Netflix Gets What It Pays For: Comcast Streaming Speeds Skyrocket 328
jfruh (300774) writes "Back in February, after a lengthy dispute, Netflix agreed to pay Comcast for network access after being dogged by complaints of slow speeds from Comcast subscribers. Two months later, it appears that Comcast has delivered on its promises, jumping up six places in Netflix's ISP speed rankings. The question of whether this is good news for anyone but Comcast is still open."
Seriously (Score:5, Insightful)
Fuck Comcast
Re:Seriously (Score:5, Funny)
I love Comcast. Comcast is awesome. And I don't just say that because they're my only real broadband internet option now, and the only real option now for several cities around me now in fact. I say it because they're great! Doubleplus good they are!
Whatever you're smoking... (Score:2)
I want some, cause it's clearly as good as BTL chips.
Re:Whatever you're smoking... (Score:5, Funny)
We don't know what NotDrWho meant to post. His access to Slashdot is through Comcast.
Re: (Score:2)
Its really easy to feel this way if its also the only real modern broadband experience you've had and things like throttling content to extort money out of content providers seems like completely acceptable behavior to you.
Re:Seriously (Score:4, Informative)
I wish I could be so "lucky"... The only choices we have here in KC is AT&T U-Verse, Time Warner, oh and um.... GOOGLE FIBER!!!
Re: (Score:2)
In Cherry Hill, NJ the possibilities are Verizon, Comcast, and some others. I think I am on Verizon, but I'd have to go look at a bill to be sure. Haven't used Netflix in a while, so I have no idea if they run any better on one or another at home.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...they're my only real broadband internet option now, and the only real option now for several cities around me now in fact.
That's odd. Usually there are two broadband options: DSL and Cable. Are you saying that Comcast owns both?
Re:Seriously (Score:5, Funny)
Max DSL speed here is 3 mbps, not even fast enough to do HD streaming. Not that I wouldn't use the great Comcast anyway of course! My only real complaint about them is [this post censored for content by Comcast social media decorum services. This is your 2nd strike warning, customer.]
Re: (Score:3)
3Mb/s is more than enough to do HD.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Seriously (Score:5, Insightful)
Fuck Netflix too. We know that telco's are evil. You've just given them a big win, and a taste for blood.
Thanks for nothing, Netflix. You broke the Internet. We won't forget this.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Thanks for nothing, Netflix. You broke the Internet. We won't forget this.
Yea, you asked for it by wearing those tight-ass jeans, whore. /sarc
Misunderstanding Peering Agreements (Score:3)
We won't forget this.
Haha, that's what everyone said about the separating of DVD and streaming services, which was an effective price hike.
But in all seriousness, there was nothing special about the deal, it was a peering agreement, which is STANDARD procedure for EVERYONE. This has absolutely NOTHING to do with Net Neutrality. Anyone who says otherwise has no idea how the system works and has worked since the Internet originally went commercial. Not... One... Clue... This is how the Internet as most everyone knows it has a
Re:Misunderstanding Peering Agreements (Score:4)
Umm, I pay Comcast to delivery content to me. If I want to stream video from a content provider, that's my decision. I make the request, not the content provider. The request for data is coming from Comcast's customer, not the content provider.
If Comcast is losing money because of the requests that I make, then they need to change their pricing structure with me, not blackmail the content provider.
I Pay (Score:5, Funny)
1. I Pay Comcast for internet access at X speed.
2. I Pay Netflix to send me movies via that line that I pay for.
3. Comcast holds my content hostage, wanting an extortion payment from NetFlix.
I see.
Re: (Score:3)
While I agree with you in principle, it is a little more complicated than that.
What Netflix is paying for is a peering tie-in inside of Comcast's data centers.
Re:I Pay (Score:5, Informative)
I've set up a VPS to access netflix through my comcast connection, but it doesn't allow comcast's throttling. My video quality has much improved. This anecdotally proves to me comcast is manipulating netflix's traffic.
