Netflix adds 3D and Super HD - Page 61 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 5Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1801 of 1919 Old 05-01-2014, 08:46 PM
Member
 
DrunkenTiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14

;_; So it does have Super HD on your Tiivo...But I can't get that on my PC...You've got to be kidding me.

I wonder if the PS3 app gets The Clone Wars in Super HD. This sucks.

DrunkenTiger is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1802 of 1919 Old 05-01-2014, 08:50 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 16,404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 470
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrunkenTiger View Post

;_; So it does have Super HD on your Tiivo...But I can't get that on my PC...You've got to be kidding me.
I wonder if the PS3 app gets The Clone Wars in Super HD. This sucks.

I'm confident that PS3 will get the highest quality encodes. While playing it on the PS3, hit the SELECT button on a pad or the SELECT or DISPLAY button on a remote and it will put this little stream status display up in the corner. It will say "1080 Super HD" when you're getting the 4300- or 5800 Kbps encodes.

As I said, titles which can't be played in HD at all on PCs are not uncommon. If you're looking at descriptions of titles on their website, it'll say "Available in HD on your TV" for those titles as opposed to simply "Available in HD". It's just the licensing terms for some of their content, no doubt insisted upon by stupidly paranoid IP holders who think that if they allow the highest quality to be displayed on PCs that someone will capture it rolleyes.gif.

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #1803 of 1919 Old 05-01-2014, 09:00 PM
Member
 
DrunkenTiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14

This is so stupid...It's a great series, I feel shafted knowing I watched two seasons of it being at a crap 3 mpbs...

Yet I can't shell out 100$ for the Bluray atm...Damn.

Why would they screw PC users, it's so dumb. Licensing terms suck.

reddice likes this.
DrunkenTiger is offline  
post #1804 of 1919 Old 05-01-2014, 09:24 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 16,404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 470
Again, there are plenty of titles for which the best you can get on a PC is the 1750 Kbps 480p encode. It is what it is.

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #1805 of 1919 Old 05-02-2014, 05:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
reddice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 1,741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Avoid anything from Fox Studios, Sony Pictures, Paramount (just the movies the TV series are fine from Paramount) only allow 480p playback on Tablets and PC's and Disney which owns the Clone Wars (720p only playback). They are the only ones with the stupid PC restrictions. However Warner, Universal and other smaller companies let you playback movies and TV shows in Super HD on any tablet or PC devices.

Earthlink Standard powered by Time Warner Cable Brooklyn.
ASUS RT-N66W Router 374.43 (Merlin Build) using OpenDNS.
Amazon Fire TV, Apple TV 3, Roku 3, Sony PS3 Slim, Sony S5100 all Wired. Chromecast Wireless.
Toshiba 39L2300U 39-Inch 1080p. Nexus 5 on T-Mobile and
Nexus 7 (2013).
Cats are the best pets.
reddice is offline  
post #1806 of 1919 Old 05-10-2014, 07:48 AM
Advanced Member
 
Ruiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 526
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
So, now that Comcast and Verizon have won, does that mean Open Connect quality streams will arrive on those networks?
Ruiner is offline  
post #1807 of 1919 Old 05-10-2014, 10:25 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 16,404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruiner View Post

So, now that Comcast and Verizon have won, does that mean Open Connect quality streams will arrive on those networks?

Yes.

I suppose that you could say that the ISPs "won", but so did Netflix, who are paying less to move their content over direct connections into those ISPs networks. They were paying commercial CDNs, who were paying the ISPs to accept Netflix's traffic (Netflix is still paying them to push their content into some networks). Netflix might be paying the ISPs more to take their traffic over direct connections than the ISPs were getting from the commercial CDNs for it, but still less than Netflix was paying the CDNs. Netflix has never claimed that they were paying more now; the ignorant mainstream press just assume it because they weren't paying those ISPs anything directly before. Since Netflix would like to have those direct connections without paying bandwidth charges, they're happy to let that misconception persist for the public sympathy it gets them.

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #1808 of 1919 Old 05-10-2014, 12:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mailiang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springsteen Country
Posts: 6,564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott View Post

Yes.

I suppose that you could say that the ISPs "won", but so did Netflix, who are paying less to move their content over direct connections into those ISPs networks. They were paying commercial CDNs, who were paying the ISPs to accept Netflix's traffic (Netflix is still paying them to push their content into some networks). Netflix might be paying the ISPs more to take their traffic over direct connections than the ISPs were getting from the commercial CDNs for it, but still less than Netflix was paying the CDNs. Netflix has never claimed that they were paying more now; the ignorant mainstream press just assume it because they weren't paying those ISPs anything directly before. Since Netflix would like to have those direct connections without paying bandwidth charges, they're happy to let that misconception persist for the public sympathy it gets them.

