How Netflix Eats the Internet 303
pacopico writes "Every night, Netflix accounts for about one-third of the downstream Internet traffic in North America, dwarfing all of its major rivals combined. Bloomberg Businessweek has a story detailing the computer science behind the streaming site. It digs into Netflix's heavy use of AWS and its open-source tools like Chaos Kong and Asgard, which the Obama administration apparently used during the campaign. Story seems to suggest that the TV networks will have an awful time mimicking what Netflix has done."
Just like eating an elephant (Score:5, Funny)
Don't worry about the networks... (Score:5, Insightful)
They'll use their bought and paid for congress critters to get Netflix legislated to death and use their industry connections to get even more content taken away from Netflix to keep them under control...
Re:Don't worry about the networks... (Score:5, Insightful)
"You can't stop the signal." ~ Mr. Universe.
Re:Don't worry about the networks... (Score:5, Interesting)
You underestimate the power of Netflix and the demand that customers have for it.
Many do...it was a wakeup call for the cable/satellite operators when Disney signed with them. Disney is one of the kings of content...and they see something more valuable in Netflix than their current (soon to be previous) contract with the Starz cable channel. Netflix charges 8 dollars a month for offering more content than many people who pay 100 dollars a month get from their cable subscription.
Live sports and live political talk shows (Score:3)
Netflix charges 8 dollars a month for offering more content than many people who pay 100 dollars a month get from their cable subscription.
One household in my survey sample keeps cable TV around for NCAA football, NFL, NHL, and UFC. Another keeps cable TV around for MSNBC. Netflix doesn't offer such live programming.
Re:Live sports and live political talk shows (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah that's pretty much what I was thinking. Live programming is the only thing keeping cable TV alive. Once that becomes available for streaming online, well, cable (and possibly satellite as well) is done.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't like sports and I wouldn't get my news from TV programs if you paid me. I think the networks are in trouble with me.
Re: (Score:2)
"Industry connections" aren't stupid - if Netflix offers a better deal, they're going with Netflix. If those "connections" do decide to be stupid, they do so knowing full well there's raftloads of independents snapping at their heels.
The TV networks have had an awful time adapting fo (Score:3, Insightful)
Comparing TV networks to Netflix is like comparing an ancient Spartan soldier to a modern, fully armed, US Marine.
Re:The TV networks have had an awful time adapting (Score:5, Funny)
If I've learned anything from Sid Meier, it's that spearmen are damned tough bastards to beat when they want to hold their ground.
Re:The TV networks have had an awful time adapting (Score:4, Informative)
He learned that from the British. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Comparing TV networks to Netflix is like comparing an ancient Spartan soldier to a modern, fully armed, US Marine.
You give the TV guys far too much credit. Your hypothetical Spartan soldier would, of course, be doomed by inferior technology; but it is unlikely that he would resort to petulant litigation or pernicious lobbying.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm pretty sure that Athens did a lot more of the heavy lifting on that side of things. They also had perks like 'culture' and 'occasionally not existing in a state of total war'; but their legal and political shenanigans are quite legendary.
I heard other numbers (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I heard other numbers (Score:5, Insightful)
YouTube - You watch a short, low quality video, then spend a little time browsing for another video.
Netflix - You are continuously streaming high quality video for anywhere from 20 minutes (30 min TV show) to 2+ hours (movies).
YouTube might have more users at any given time, but it's completely plausible that Netflix utterly crushes it in terms of how much bandwidth is used. Given that Hulu, which is probably Netflix's single largest competitor, posted around 1/5 the revenues for 2012, it's a drop in the bucket compared to Netflix... and Netflix is more friendly to people that want to continuously watch episodes/movies due to a lack of commercial breaks.
Re: (Score:2)
And they're talking about North America. You have to take into account that things like Hulu are USA-only but Netflix is available in Canada. Granted, the selection pales compared to the USA version, but at least it's available.
