them all, my "to watch list keeps growing").

    I currently have DirecTV in my home, cost is about $100 a month. I'm not quite ready to ditch it yet (because of my kids, Disney and Nick are popular in my house), but I see that day coming. The few things that we watch that aren't on Prime/Netflix/Hulu can be purchased by the episode most of the time, sooner or later, cable/satellite will be really pointless.

    I'm sure for many, that day has already arrived. More and more each year are likely to cut that cord, just as they did with landlines. I cut my landline in 2005 and never looked back, so will it be with DirecTV at some point.

    • I'll second that. I'm a heavy pirate, and the only stufff I get anymore is new movie releases and TV shows because for some incomprehensible reason, they are delayed reaching those services by weeks to over a year... or for things they don't carry in their catalog; For example, Babylon 5 is not available for instant viewing on Netflix.

      For $10 a month, I've been fairly satisfied with the service; I wish the quality was better, but that is a limitation of crappy internet service that everyone in the country d

      • by EdIII (1114411)

        This really speaks to the Full Retard status of Big Entertainment.

        The writing has been on the wall for a long damn time, they just can't see it. Not possible for them I guess.

        Netflix/Hulu/Amazon Prime is a piracy killer. What more proof do they want? If you offer a service at a reasonable price that people actually want.... surprise surprise.. people will pay the money.

        I don't pirate nearly as much these days simply because of how easy (and cost effective) the alternative is now.

        The price points of these se

      • Babylon 5 was pulled because WB is trying to make their own go of a streaming service.

        Give them a few years, it will be back when WB fails at that.

      • by Rich0 (548339)

        I'll second that. I'm a heavy pirate, and the only stufff I get anymore is new movie releases and TV shows because for some incomprehensible reason, they are delayed reaching those services by weeks to over a year... or for things they don't carry in their catalog; For example, Babylon 5 is not available for instant viewing on Netflix.

        Yeah, that makes no sense at all.

        Why not charge $1 to enable a movie early on your streaming account. It will be there eventually for free anyway, and you still only can watch it for as long as you subscribe. So, make it available on release day for $1 more or something like that, and then would-be pirates have to decide whether it is worth futzing with torrents and having to wait an hour or two to start watching it to save $1. Don't make it like pay-per-view where you only get it for the day or whatever

    • by amiga3D (567632)

      I mostly use piratebay for downloading shows from England. Downton Abbey for my wife is one. Frankly there is more on DirectTV than I'll ever have time to watch. I can't bother streaming anything. My wife DVR's a lot of shows and occasionally I'll sit and watch one with her, mostly cooking shows or the like. Occasionally I'll watch football or baseball. Really if it wasn't for the wife and the grandkids I wouldn't miss any of it much. Game of Thrones and Justified are the only two shows I regularly w

    • The thing I still use torrents for is to find really old stuff (we are talking 20s-50s here, mostly "horror"). There are lots of old gems to be found on TPB, which I do not think will ever be offered by any commercial streaming service. To be fair, most of those fringe downloads are abmyssably slow. Because of this, I still think that the torrents will fill a niche also when the true pirates have disappeared. It would be great if there was a repository with 1) legal now public domain movies (the old stuff)
      • Isn't that what the Internet Archive is doing? If not, they should be.

        I give Wikipedia a few bucks each year, I'd give such a service some money every year to keep all the old stuff online. It is a benefit to future generations to not lose all of that.

    • by nospam007 (722110) *

      "To be honest, I'll admit that a few years ago, I was a frequent user of The Pirate Bay.
      Now? For less than $25 a month, I have Amazon Prime Videos, Netflix, and Hulu Plus."

      It's good to be you. 95% of the planet do not have the pleasure, so we have to torrent original movies and series.

      As for TFA, streaming needs more bandwidth than peer to peer, who would have thought.

      • Slightly more than 5% of the planet has at least one of those services, or something similar to it.

        In any case, more than half the planet is more concerned with clean drinking water and electricity, so frankly the whole planet isn't the target.