Re:I Pay (Score:5, Informative)
Have a local ISP who pipe through Time Warner. Around the end of December, Netflix connections went to crap. Complained and ISP threw Netflix under the bus, saying they've over-saturated their bandwidth. Tried a SOCKS proxy via VPS and magic, works fine. Told ISP and they seemed genuinely amazed.
Comcast is still the devil- but VPS is a very viable workaround.
Re: (Score:3)
Sign up for a linux-based VPS. (I use digitalocean. There's lots of options.)
If you're using OSX or Linux, open terminal and
ssh -N -D 8080 your.vps.ip.or.domain -f
(N is for "no command", -D specifies port, 8080 is your port, hostname, and -f keeps it running in background)
Then in your browser or system, open your proxy configuration and type localhost as the server/host and 8080 as the port. Or whatever number you like. 8080 is just ingrained in my mind.
If you're using PuTTY and Windows, it'll make you type
No... (Score:5, Insightful)
What Netflix is paying for, is a bribery fee so that Comcast quit throttling them. The proof?
As soon as the agreement was reached, I could finally stream Netflix in 3D. Oh, and we all know they didn't get their peering equipment in within 3 days....
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:No... (Score:4, Funny)
The ONLY way to stop this shit is to label all ISP as common carriers.
Oh, man... is that really the only way?
drops torch and pitchfork as he walks away despondently
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Netflix also offered to set up their server inside the Comcast DC's, that way there would be no peering, it'd be on the Comcast network all the time. Comcast declined.
A Poo Pile by any other name will smell as 'sweet' (Score:3)
What Netflix is paying for is "a peering tie-in inside of Comcast's data centers".
You can call 'protection money' whatever you want. It's still Extortion.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There I was, thinking that I was paying my ISP for the bandwidth. Wait a minute, what is that bill I get every month?
Re:I Pay (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I Pay (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to mention the fact that the part of the internet NOT controlled by Comcast didn't have the same issues experienced by Comcast customers -- which shows that the issue was at some level, Comcast's problem. Of course, the real issue was their peering agreement with Cogent (who didn't have such issues with others, but Comcast must have, as it would have only been a few hops to route around the peering issue).
In other words, Comcast is looking like a gated intranet, and Netflix has now paid for the access keys in a way that ISPs refused to do. I predict that soon you'll see ads saying "blazing fast speeds within the Comcast Network". So much for net neutrality.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, yeah, that's right... You don't understand. Bandwidth isn't connectivity.
Everyone (or most people) get the fact that Gigabit ethernet in their house doesn't get them Gigabit feeds from the Internet.
It's the same on the other end of the line. Links at a certain bandwidth from a Netflix hosting center into Cogent, do not equate to identical upstream bandwith from Cogent to every other network. That's why peering exists: to connect multiple networks together.
There is no free lunch, and there is no con
Re:I Pay (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, not just from Netflix, what they really want is to make the Netflix experience so terrible that you'd rather buy pay-per-view movies from Comcast instead. Barring that, they'll take money from Netflix if they can get that, too.
Comcast's end game is being your only source of content. Internet, TV, movies, music, phone service, all through Comcast and no one else. If they have to break Netflix and Skype to do that - "oops." After all, net neutrality is currently unenforceable in the United States.
Re:I Pay (Score:5, Informative)
This is worse than net neutrality. IMO it violates the Sherman antitrust act.
Re: (Score:3)
I think it should be handled the way electricity and gas are handled - the company that owns the infrastructure cannot se
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:I Pay (Score:5, Informative)
1. You pay Comcast for Internet access at X speed.
2. Netflix pays Amazon and others for Internet access at Y speed ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N... [wikipedia.org] )
3. You pay Netflix to send you movies via those lines that you both pay for.
4. Comcast holds your content hostage, wanting an extortion payment from NetFlix.
The point about NetFlix paying for bandwidth is important, since Comcast keep claiming things like "they shouldn't get a free ride" and "somebody needs to pay for the infrastructure", but they *were* paying for infrastructure; just not Comcast's (directly, anyway).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree with you in principle...