It's obvious that you and Ken Florence are at odds. But like a posted here:http://www.avsforum.com/t/1089285/netflix-streaming-quality/5500_100#post_24661447 unless we are privy to what they are actually paying, it's hard ( at least for me) to take a side on this issue.


Ian

The best way to succeed in life is to act on the advice you give to others

mailiang is offline  
post #1809 of 1919 Old 05-10-2014, 01:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 16,404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 470
Quote:
Originally Posted by mailiang View Post

...unless we are privy to what they are actually paying, it's hard ( at least for me) to take a side on this issue.

I'm just listening to Dan Rayburn, industry analyst and StreamingMediaBlog.com blogger. From this post about Netflix and the Comcast/TWC merger:
Quote:
While some want to debate whether or not it’s cheaper for Netflix to go direct to Comcast as opposed to using transit providers like Cogent, it’s not debatable. Netflix’s deal with Comcast is cheaper. Netflix knows it and won’t deny it. In fact, some money managers on Wall Street and others have told me that Netflix is quietly telling them that their deal with Comcast deal is cheaper.

From his "Inside The Netflix/Comcast Deal and What The Media Is Getting Very Wrong" article:
Quote:
Naturally, many of these same people are also implying that because Netflix has to pay Comcast, consumers will foot the bill for this as Netflix will have to charge more for their service. This could not be further from the truth. Those stating this have no clue how Netflix delivers their content today or what costs they already incur. If they did, they would know this is not a new cost to Netflix, it’s simply paying a different provider, and it should be at a lower cost. It should actually be cheaper for Netflix to buy direct from Comcast, and they also get an SLA, which also improves quality and that’s a good thing. Given that Netflix has many options to buy transit from many different transit providers, why would they pay more? They wouldn’t.

During all of their grandstanding, Netflix has never once said that they were paying more for these direct connection deals than they were paying to provide service through the commercial CDNs and if it were true, I'm certain that they would have. They just believe that in principle they shouldn't have to pay bandwidth charges at all, since we pay our ISPs to bring the bits we request from the edge of their network to our homes. They have something of a point there, but the status quo is what it is and it won't change without somebody paying the ISPs the money that they're getting now and have been all along.

Ken Florence's spiel about Netflix "shouldering the cost of transit and paying Comcast" assumes that Netflix is paying Comcast what they were paying the ISPs to handle their content, which is obviously not true. They're paying the ISPs something on the order of what those CDNs were paying the ISPs.

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #1810 of 1919 Old 05-10-2014, 02:13 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 27,933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Liked: 310
Something to consider when referencing Dan Rayburn, he is not a truly unbiased third party, he and his company derive a portion of their income from doing work for Comcast and other cable companies.
Keenan is online now  
post #1811 of 1919 Old 05-10-2014, 03:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mailiang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springsteen Country
Posts: 6,564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott View Post

During all of their grandstanding, Netflix has never once said that they were paying more for these direct connection deals than they were paying to provide service through the commercial CDNs and if it were true, I'm certain that they would have..

True. But what Florence is saying, is that they are not getting the same bang for the buck.

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott View Post

Ken Florence's spiel about Netflix "shouldering the cost of transit and paying Comcast" assumes that Netflix is paying Comcast what they were paying the ISPs to handle their content, which is obviously not true. They're paying the ISPs something on the order of what those CDNs were paying the ISPs.


I assume you meant to say what they were paying the CDN's to handle their content? Obviously, Florence knows exactly what Netflix is paying, but how do you, or anyone else, including Rayburn, know that? There are no financial disclosures, which was my point in the first place.


Ian

The best way to succeed in life is to act on the advice you give to others

mailiang is offline  
post #1812 of 1919 Old 05-11-2014, 12:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
undecided's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by keenan View Post

Something to consider when referencing Dan Rayburn, he is not a truly unbiased third party, he and his company derive a portion of their income from doing work for Comcast and other cable companies.

It looks like he is a principal analyst for Frost & Sullivan - an industry analyst group.

What kind of income is Frost & Sullivan getting from Comcast (or Netflix)?

My experience is these kind of companies sell market analysis and any blogs etc are there to sell their reports.

They have to be seen as neutral or why would you buy their research? Which is where they get their revenue.
undecided is online now  
post #1813 of 1919 Old 05-11-2014, 12:33 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 16,404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 470
I did run across Ken Florence's letter to Al Franken earlier in which he states:
Quote:
Netflix is directly interconnected with ISPs all over the U.S. and internationally without any exchange of payment from either side. Our agreement with Comcast is the first time that Netflix was forced to pay an ISP for what amounts to access to their subscribers.