        As for bandwidth, actually Netflix doesn't require as much as you'd think, they have local machines they put in busy ISPs to keep the backbone as clear as possible of video traffic.

        https://signup.netflix.com/openconnect [netflix.com]

        Netflix will install their server for fre

  • Not to worry. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jeffb (2.718) (1189693) on Monday November 11, 2013 @09:04PM (#45396435)

    It won't be long before our fully-purchased representatives finish overturning the last vestiges of Network Neutrality, allowing our Rightful Owners to specify and enforce the proper balance of Internet traffic.

  • by paiute (550198) on Monday November 11, 2013 @09:16PM (#45396517)
    Dear Netflix and Youtube watcher,

    Our customers have reported stuttering, loss of signal, blackouts, and insertion of pornographic images and video into their streams. We are doing everything we can to fix this problem. In the meantime you might consider upgrading to Xfinity streaming service, which we guarantee will not be hit by these glitches.

    regards,

    Comcast
    • by timeOday (582209)
      As a long-time Comcast customer it seems to me things are going in the other direction - better! They had a 250GB cap for a while and then gave up on it. Years ago, youtube used to stall all the time and now rarely does. Then youtube was OK but then Netflix (then Prime) always paused to buffer at least a couple times during a show, whereas now it hardly ever does. I've been a VOIP user since I think 2004 (Vonage then Ooma) and, whereas it was initially fairly embarrassing to use, the spousal complaint r
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Sounds like you missed this little tidbit. [arstechnica.com]

      • That's good to hear since my FIOS connection has been sucking shit for YouTube videos lately. According to independent investigations done by FIOS customers who happen to be network engineers, the problem is on Verizon's end. Some people are claiming similar issues with Netflix on FIOS. I just bought an HD TV antenna and I'm going to switch to Comcast for internet since YouTube has a chance of working on their network. Seriously Verizon, what's the point of 75 Mbps down when your network is slowing down
        • I have FIOS and can confirm that sometimes YouTube sucks.

          Sometimes it works great, but there are times I do end up giving up on it.

          I can confirm that Netflix and Amazon Prime Video work perfectly, first time, every time, no buffering.

          150 meg down, 65 meg up, and thankfully no caps. I VPN my home to my office with it (and keep the files synced between them) and I also backup online with two different services (Crashplan and Backblaze), plus use streaming services every day, I actually don't know what

      • by mcrbids (148650)

        Happy Comcast customer here.

        I can log into their portal and see that I've not been within their 250 "cap" for months, yet I've received no communication from them. The instant I get a letter from them, I start with the alternative that doesn't cap. I'll go back to 5 Mbit DSL if I have to if it comes without caps.

        I'd rather give my money to a company that increases profits by serving their customers.

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        As a long-time Comcast customer it seems to me things are going in the other direction - better! They had a 250GB cap for a while and then gave up on it.

        They had a 90GB cap for a while, and then gave up on it! Guess I was a Comcast customer before you. This was before they had a page that would tell you when you went over the cap, and before you could get a front-line employee to tell you what the cap was. The third guy I talked to finally spilled the beans, and I finally stopped getting letters from Comcast when I stopped going over 90. This was probably a decade ago now, my god we've had cable internet a long time and yet where I live now I'm still on a s

  • Nice that was tossed in there. Screw you.

  • Is that people are content with watching brainless cat-videos instead of learning something.

    Drool... Drool... click.. Drool.

  • by Trax3001BBS (2368736) on Monday November 11, 2013 @09:41PM (#45396649) Homepage Journal

    http://www.reddit.com/r/fullmoviesonyoutube/ [reddit.com]

    PS3 in a drop down fashion are NetFlix, youtube, then of course Amazon instant videos and Red Box
    showed up on the last update -4.5.

    Flame: Know how time consuming it was to find that reddit link? It used to be a tab on my browser.

    Yesterday I updated Opera 12 to version 17. I didn't want to lose the /. taking me to slashdot feature so put it off.
    Opera doesn't have bookmarks anymore, how truly asinine is that? Nor can I disable flash, and much more.
    So I don't use Opera after well since forever, but FireFox that auto log's me into a site (for the moment).
    and off topic but I'm still hot over it.

  • Why download a 4GB HD file and have to store, let it sit there for years when you can stream it and forget about it after 'consuming it'. As for youtube videos, no one wants to hold on to that stuff--it's short term memory videos anyway and google stores it for free....

    Sure you can take that BT file and store in your cloud, but LIRC lots of cloud storage costs money (since the free account limit you at what, 5GB?).