That isn't actually true. What you "pay for" is "internet access UP TO X speed".
It is the "up to" part that everyone ignores when they buy 25mb or 50mb connections.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah...I'm not buying that. not questioning you, but I don't buy the cost of bandwidth.
Most of the developed world gets more for less.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps the issue is weak analogies are called such for a reason.
Re: (Score:2)
This Netflix situation is more like:
...or at least it's no worse an analogy. It's equally bad at describing what the fuck
A win? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
From what I heard they want to do that in places like California. So beware.
Re: (Score:2)
During the summer months any usage over your average winter usage is charged at a higher rate
Are you sure? The reason I ask is this: They have winter usage monitoring where I live as well. However, the way it works here is during the summer, anything over the winter usage is assumed to be outside usage and hence not eligible to be billed against sewer usage (since outside water goes into the storm drains, not the sewer). So it has the net effect of lowering your overall bill vs. if they didn't have the winter usage concept. Not that I'd put it past a utility to work the way you say; just makin
Re: (Score:2)
That is a stupid policy, it actually encourages you to waste water during the winter to get your winter average bill up to save money during the summer.
Re: (Score:2)
Incoming water is also charged a sewer fee, essentially doubling the cost. I can put a separate meter on my outside nozzle so that when I fill the pool, wash the car or water the garden, I'm not also being billed for the (not directly used) sewer fee.
Just wait, the city will start to tax you for evaporation for water released into the outside world...
Re: (Score:2)
If Comcast was honest.... (Score:3)
They would have offered to play netflix streaming server mirrors in their regional Headends to give real speed boosts.
Re: (Score:3)
But how does that get them more money?
They would have far less traffic transiting other networks, greatly reducing the thing they kept complaining about, which supposedly costs them money, so this would save money there.
It would also provide a benefit to many of their customers experiences.
This is all very similar to Akamai and other CDN's. As an ISP, it's a win-win, especially if the provider (netflix/akamai) foots the bill for their hardware.
Of course, they may be making more cash from this agreement with Netflix... but that's not really a go
Re: (Score:2)
Nice little service you've got there... (Score:2)
Now, it would be a pity if your customers were to... experience service disruptions... would it not?
that was quick! (Score:5, Insightful)
it's barely been a month & comcast's already completed all those network upgrades? you know, all that capital investment that was required b/c of netflix that they didn't have the $ for until a month ago? that's impressively fast considering how long it takes them to fix the most basic problems for individual customers!
Re:that was quick! (Score:4, Insightful)
it's barely been a month & comcast's already completed all those network upgrades?
Apparently there were no network upgrades. The Netflix deal sounds like what happened is that Netflix is paying Comcast to allow them to hook up servers directly to Comcast's network instead of having to route in from outside Comcast. Which would explain why it happened within a month, if all Netflix did was set up some new servers inside some Comcast data centers.
Re:that was quick! (Score:5, Informative)
It happened basically over night.
It was merely throttling policy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Consumers pay (Score:5, Insightful)
Obviously Netflix will just pass the cost on to its subscribers (where else would they get the money from?). It's very unlikely they'd implement this as a surcharge for their Comcast subscribers only (I wish they would, but I expect their contract with Comcast prohibits it), they'll just absorb it into the single subscription price. So in fact non-Comcast customers will effectively be indirectly paying Comcast to subsidise other users' access.
From an engineer's point of view it's all baffling (Netflix and their customers are both paying for a certain amount of bandwidth, so where's the need for anything more?), but when you view it through the lens of capitalist incentives it all makes perfect sense.
Re: (Score:3)
If Netflix could get away with raising prices without losing too many customers, do you think they wouldn't have done it regardless of this event?