Difficult to believe, if true. Still, Rayburn's analysis that they're saving money over what they were paying to get their content to subscribers via commercial CDNs is sound; they've just somehow managed to get a number of ISPs to take their traffic, eschewing the money they were getting from the commercial CDNs for it. That's really wonderful for them, but they could hardly expect the mega ISPs to accept that.

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #1814 of 1919 Old 05-11-2014, 09:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mailiang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springsteen Country
Posts: 6,564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott View Post

I did run across Ken Florence's letter to Al Franken earlier in which he states:
Difficult to believe, if true. Still, Rayburn's analysis that they're saving money over what they were paying to get their content to subscribers via commercial CDNs is sound; they've just somehow managed to get a number of ISPs to take their traffic, eschewing the money they were getting from the commercial CDNs for it. That's really wonderful for them, but they could hardly expect the mega ISPs to accept that.

As I have posted before, I have no problem with ISP's charging a toll to content providers who require faster lanes due to their use of excessive bandwidth. What I do have a problem with, is an industry that has monopolized accessibility to the internet and can now indiscriminately charge data providers to reach their subscribers. Also, there may not be a direct payment exchange, but I don't believe that Netflix is immune from any fiscal responsibility with ISP's that have partnered with Open Connect. A Cablevision spokesmen assured me that there was a financial agreement, but again, they will not disclosed the details of that arrangement.


Ian

The best way to succeed in life is to act on the advice you give to others

mailiang is offline  
post #1815 of 1919 Old 05-11-2014, 10:20 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 27,933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Liked: 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by undecided View Post

It looks like he is a principal analyst for Frost & Sullivan - an industry analyst group.

What kind of income is Frost & Sullivan getting from Comcast (or Netflix)?

My experience is these kind of companies sell market analysis and any blogs etc are there to sell their reports.

They have to be seen as neutral or why would you buy their research? Which is where they get their revenue.
Companies hire research outfits all the time to create presentations that will put them in a good light. Suppose Comcast wants a report to present to Congress that shows what a charitable company they are, Frost & Sullivan will manipulate some data to make it look like Comcast is actually a charitable organization.

I'm not saying that he or his company have done anything like that specifically, but that sort of thing happens ALL THE TIME with companies just like his.

Just something to consider when one quotes him as a neutral party. I used to quote him myself until I found out a little more about what he and his company do.
Keenan is online now  
post #1816 of 1919 Old 05-11-2014, 10:41 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 27,933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Liked: 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by mailiang View Post

As I have posted before, I have no problem with ISP's charging a toll to content providers who require faster lanes due to their use of excessive bandwidth. What I do have a problem with, is an industry that has monopolized accessibility to the internet and can now indiscriminately charge data providers to reach their subscribers. Also, there may not be a direct payment exchange, but I don't believe that Netflix is immune from any fiscal responsibility with ISP's that have partnered with Open Connect. A Cablevision spokesmen assured me that there was a financial agreement, but again, they will not disclosed the details of that arrangement.


Ian
Some excellent reading at Vox, the below link was especially illuminating.

Comcast is destroying the principle that makes a competitive internet possible

The author has a whole series of articles about the Internet and where it's headed,

The new fight over the future of the internet


The problem I have with providing faster access to companies that pay up is 1) isn't that what the subscriber is already paying for? and 2) those companies aren't going to get faster access, they're just going to take up more data space on the line which will throttle down those companies that don't pay for that "faster" access. Cable Internet providers are pretty much in rent seeking mode, they are not going to make extensive upgrades to last mile delivery just so a company like Netflix can have something called "faster" access, what ever that is, how fast does Netflix need to be?

To put it another way, there is already plenty of throughput available, what companies like Comcast and Verizon are doing is introducing new revenue streams from a process that has been going on since the Internet was born. It's much easier, and far cheaper, to just charge someone new for the same product another is already paying for than to actually expand and build out infrastructure. Comcast themselves have stated they have absolutely no throughput problems on their network. It's the access to that network that it the problem, and they are acting as gatekeepers to that network. The cost of adding more "doors"(ports) to that network is couch change, but why not make a bundle off what someone else is already paying you for?
mailiang likes this.
Keenan is online now  
post #1817 of 1919 Old 05-11-2014, 01:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
undecided's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by keenan View Post

Companies hire research outfits all the time to create presentations that will put them in a good light. Suppose Comcast wants a report to present to Congress that shows what a charitable company they are, Frost & Sullivan will manipulate some data to make it look like Comcast is actually a charitable organization.

