Netflix adds 3D and Super HD - Page 4

Not saying ISP's or Netflix is limiting streams. It's the cable and satellite companies that determine the level of compression and video quality, as does Netflix. That the content owners and cable companies are the biggest ISP's is the concern of Netflix in the context of this discussion. I can't make it any clearer. Netflix is not limiting it's stream to me even though I can't get SuperHD and certainly not 3D. That would require a new ISP for superHD and a new TV for 3D. Yep, I'm sure getting screwed! No, I get exactly the same content as everyone else, so how are they limiting my stream? Sorry to disappoint anyone, but I don't recall reading where Netflix or any cable or satellite provider, for that matter, is required to maintain a specific quality of picture to me. What we purchase from them is access to their content. Many comments on this thread are inferring that Netflix is somehow withholding something they have paid for. That simply is not the case. All Netflix is trying to do is make it as easy and and as cheap as possible for the ISP's to get higher quality Netflix content into your home. What else can they do short paying each ISP's directly for the increased bandwidth? Yeah, let's trust Comcast and Time/Warner to provide that. That would be impossible to monitor and would be business suicide on Netflix's part. Should Netflix buy me a new TV because they are providing 3D now? Where does it stop? Face it, a hostile ISP is between you and buffet streaming of video content as currently provided.

Nobody said cable/satellite customers should not comment here but just be aware that this could present a conflict of interest or could result in disingenuous comments. These commentators will have a different perspective than those who get all their content from streaming and OTA. I bet someone like me is in the distinct minority here. Since streaming services and cable TV come over the same wire for the vast majority of people here, that makes it harder to separate cable TV bias from the discussion of video download services in this forum. That's all I'm saying.

Since you state Netflix is trying to dump the extra-needed bandwidth onto the local ISP's, shouldn't that be who you offer more money to? It makes no sense to offer it to Netflix so they can then give it to the ISP's for more bandwidth. What is even more ironic is that most here say they have plenty of bandwidth and that the last mile is not the problem, and so Netflix offers these same ISP's direct access to their CDN for free and that still is not enough.

Has anyone watched any 3D programming that is streamed? I check out "Tin Tin" which was in their 3D list but it's not 3D at all.

Ummm - as has been stated many times here Netflix is limiting the stream. Netflix has decided to limit who can get SuperHD or 3D.

I could previously stream the old 4800 kbps stream fine - Netflix has now decided to limit me to 3850 Kbps (withholding the 4300 and 5800 Kbps streams from me).

Sure Netflix is under no obligation to provide the same streams to everyone - but it seems very poor marketing and customer service to withhold the higher quality streams from most of their US customers - many of whom would have the bandwidth to access these higher quality streams.

No ISP (hostile or not) is currently preventing anyone from accessing the highest quality Netflix stream their bandwidth can support.

 

I think this is a short-sighted view of what's happening. Rather, I see Netflix attempting to position themselves for the future which will best serve their customers long term. Many like to accuse businesses as being anti-customer and at times exceptions do happen however in virtually all occasions what's in the best interest of the business is in the best interest of the customer. It has to be as the company is best served when its customers' needs are addressed. As in this case not spur of the moment (I want, I want... I want) emotional reactions rather long term solutions that ensure they are best suited to serving their needs.

 

Whether Netflix's current structure can handle the increased load I can't say... based on recent outages and other issues I have seen reported I have my doubts. A customer having available bandwidth is very little of the puzzle. 

Edited by Charles R - 1/14/13 at 12:07pm

Nah, nothing more than Netflix trying to pass the buck to the ISPs. Look what happened the last time Netflix implemented a price increase. They did need to do a much better job of educating the users this time around about why a price increase will be needed.

VUDU has and has had fairly high bit rate files but they did not limit users to certain ISPs for their HDX or 3D.

What annoys me is that all the major ISP's that most people have (Comcast, Verizon FiOS and Time Warner Cable) are not supported yet unknown ISP's (heck even in a third world county somewhere here lives in Brazil has DSL and his provider is supported) besides Google Fiber which is a joke because it is only available in certain areas of Kansas City and only on the Missouri side.

The reasons why is because they want you to use there crappy streaming services which use Adobe Flash and play like crap. HBO Go I tried a few times and only once I was able to watch a movie but other times it streams really bad, buffers and pauses and looks really bad all because they use the crappy Adobe Flash plugin.

 

Comparing Netflix to VUDU (in daily bandwidth requirements - theirs not yours) is beyond silly. Perfect example of short-sighted reasoning. The picture is much larger than your screen and as no one wants to see that I'll bow out and let the tunnel vision continue... :)

Edited by Charles R - 1/14/13 at 3:36pm

Respectfully I disagree.

If I was able (until one month ago) stream 4800 Kbps stream from Netflix without any problems why are they now limiting me to 3850 Kbps (withholding the 4300 and 5800 Kbps streams from me).

Netflix should position themselves for the future by cutting whatever they think is the right deal with the ISPs.

They announced SuperHD and 3D presumably to create customer desire for these options. Yet at the same time they deliberately withheld these options to the vast majority of their US customers. The only rationale would seem to be a misguided expectation that these customers would successfully lobby their ISPs to support Netflix's plans.