For 95% of non-commodity products, the only factor in setting a price is what the client is willing to pay for it. Cost has some influence there, but it's not nearly as direct as many people seem to think.
This will probably just eat into the margins of Netflix.
Re: (Score:3)
If you have negative margins it ceases to be a business. That sounds like a good reason to jack up prices to me.
Re: (Score:2)
not really, no (Score:2)
It would make sense, if it wasn't for the fact that Comcast operates as a government-sponsored monopoly.
They get away with this crap because their potential customers are prohibited from operating: there is no free market. In a free market, you'd probably have full gigabit fibre to the home as an option in most metropolitan areas at this point. As it is, ISPs rarely can even gain the rights to offer service in areas due to exclusive deals Comcast has brokered by greasing the palms of local officials.
Capital
"The question of whether this is good news..." (Score:5, Informative)
"...for anyone but Comcast is still open."
It was never a question, nor open. The answer is no. It is painfully obvious this benefits Comcast and hurts everyone else.
bad news for everyone (Score:2)
Danegeld (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
comcast vs net neutrality (Score:4, Insightful)
Time to Join the Collective (Score:2)
The other evil empire (AT&T) is royally screwing us via U-Verse, jacking up every fee, every month.
We are thinking about dumping U-Verse and getting JUST internet from Comcast (no land line, no cable).
We can get about 50 digital channels over the air, plus streaming.
YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED!
Re: (Score:2)
Heh. I'm thinking about switching from Comcast to Uverse because it looks like I can get substantially similar service (minus some channels I don't use) for half as much. I've been trying to figure out what I'm missing that will make it actually not a savings.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The short name for that is "fascism."
Only Comcast cable here... (Score:2)
So, does TIVO work with OTA HD signals?
A great chance for the competition (Score:2)
Now is a great chance for the competition to "listen to their customers" and increase Netflix performance on their networks without charging Netflix or their customers (directly).
You know, do what they are supposed to do but spin it to make Comcast look like worse than they already do.
AT&T also sucks (Score:3)
VERIZON! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The evidence suggests that 'quantum' has a lot to do with it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Net Neutrality Now (Score:4, Insightful)
If you have a company and pay for Internet connectivity, then you already paying what is necessary for that volume of data. The speed should be the same for everyone. Otherwise new businesses cannot form on the net on equal terms. This is important for freedom and even for the market economy. However, without net neutrality will end up in a time of monopoly (or oligopoly). Only this time the monopoly is not governed by the state and at least in theory controlled by the public.
For the US, dropping net neutrality makes sense from a corporate state viewpoint, as all big Internet services are US-based (beside those in China). If you hinder any other new service you can guarantee that those corporations stay in business, because the ramp up cost for new players would be too high. Also peer-to-peer technologies which could flourish with IPv6 can be crippled right before they become dangerous for the establishment.
It would be a shame... (Score:5, Funny)
It would be a shame if ... something ... happened to that nice video streaming business you got there.
Netflix doing this on purpose (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm beginning to wonder if Netflix did this on purpose, to gain sympathy and to highlight the actual problems around net-neutrality.
It makes sense, instead of making bold claims about what might happen, they went ahead and just let it happen..
It's sort of like a person going into a bad neighborhood, getting roughed up and then telling everyone about how much of a bad part of town that was, look he's even a victim!
This chart is easy to show to politicians and policymakers, and it exposes the simple fact that Comcast clearly **had** the capacity before these payments, they were just withholding.
Personally, I think it's a very smart move on Netflix's part, they are playing the long game.
That explains it (Score:2)
I really have to hand it to comcast to finding ways to consistently make things worse than expected.
Re: (Score:3)
What about the folks who prefer Hulu? What about the next great Internet service that now can never happen again like it did in the past? Netflix paying Comcast is not just about gaining access to customers. It's about locking out competition.
Re:huh? (Score:5, Interesting)
One. Nobody "prefers Hulu". Except the people who implemented it but don't actually USE it.