I'm not saying that he or his company have done anything like that specifically, but that sort of thing happens ALL THE TIME with companies just like his.

Just something to consider when one quotes him as a neutral party. I used to quote him myself until I found out a little more about what he and his company do.

If they did that - and as you say there is no evidence they did - they become valueless as an industry analyst company.

Any industry analyst company that will manipulate data the soon loses credibility within the industry - and their credibility is the only reason anyone buys research from them.

I certainly only buy industry research from companies that can viewed as neutral.

Rayburn's analysis seems some of the better thought out (certainly better than the hysterical mainstream press) - but you are also right to check the source and other views
Keenan likes this.
undecided is online now  
post #1818 of 1919 Old 05-11-2014, 04:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mailiang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springsteen Country
Posts: 6,564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by keenan View Post

The problem I have with providing faster access to companies that pay up is 1) isn't that what the subscriber is already paying for? and 2) those companies aren't going to get faster access, they're just going to take up more data space on the line which will throttle down those companies that don't pay for that "faster" access. Cable Internet providers are pretty much in rent seeking mode, they are not going to make extensive upgrades to last mile delivery just so a company like Netflix can have something called "faster" access, what ever that is, how fast does Netflix need to be?

Sounds like you're making a case for Open Connect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by keenan View Post

To put it another way, there is already plenty of throughput available, what companies like Comcast and Verizon are doing is introducing new revenue streams from a process that has been going on since the Internet was born. It's much easier, and far cheaper, to just charge someone new for the same product another is already paying for than to actually expand and build out infrastructure. Comcast themselves have stated they have absolutely no throughput problems on their network. It's the access to that network that it the problem, and they are acting as gatekeepers to that network. The cost of adding more "doors"(ports) to that network is couch change, but why not make a bundle off what someone else is already paying you for?

Since more consumers are abandoning the cable TV market for steaming services, the move to double dip doesn't surprise me. They going to get their money one way or the other.


Ian

The best way to succeed in life is to act on the advice you give to others

mailiang is offline  
post #1819 of 1919 Old 05-12-2014, 04:31 PM
Advanced Member
 
Apostate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by mailiang View Post

Sounds like you're making a case for Open Connect.
Since more consumers are abandoning the cable TV market for steaming services, the move to double dip doesn't surprise me. They going to get their money one way or the other.


Ian

Please explain what you mean by double dip.
Apostate is online now  
post #1820 of 1919 Old 05-12-2014, 05:35 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 16,404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apostate View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mailiang View Post

Sounds like you're making a case for Open Connect.
Since more consumers are abandoning the cable TV market for steaming services, the move to double dip doesn't surprise me. They going to get their money one way or the other.


Ian

Please explain what you mean by double dip.

Charging both us and Netflix to bring Netflix's content to us. Netflix is willing to pay to establish and maintain direct connections, but they don't want to be charged for the bandwidth necessary to bring their content from the edge of an ISP's network to our homes, since that's what we pay the ISPs for. It's a reasonable argument, but ISPs charging purveyors of massive one way traffic at the gate is industry SOP.

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #1821 of 1919 Old 05-12-2014, 08:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mailiang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springsteen Country
Posts: 6,564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apostate View Post

Please explain what you mean by double dip.


http://www.digitaltveurope.net/174572/netflix-attacks-toll-taking-from-isps-warns-against-comcast-merger/


Ian wink.gif

The best way to succeed in life is to act on the advice you give to others

mailiang is offline  
post #1822 of 1919 Old 05-13-2014, 07:44 AM
Advanced Member
 
Apostate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott View Post

Charging both us and Netflix to bring Netflix's content to us. Netflix is willing to pay to establish and maintain direct connections, but they don't want to be charged for the bandwidth necessary to bring their content from the edge of an ISP's network to our homes, since that's what we pay the ISPs for. It's a reasonable argument, but ISPs charging purveyors of massive one way traffic at the gate is industry SOP.

That's what I was trying to figure out. Why is the charge of "double dipping" popping up? How is ISP being paid for Netflix traffic different now than the way it was before?

Before, ISP got paid by the subscribers for access and Netflix via 3rd CDNs for conveyance. Now, ISP gets paid by the subscribers for access and Netflix directly for conveyance. ISPs get paid for access and conveyance as it always did.

Only loser I see are the 3rd party CDNs. The subscribers of Netflix are the winners. We don't pay any extra to neither the ISPs nor Netflix for much better Netflix PQ.