Re:I heard other numbers (Score:5, Funny)
YouTube spends most of its time saying 'buffering'; something I've never experienced with netflix. That's got to save a lot of bandwidth.
Is BitTorrent still using 35-40%? (Score:2)
It's possible that that figure was only on Internet2, which has mostly academic users. Or is Netflix using BitTorrent for their downloads?
You know... (Score:5, Interesting)
I would be more than happy to be able to actually download movies from Netflix during non peak times to watch at some other time. This would allow spreading out the bandwidth over the course of a day instead of everyone streaming at peak times such as 7PM EST,CST,PST
Streaming services will continue to degrade our bandwidth unless we are given the ability to download movies\shows during off hours to watch later.
Re: (Score:2)
Better idea just upgrade the internet connections.
I don't want to decide what I am going to watch hours in advance. I have no interest in leaving some machine on burning power to record a show for later.
TV series episodes on the bus (Score:4, Interesting)
Better idea just upgrade the internet connections.
Say you want to watch 24-minute episodes of a TV series on your 30-minute-each-way bus commute to and from work. To stream on the bus, you'd need an expensive cellular data plan. And it's expensive because there's a limit to how many cellular subscribers can be served at once.
I don't want to decide what I am going to watch hours in advance.
You do if you're watching a whole season of a TV series in order.
I have no interest in leaving some machine on burning power to record a show for later.
Even if you have no such interest, millions of pirates using BitTorrent have such interest.
Re: (Score:3)
I already have such a plan. I can also rip DVDs.
More cellular subscribers can be served by making cells smaller. I am driving that sort of change with my usage.
Millions of pirates using BitTorrent can download their files right before they watch them with modern internet connections.
Re:You know... (Score:5, Insightful)
I would be more than happy to be able to actually download movies from Netflix during non peak times to watch at some other time. This would allow spreading out the bandwidth over the course of a day instead of everyone streaming at peak times such as 7PM EST,CST,PST
Streaming services will continue to degrade our bandwidth unless we are given the ability to download movies\shows during off hours to watch later.
But that would disrupt the hilarious consensual hallucination among the 'content' people that 'streaming' isn't actually just a form of 'downloading' where you don't bother to write things to the disk! We can't have that!
It is absolutely necessary that 'streaming' and 'downloading' be fundamentally different, because, um, 'broadcasting' and 'selling VHS tapes' were fundamentally different! That's why! Also, if your video decoder was sold as a 'computer' and connects to an LCD panel that the salesman called a 'monitor', that's entirely different than if your video decoder is called a 'set top box' and is connected to an LCD panel called a 'TV'. Because, because, something.
Re: (Score:2)
My AppleTV is connected to a computer-only LCD panel (it only has VGA, DVI and HDMI inputs, no built-in tuner).
I wonder what kind of comments I'd get about my setup from those "content people".
Re: (Score:2)
You... can't... don't... should... not... be.
Silent (Score:2)
My AppleTV is connected to a computer-only LCD panel (it only has VGA, DVI and HDMI inputs, no built-in tuner).
I thought computer-only LCD panels tended to lack audio output. Did you have Apple TV in mind before you bought your computer-only LCD panel to make sure it had an audio output?
Re: (Score:2)
Some computer-only LCD panels do have audio support from the HDMI input port, but mine doesn't. Besides, my LCD was a gift and anyway I route the optical audio output to a line-level converter from monoprice and then to small powered speakers, into which I connect my headphones.
Re:You know... (Score:4, Interesting)
What you need is .... TiVo for NetFlix!
Um...you mean PlayLater [playon.tv]?
Netflix Canada (Score:2)
It eats the Internet too, eh?
Bad codecs (Score:5, Interesting)
If they used modern H.264 and AAC encoders rather than whatever outdated VC.1 and WMA encoders they're using, they could cut that bandwidth use by a third, reducing their costs and improving the customer experience tremendously. Does anybody know why they haven't already done this?