    What's killing P2P file sharing is not the offerings (though the netflix, youtube), but the co

  • Perhaps there were fewer world of warcraft updates pushed out?
    Bittorrent isn't just used for video.

  • Data went up... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by viperidaenz (2515578) on Monday November 11, 2013 @10:14PM (#45396873)

    But did consumption go up or did video bit rate go up?
    Maybe more people are now selecting "HD" streaming than they used to.

    • by swillden (191260)

      But did consumption go up or did video bit rate go up? Maybe more people are now selecting "HD" streaming than they used to.

      And they're probably torrenting higher video bit rates, too.

      My money is on the first supposition in the summary being right: The legal services have gotten good enough, and cheap enough, that people have less incentive to reach for illegal torrents.

      • illegal video downloads used to be of fixed size. Some traction of multiple of CD or DVD media. eg: 350mb, 700mb, 1.4gb, 4.7gb,

        It seems lately the sizes have been shrinking, the compression rates are getting higher. A 40 minute TV show is now less than 300mb in "SD" quality.
        A year or so ago, they were 350mb
        The 700mb quality has also dropped to around 560mb.

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        And they're probably torrenting higher video bit rates, too.

        Not just that, but Netflix is overcompressed as compared to the genuine HD video sources. Torrents have gotten bigger than Netflix streams faster, but Netflix has eclipsed torrents.

  • I find that hard to believe, half of the time, I can hardly get the vids there to play. Every year it gets worse, it's at a point making me yearn to real player.

    Netflix otoh, almost never has issues.

  • Meanwhile, back in your fiber box...

  • by PopeRatzo (965947) on Monday November 11, 2013 @10:39PM (#45396997) Homepage Journal

    If you click a few levels through the story, you'll find that the data comes from Sandvine, whose customers are the big telecoms. Considering the battle over net neutrality, I'd say that Sandvine is not a neutral source in this discussion.

    I'd like to see data from some other sources on "Netflix and Youtube are half of all Internet traffic".

    • by Anubis IV (1279820) on Tuesday November 12, 2013 @03:57AM (#45398435)

      Not everyone who gets paid by an industry is automatically in its pocket. In this case, they gain nothing by doctoring the report.

      Sandvine's numbers are taken as fact by pretty much everyone in the know. When I was in grad school, they were the ones posting the numbers saying that torrents accounted for whatever insane percentage of Internet traffic that they once accounted for (30%+, as I recall), and practically every research paper I read quoted something Sandvine had published at some point. As I recall, the reason they're able to get such accurate numbers is because their customers are the big telecoms, which gives them the sort of access they need to make these assessments. Without that sort of access, the best you could do is get some numbers from large universities, local ISPs, and CDNs. Of those, the first two wouldn't be useful in the least for extrapolating traffic patterns to the population at large, and good luck getting these sorts of numbers from the CDNs.

      Look back on Sandvine's historical data and you'll see that they haven't exactly done the entrenched telecoms any favors, since they seem to just tell it like it is, time and again, regardless of what the implications may be.

  • by tom229 (1640685) on Monday November 11, 2013 @11:07PM (#45397155)
    This is all the entertainment industry needs to do. Get behind a financial sane method of delivering media, that's more convenient than pirating, and the "war" is over. Prohibition is never the answer, yet it always seems to be the first response.
  • by J'raxis (248192) on Tuesday November 12, 2013 @01:37AM (#45397907) Homepage

    Meanwhile Bittorrent traffic is down slightly (7.4% from 10%) in Internet traffic compared to last year. Could more people be satisfied with current video offerings or are less people finding useful things to download via file sharing?

    Or, could it be that someone doesn't understand percentages? If there are three people in a room, and two are using BitTorrent, that's 67%. If a fourth person walks in, and two people are still using BitTorrent, usage isn't down at all, but the percentage shrank to 50%.

    BitTorrent traffic could be shrinking, or it could be holding steady, or it could even be increasing, just not enough for its proportion of total Internet traffic to even remain constant. But you can't tell anything by just looking at percentages of the whole like that.

  • Actually bit torrent traffic went up and Netflix traffic went up more.

Optimism is the content of small men in high places. -- F. Scott Fitzgerald, "The Crack Up"

Working...