Look at Hulu. It's a mediocre streaming site with ever larger chunks of intrusive video ads. And paying them doesn't make the damn things go away or space them out further or make them shorter ads. That's how the entertainment industry would LIKE people to consume their media. Paying them directly, then supporting them indirectly through ad revenue as well.
NO THANK YOU!
I mostly agree with your sentiments about it being bad that Comcast got paid for content their users REQUESTED and were already paying them to deliver.
Not entirely sure about lock-out though.
Re:huh? (Score:5, Insightful)
The ads, or how bad Hulu is, is completely unrelated to the topic WaywardGeek was bringing up.
I assume they meant to ask, what happens with Netflix 2, when there is some new streaming service that's even BETTER than Netflix in every way. Will they also have to go through the same growing pains, eventually forking over cash to get access to the "full internet"?
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, Hulu was just a for-instance. The big issue is whatever comes "next"
This is going to be a major roadblock for any new streaming idea / service coming through... if they want access they have to pay the toll.
Re: (Score:3)
That's how the entertainment industry would LIKE people to consume their media. Paying them directly, then supporting them indirectly through ad revenue as well.
So, in other words, exactly like a cable subscription.
Re: (Score:3)
> watch a few hours of commercials every week, and maybe a few hours of actual show.
If you're ratio of commercial:content on basic cable is anywhere close to 1:1, then you're doing it wrong. Even if you don't use a DVR, the actual ratio on the vast majority of networks is 1:2, or about 18-20 minutes of ads and 40-42 minutes of show every hour.
> Every single time I surf the menu and see something that looks appealing, and change the channel, it's right to 5 minutes of commercials.
That's because you su
Re:huh? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's worse, to some degree.
With cable TV, the providers only have limited information about who is watching. With streaming video, they can gather much more demographic information, which they can either use themselves or resell to "business partners". It's yet another form of income for them. So Hulu (and similar services) are triple-dipping; they charge the viewer cash for the privilege of watching, then get paid for the adverts, then resell the collected demographics. The viewer pays in money, time, and privacy.
Re: (Score:3)
Once upon a time, cable TV did not have ads, either. One day we will look back fondly at a Netflix (subsidiary of Comcast) without ads.
Re:huh? (Score:5, Informative)
No, what you're seeing is fewer ads, but longer overall.
Take an Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. episode.
43 minutes of show.
Plus 6 (count 'em) 2-3 minute commercial breaks when you see four ads back to back.
Granted, that's only about 28% (when TV is 36%). Still, for someone paying the monthly fee, that's ridiculous.
Re: (Score:3)
The thing is, I don't give a crap how much it costs to support streaming.
If you want to give it away, ad-supported, for "free"? Cool!
But if I'm going to pay a subscription fee, I'll be damned if I'm going to put up with ads on top of that. And if the sub price doesn't cover what it'd cost to go ad-free, then they need to rethink their pricing and delivery scheme.
In short "I don't want to see ads. PERIOD!"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
it seems like it's really good news for the people who stream Netflix on Comcast.
Soon that will be about 50% of the entire United States. You go with Concast or you go without broadband.
Re: (Score:2)
it seems like it's really good news for the people who stream Netflix on Comcast.
Soon that will be about 50% of the entire United States. You go with Concast or you go without broadband.
Once they hit that threshold, somebody should slam them with an antitrust suit, if not before.
Re:So Netflix wants to change how it connects (Score:5, Informative)
Netflix is not the comcast customer. Netflix pays their own ISP for their bandwidth already.
It's not Netflix which is using all this bandwidth on comcasts network - it's comcast customers who are using it. And they already paid for it.
Comcast wants to bill twice. I am sure they would bill 20 times if they could get away with it.
And they are the 800lb gorilla with an effective monopoly position in many markets and no scruples whatsoever. Netflix folded to extortion, and the precedent is certainly not one that will benefit any users, unless it's the users that are also comcast stock owners.