Re: (Score:2)
BTW I believe their streams for iOS, PS3, etc are h.264 these days, but their desktop Silverlight player still uses VC-1 last I heard.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think they're sending VC.1 or WMA to all the iOS devices, the PS3, the Wii, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Probably because they're limited by the vast array of third party devices their streams must play on. Adding different codecs to the mix would increase their operational costs and complexity even as it reduced their bandwidth costs... so it's not clear a priori that such a switch is beneficial overall.
To know that for certain, we'd need their internal numbers - and they aren't giving those - up.
Sports are the key (Score:2)
If any sports franchise (major league, NCAA, etc.) were to get a streaming contract that doesn't require a cable/satellite subscription, it would be the beginning of the end. I think they realize that, and is why they lock down things like ESPN3 or NFL Gametime, etc. Sports is where the revenue is for the operators...not channels like Syfy.
Re: (Score:3)
Double entendre (Score:3, Funny)
From TFA:
They call me "18-Inch Guy", too... Probably for different reasons.
Re:Double entendre (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is Netflix (Score:5, Insightful)
No, they pay their ISP bills like everyone else.
Netflix used 1/3 of Internet's BW on DVD-by-mail (Score:5, Funny)
Back in the old days, when Netflix worked by mailing physical DVDs, their bandwidth was about 1/3 of the total bandwidth of the Internet. They had a much higher latency (~48 hours), but a huge amount of parallelism and 4GB packet sizes.
Re: (Score:3)
I know /. thinks this is funny, but some communities still use carried pigeons + USB sticks because it offers far superior bandwidth to what is available.
Re:Is Netflix (Score:5, Insightful)
And we are paying for that downstream bandwidth. Netflix, I'm sure, pays an insane amount to their ISP for the bandwidth they use.
You are using the same logic that AT&T used when they wanted their "google tax".
Re:Is Netflix (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually Netflix is trying to get past transit ISPs as much as possible via peering [netflix.com]. Provide free peering and caching appliances to ISPs, they get their content closer to the customer, and cut down their transit costs.
Re:Is Netflix (Score:4, Informative)
Just like Akamai and others were doing 13 years ago...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Is Netflix (Score:4, Informative)
Which is why distributing through AWS also makes sense. Tumblr and others do the same thing. It's called: most efficient CDN you can construct. And with luck, it will eat Comcast/xFinity's lunch, along with a long list of broadband cable provider's meals. Yes, you still need the last mile. No, you don't need the goofy TV signal infrastructure at 720p on a good day. Free your cable: use all of the bandwidth for packets.
Re:How many thirds are there? (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe Netflix is spamming us with porn via bit torrent?
Re:Is Netflix (Score:5, Interesting)
ISPs only have so much capacity to sell though.
And Netflix is buying what ISPs are selling. And more importantly, Netflix's customers are buying their connections.
I hear this every so often since I used to work at an ISP. Basically the ISPs are longing for the days where they could sell a grandma a 10 meg connection for $100 a month and watch her use 100kb of bandwidth a day when she checks her email and looks up recipies.
Granted, we do have a problem with network saturation, where ISPs sell product they do not own, but that's their own fault, not Netflix nor their customers.
Re:Is Netflix (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree. To create an analogous situation with something other than Internet service, imagine Microsoft started going around to every business running Windows/Exchange, saying, "Hey, we deserve some of your profits. You're using our products to make money, and it's totally unfair that we don't get a cut." That'd be ridiculous,right? Microsoft offered a product, and you bought it according to their terms. If you think they deserve a percentage simply because you use their product to make money, then where does it end? Why can't 3M come after you for a percentage because you use post-its.
Even in talking about Internet service, why aren't ISPs going after every company with a website? I work for a company with a website, and we get business through the internet. We use our Internet connection to conduct our business. Should our ISP be able to come after us for a percentage of profits, just because we make money by using out Internet connection?
No. We pay for out internet connection. We pay for our hosting. Our customers pay for their internet connections. That's all the ISPs can lay claim to: the charges for providing Internet service.