So what is it with the charge of "double dipping"? Is that the new fashionable sound bite when it comes to net neutrality?
Apostate is online now  
post #1823 of 1919 Old 05-13-2014, 08:07 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 16,404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 470
Before the Comcast deal there was no awareness of the practice. The press spun it as being something new and outrageous and Netflix used the opportunity to lobby for "net neutrality" rules which would prevent ISPs from charging for ingress of data. They claim that they aren't paying their Open Connect partners bandwidth fees and that Comcast is the first. Of course they don't say that they're paying less for better service than they were getting from the commercial ISPs; that's irrelevant, since they shouldn't have to pay anything rolleyes.gif.

Now the press is blaming the recent price increase on the cost of the Comcast and Verizon deals when they actually reduce Netflix's costs. Netflix, of course, doesn't bother to deny it.

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #1824 of 1919 Old 05-13-2014, 09:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
Apostate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 122
I see. I was puzzled at the claim of move to double dipping by certain posters. What move to double dipping? As far as I know, ISPs have been "double dipping" since the beginning of internet.

As to Netflix, of course, they are going to embrace any political / ideological movement that could possibly reduce or eliminate their costs. Getting something or nothing is always the best deal, right? wink.gif
Apostate is online now  
post #1825 of 1919 Old 05-13-2014, 09:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
reddice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 1,741
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott View Post

Now the press is blaming the recent price increase on the cost of the Comcast and Verizon deals when they actually reduce Netflix's costs. Netflix, of course, doesn't bother to deny it.
This is why I don't believe most of the crap the press says. There blame the price increase on anything.

Earthlink Standard powered by Time Warner Cable Brooklyn.
ASUS RT-N66W Router 374.43 (Merlin Build) using OpenDNS.
Amazon Fire TV, Apple TV 3, Roku 3, Sony PS3 Slim, Sony S5100 all Wired. Chromecast Wireless.
Toshiba 39L2300U 39-Inch 1080p. Nexus 5 on T-Mobile and
Nexus 7 (2013).
Cats are the best pets.
reddice is offline  
post #1826 of 1919 Old 05-13-2014, 11:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Wendell R. Breland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apostate View Post

Only loser I see are the 3rd party CDNs.

IIRC, a Comcast person said Netflix came to them (Comcast) and said "Lets cut out the middle man". I feel certain the middle man in this case was 3rd party CDN's. This was most likely true because Netflix has not denied it.

IMO, if it is made illegal for a ISP to charge Netfix for having local CDN's (as in Open Connect) then the ISP's will disconnect the local CDN and we will revert back to Netflix via 3rd party CDN's.
Wendell R. Breland is offline  
post #1827 of 1919 Old 05-13-2014, 11:48 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 16,404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland View Post

IMO, if it is made illegal for a ISP to charge Netfix for having local CDN's (as in Open Connect) then the ISP's will disconnect the local CDN and we will revert back to Netflix via 3rd party CDN's.

Either that or Comcast will raise their prices for all of their customers to compensate. They're not likely to let go of any income.

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #1828 of 1919 Old 05-13-2014, 01:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mailiang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springsteen Country
Posts: 6,564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 291
Let me just reiterate.

1) Netflix is not simply complaining about paying Comcast to access their Network. They are complaining that the charges it pays are not comparable to those provided to CDN providers, which also offer transit services to other networks.

2) I personally don't believe that Open Connect is a free lunch for Netflix. They may not be making direct payments to those ISP's, but there are probably other financial arrangements, which may also include some form of revenue sharing. Cablevision is currently running multimedia ads including TV commercials claiming that they offer the best Netflix picture quality and experience, when compared to other ISP's.


Ian

The best way to succeed in life is to act on the advice you give to others

mailiang is offline  
post #1829 of 1919 Old 05-13-2014, 01:50 PM
Advanced Member
 
Apostate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by mailiang View Post

2) I personally don't believe that Open Connect is a free lunch for Netflix. They may not be making direct payments to those ISP's, but there are probably other financial arrangements, which may also include some form of revenue sharing. Cablevision is currently running multimedia ads including TV commercials claiming that they offer the best Netflix picture quality and experience, when compared to other ISP's.

??? Your first two sentences contradict each other. Is Netflix or someone claiming that Open Connect doesn't cost anything to Netflix? Does Netflix or someone claim not to be making direct payments to ISPs? Do ISPs and Netflix share a common type of revenue stream that they can share?
Apostate is online now  
post #1830 of 1919 Old 05-13-2014, 02:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 16,404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apostate View Post

Does Netflix or someone claim not to be making direct payments to ISPs?

Netflix is, in a letter to Senator Al Franken--see my post back here.

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
Reply Video Download Services & Hardware

Tags
Netflix

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off