Really, the only difference with Netflix is they end up being a competitor to ISPs who also provide Cable service. Well boo-fricking-hoo.
Re:Is Netflix (Score:4)
Really, the only difference with Netflix is they end up being a competitor to ISPs who also provide Cable service. Well boo-fricking-hoo.
+100 Internets to you good sir.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
imagine Microsoft started going around to every business running Windows/Exchange, saying, "Hey, we deserve some of your profits. You're using our products to make money, and it's totally unfair that we don't get a cut." That'd be ridiculous,right? Microsoft offered a product, and you bought it according to their terms. If you think they deserve a percentage simply because you use their product to make money, then where does it end? Why can't 3M come after you for a percentage because you use post-its.
Well they did do something analogous to this when they were doing site licensing. I don't know if they still get away with the practice but at one time they charged a per desktop license fee. Not a per installed copy mind you...they quite literally charged per machine on the premises and it did not matter if it was running a MS product or not. If the entire marketing dept. was using Macs they still got charged for a Windows license for every Mac. Engineering group all running on Sun Sparc? doesn't matter th
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Is Netflix (Score:5, Informative)
imagine Microsoft started going around to every business running Windows/Exchange, saying, "Hey, we deserve some of your profits. You're using our products to make money, and it's totally unfair that we don't get a cut." That'd be ridiculous,right? Microsoft offered a product, and you bought it according to their terms. If you think they deserve a percentage simply because you use their product to make money, then where does it end? Why can't 3M come after you for a percentage because you use post-its.
Well they did do something analogous to this when they were doing site licensing. I don't know if they still get away with the practice but at one time they charged a per desktop license fee. Not a per installed copy mind you...they quite literally charged per machine on the premises and it did not matter if it was running a MS product or not.
That's not the same as it only references in-business usage. This would be like Microsoft asking for a percentage of quarterly revenue from your company simply because everyone is using Outlook/Exchange justifying it as the email service helped facilitate business.
Or how about the Ford company asking a taxi fleet for a cut of the per-mile rate because the vehicles are all Ford made, ignoring that the vehicles were all purchased paid in full by the company already.
Re:Is Netflix (Score:5, Insightful)
imagine Microsoft started going around to every business running Windows/Exchange, saying, "Hey, we deserve some of your profits. You're using our products to make money, and it's totally unfair that we don't get a cut."
You don't have to imagine it. Apple does it with iOS every day. You want to put your software on a iPad or iPhone, or make any money off of said app--Apple wants their 30% cut (or hit the road, Jack).
Re:Is Netflix (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes but ISPs DO go after business with " You're using our products to make money, and it's totally unfair that we don't get a cut" attitude.
Case in point: "Business plans" for internet service. I don't know about where you live, but I can tell you: the local telco will not provide "residential" $20/mo DSL service to "commercial" phone lines. They instead "offer" the cheapest $50/mo "business plan" that offers less speed (3mbit vs 6mbit) but includes "up to 10 email addresses, 50MB of web space" while residential service offers only 1 mailbox and no web space. You can't opt not to have the useless 50MB space or the 10 mailboxes with 100MB storage (combined).
There's also no mention of an SLA, and you're stuck with the same 800-number helpdesk when you run into trouble.
Re:Is Netflix (Score:5, Insightful)
So they should raise their prices then?! Or maybe put down some more pipes?
If an ISP has a problem with its customers using bandwidth, they really have three options:
1) Raise prices per/MB; 2) Get more bandwidth; 3) Get rid of customers who use a lot of bandwidth. It seems that many ISPs want to do only 1 and 3, where the logical thing is to do 2 (because bandwidth usage will only increase in the future, and and ISP that can provide it, will have an edge of those that can't).
Re:Is Netflix (Score:4, Insightful)
Precisely, commercial bandwidth is one of the few areas where capitalism seems to be working. The price has come down substantially over the last decade. If they can't afford to provide what Netflix needs, then they should raise the rates and build out the infrastructure.
Problem solved.
Re: (Score:3)
I do, it is super cheap.
You need to switch providers.
I think it comes with 10Mbit for each rack.
Re: (Score:2)
FYI, 1 and 2 are mutually inclusive.
Re:Is Netflix (Score:4, Insightful)
It helps if you upgrade your equipment, rather than look for the world's greatest ROI on 10 Mb hubs...
Re:Is Netflix (Score:5, Insightful)
I run a small hobby ISP and I can have effectively as much bandwidth as I'm willing to pay for, or rather, as much as my customers are willing to pay for.
As a somebody selling internet access, I love Netflix and any other online service that give my potential customers a chance to blow through the incumbent telco's artificially low transfer caps (I don't put caps on my service). I can't think of another business where the typical vendor prefers that his customer use less of the product he sells. It makes no sense to me.
Re:Is Netflix (Score:4, Insightful)
Your comment got me thinking, and I came up with one. Insurance. ISP's want to be like insurance companies, collecting money for a service they don't want you to actually use. Unfortunately, they're not providing a service that their customers would rather not have to use.
I think it's high time to classify ISP's as a utility and be done with it.
Re:Is Netflix (Score:5, Interesting)
I think it's high time to classify ISP's as a utility and be done with it.
Completely agree
Re: (Score:3)
Golden Corral (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't think of another business where the typical vendor prefers that his customer use less of the product he sells.
Golden Corral and other buffet restaurants.
Re:Golden Corral (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe, but I've never seen a buffet discourage its customers from eating more food. Sometimes they have a sign asking you not to take more than you can eat, or even promising to bill you extra if you do, but large ISPs don't ask you not to waste their product, they simply discourage it across the board.
I think the buffet comparison is particularly apt. Whenever my customers ask me about transfer caps, I simply ask that they enjoy the bandwidth and do not waste it. I leave it up to them what constitutes judicious use of the resource.
Re:Is Netflix (Score:5, Informative)
ISPs only have so much capacity to sell though.
Yes, and like any product when demand exceeds supply you would then invest in your company to increase your ability to fulfill it. It's called "business is going well -- we're expanding".
Re:Is Netflix (Score:5, Insightful)
Basically taking advantage of an infrastructure it doesn't pay for?
If anything(given that buildout is expensive, and keeping a run of either copper or fiber maintained and backhoe-free isn't free), Netflix is, in addition to paying its bandwidth bills just like everybody else, providing the rather valuable service of giving millions of customers a reason to buy more bandwidth.
Given the steady advances in cramming bits over lines, even shitty legacy copper, the more bandwidth your customers want to buy, the more bandwidth you get to sell per fixed-cost(rights of way, keeping the lights on at HQ, dudes in bucket trucks, etc.)
Re: (Score:3)
I would kill for Google Fiber to cover the South Bay area. I live about ten miles from both Apple HQ and Google HQ (Sunnyvale), and I can't get cable Internet service, either. My only options are MegaPath DSL, AT&T DSL, and possibly some wireless services. (No, satellite Internet does not count.) And even though AT&T keeps sending me ads for U-Verse in the mail, when I actually go to check availability of business-class U-Verse service, they tell me that it isn't offered in Sunnyvale. My grand
Re: (Score:3)
Is Netflix basically taking advantage of an infrastructure it doesn't pay for?
Nope. I'm taking advantage of an infrastructure that I pay for. I apologize for not contributing more to the CEOs of America, but I'm sure they'll find a way to get their money on my cash, one way or another.
Netflix should then be on... (Score:2)
Re:Still not good enough for me. (Score:5, Insightful)
I feel that way about cable.
Too much content I don't want, advertising, and shows are played via some schedule instead of streamed when I want. Sure there are workarounds like DVRs, but that is just a bandaid on a huge gaping wound.
Re: (Score:2)
I feel that way about cable. Too much content I don't want, advertising, and shows are played via some schedule instead of streamed when I want. Sure there are workarounds like DVRs, but that is just a bandaid on a huge gaping wound.
I love the DVR you pay the cable company more each month so you can watch shows when you want because they like money!
This is why I cancelled cable TV and purchased a $40 antenna for my house and now use Amazon Prime for streaming service.
Re:Still not good enough for me. (Score:4, Informative)
I love how the cable companies (ie:Comcast) can call me up offering me a Cable/Internet package for $70/month, only $5 more than what I nominally pay for Internet only ... but flat out refuse to tell me what the actual cost would be after taxes/fees (I was literally told that I should sign up and can cancel it after the first month if I don't like what the taxes are). I'd gladly pay an extra $5-10/mo for full cable TV access ... but in reality it's more like 20-40 after taxes and fees (which largely don't apply to Internet-only service). /rant
And those are additional reasons why Netflix+Antenna+MythTV > Cable TV
Re: (Score:2)
I feel that way about cable.
Too much content I don't want, advertising, and shows are played via some schedule instead of streamed when I want. Sure there are workarounds like DVRs, but that is just a bandaid on a huge gaping wound.
well imagine if the content on netflix what americans had on cable in 2006 and you'll have nordic netflix! like 3 seasons of mythbusters! WHEEEE!
(yeah I should stop being lazy and cancel my sub, the reason for the poor 3rd party content on the netflix over here is that the americans who own the shows sold 'em on exclusivy deals to the domestic networks over here.. so netflix doesn't have rights to show 'em..)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I pay for Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Prime, NHL Center Ice, and per episode subscription for the few TV shows that I consider not worth waiting for to have the season released for "free" to the aforementioned services when they are not available on Hulu. I still save more doing it this way than I would spending money for over 1000 channels I have no desire to pay for or watch.
When the Stanley Cup finals are blacked out (Score:4, Informative)
I pay for Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Prime, NHL Center Ice
What do you do for NHL games that are blacked out of NHL Center Ice because they are shown on national or regional cable television? Last year the freaking finals were shown on what is now NBC Sports Network, a cable channel.
Re: (Score:3)
He probably meant GameCenter. CenterIce is the NHL's cable package offering out of market games.
Regardless, GameCenter didn't black out the 4 Canucks playoff games (all I cared about) in Germany, which is where it looked like my network was.
The absurdity of having to VPN into Germany to watch a hockey game being played at an arena 15 minutes from where I live was not lost on me.
Re: (Score:2)
There is still too much content I want that Netflix does not have available for streaming, making it not worth the price.
So you're not even counting towards that 33.33% of traffic. But a lot of people do and they are *paying* for this content.
Lots of demeritz to Starz, who started this "we're toooooo posh for Netflix" and now the other MAFIAA outfits Warner Bros. and MGM and Universal [techdirt.com] that will drive people to pirate their content.
If they think that people will subscribe to 10 different "streaming sites" like they do "cable packages", they are insane.
Re: (Score:2)
If they think that people will subscribe to 10 different "streaming sites" like they do "cable packages", they are insane.
The sad thing is that they already do. Folks are used to paying multiple providers for content - and/or paying those providers for multiple packages. I don't think the internet will end up being any different.
Sad, but I'm afraid that's the way it's gonna go.
Hell, how many people have huge numbers of streams replacing what used to be the telephone? Email, twitter, facebook, their cell phone, their landline, text messages, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
The main reason that my parents still have a satellite is sports. MLB sells their online package, but you can't see local market games on it until after the point where it's worth watching. The price is reasonable, but because it's only really useful for seeing out of market games, it's not something that somebody who likes the home team is likely to be able to get much use out of.
Personally, I don't really care, I rarely watch new programming and when I do, I'm willing to wait a week to see it online.
Re: (Score:2)
They can think that all they want. Not gonna happen.
I can always wait for DVDs.
Blackouts (Score:2)
I can always wait for DVDs.
Including DVDs of sporting events that are blacked out of the league's online service because they are shown on national or regional cable?
Re: (Score:3)
I think I have stated before that I just go to the bar.
I am not that into sports. I will certainly not pay an amount that could buy me many live tickets to watch a sport on tv.
Re: (Score:2)
Starz content on Netflix sucked anyway. None of their stuff was in HD, and the prints looked like 3rd generation VHS dubs. Good riddance. Tough luck for whoever gets stuck with their half-assed shit.
Re: (Score:3)
Everyone I know has Netflix. It has become like having a Facebook account and a Gmail address.
Apparently that you are very lonely.
Note to inveterate Slashdotters: there is a form of inter-human communication that involves no electronics. It's an arcane technique sometimes called "in person" or "face to face". It does require you to be in actually proximity to the other person but has certain advantages. For instance, audio and video quality are exceptional. It can also allow for "tactile communication". This is particularly desirable when meeting a member of ... never mind, in Slashdot that would get me rated "-1: Absurd Fantasy".
Re:Still not good enough for me. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't imagine running out of stuff to see on Netflix, but then I only watch about a half hour or so of TV a day. Don't get me wrong, I still waste brain cells via internet instead of the boob tube... it's just that I find Netflix to be cavernous in terms of content.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but for $8 a month you can get access to the entire DVD catalog, so $8 for the streaming library which is tiny comparatively speaking is way too much money.
Re: (Score:2)
Add a DVD slot to your Mac (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Four failures on Netflix (Score:2)
Such as sports. If I were to replace cable TV with Netflix and NHL Center Ice, games shown on national or regional cable TV would be blacked out.
To be fair, let's limit it to scripted works more than a decade old. According to CanIStream.it, Netflix doesn't have the film Pinocchio and the Emperor of the Night, the film Song of the South, the film Secret of the Incas, or the TV series Spartakus and the Sun Beneath the Sea.
Re: (Score:2)
There is still too much content I want that Netflix does not have available for streaming, making it not worth the price to me, but I'm just one person whose opinion doesn't mean anything at all in the grand scheme of things, and certainly doesn't add anything to this discussion.
FTFY.
Re:Still not good enough for me. (Score:5, Interesting)
I'll readily grant that Netflix, just like pretty much every other service ever created, is not necessarily for everyone. Particularly if you're into sports or want to watch stuff as it comes out, Netflix is probably not for you. But for those of us who prefer to wait until a show is a few seasons in or entirely completed before we even pick it up, Netflix is the best thing since P2P.
In contrast to cable plan I cut even before I started with Netflix, I now have:
1) Orders of magnitude more things to watch right now, and more of it in 1080p.
2) A subscription that costs 25% of what I used to pay ($8 vs. $30).
3) An ability to watch video while away from home.
4) No need to purchase/rent a separate device to timeshift or store content.
5) The ability to watch shows a season at a time without having to store that content or plan doing so in advance.
6) Recommendations that are actually really good for stuff I haven't seen yet.
7) No more commercial breaks or wasting time watching intros/credits on TV series.
8) No hidden fees, great customer service, and no contract.
Again, it's not for everyone, and for many people the best it can be is a supplementary service that may allow them to reduce the amount they spend elsewhere or else add some extra content that they couldn't get otherwise, but for many people, it can add a LOT of value over what cable has to offer while still being significantly cheaper.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
This is the problem with affiliate systems. People will always find ways to abuse them, and it will not be the original company. I have recieved affiliate spam that eventually goes through amazon. Was amazon responsible? No.
Granted, some companies do a better job of policing their affiliates, but all it takes is registering a few dozen domains, pasting up
Re: (Score:2)
So, Firefox complains the first site you linked to has malware, ignoring that, it's also blocked by corporate firewall...
The second link complains about a netflix ad on a webpage; I don't see what that has to do with spam e-mail?
So, I'm calling you a malware spreading link spammer.
Re: (Score:2)
Forget about Netflix, the real question is: what is this "Internet" thing?