That is poor marketing in my view. If you create a demand for a service be ready to deliver it. Don't use your customers as a bargaining tool with a third party - either to lower your costs or improve your infra-structure. It is the responsibility of Netflix to manage their costs and infrastructure while delivering a great customer experience.

As I have said before Netflix shouldn't be asking my to lobby my ISP on their behalf - I have no leverage.

I don't think they are anti-customer - but they have made some questionable business and marketing decisions in the last 18 months (as well as making some good ones as they license more content etc). Remember the plan to split streaming and physical disks that was withdrawn after customer push back.

Yes, they want you to use their services, but there is little to no advantage for an ISP to go this route. Practically all the cost savings is on Netflix's end with little to none on the ISP side of the equation, the ISP still has to deliver this load of bandwidth to the home and that is where cost is going to rise for them. Moving data across the Internet backbone costs next to nothing nowadays, but facilitating delivery from the edge to the home still has notable expenses, like in continually updating and increasing capacity handling, especially when you have an initiative like this from Netflix that is very likely to increase that load on the ISP's intranet.

A probable reason why those small and foreign ISPs have signed up for the service is very likely a prime factor in why the big majors here have not: the load on those small systems will be small because of low sub-counts, it's the big systems that are going to get pounded by the increase in volume due to the fact they have the most subscribers.

 

I was out but since you repeat the same info I'll try one last time...

 

1 - Unfortunately, you aren't their only customer. Google Netflix outage and view 1.5 million hits not to mention endless reduced streaming quality complaints. Obviously, the current structure can't support what you want going forward. Remember they are adding subscribers. Also, aren't the lower rates of higher quality now... I guess that doesn't count.

2 - What makes you think they aren't (trying)?.

3 - They are creating a new market. Not denying anything.

4 - Netflix is managing their costs and infrastructure by creating this new market.

5 - I see nothing on their home page asking you to do any such thing. Heck, I don't even see anything about quality of streams casually browsing their site. I'm sure you can find some pleading some where but once again 99.99% of their customers won't.

 

We get it... you want what you want... and Netflix is too stupid to offer it. Let's reverse it... what do you believe is Netflix's logic behind this new service? Why are they offering it?

Edited by Charles R - 1/14/13 at 5:30pm

From their Super HD page (presumably only if your ISP isn't peering Open Connect):

But you're right--it's not on their home page. Then again, undecided never said it was. The service isn't aimed at Joe Average, but at the AV-ophile who'd like better PQ from Netflix and its announcement has been covered by all of the blogs where such a person might see it. They are asking all such people to lobby their ISPs and the fact that it's an even more select group than all of their customers makes it even less likely that our requests will sway the ISPs.

 

I see this more as a Please don't blame us as it's out of our control... unless they agree to offer this new service our hands are tied... it's the only way we can offer such and we're trying.

I like Netflix - I want them to succeed.

I assume Netflix's goal is to offer the best streaming service - video quality, audio quality and choice of titles.

They are doing a pretty good job. I think it is great they plan to offer higher quality streams (not so sure about 3D - but when they let me try it I'll let you know )

But I here is where we may differ.

If their biggest problem is supporting current customer streams then fix this first - then roll out the new services (SuperHD and 3D) that need more bandwidth.

It sounds like you think a good approach is for Netflix to reduce the streaming bandwidth to all (as they did a month ago). If they can do this improve service and maintain picture quality - yes that may be OK. But posts here suggest otherwise http://www.avsforum.com/t/1440503/odd-netflix-issue-x-high-hd-no-longer-available/210#post_22779113 - it seems the new streams maybe softer than what we where getting before.

Where I have a problem is that Netflix rolls out new options (SuperHD and 3D) which need MORE bandwidth. However they roll it out in such a way that most people can't access it (seems like a tease!) - while maybe reducing the quality for people who had been able to get the old 4800 Kbps streams.

At the same time they tell people the only way they can get the new streams is for their ISP to be connected to Netflix new content delivery network - Netflix Open Connect. Now why are they doing this? A very good question. Is it for their customers - not many can access these streams. Or is it some sort of convoluted way to put pressure on the ISPs - if so it is hard to see how that will work.

As others have posted here I would be willing to pay a little more for higher quality streams.
Edited by undecided - 1/14/13 at 11:12pm

Is it possible with the new compression algorithms Netflix is using that the new 3850 stream is equal to the old 4300 or even 5800 stream, or some variation of that?. Has this been conclusively ruled out yet?

Is it possible to find out exactly what it would cost an ISP to add support for Netflix's CDN? Netflix is offering free access and some or all the equipment for free. What other up-front and ongoing expenses are there?

Can any excess bandwidth from the CDN Netflix is offering be used by the ISP's for other purposes? If Netflix gives free equipment to an ISP, can they use it for other needs if not being used for streaming Netflix? In other words, can the ISP include the Netflix parts in their load balancing?

If someone offered me a free car so I could drive to Netflix-World but I would have to buy gas and pay for repairs, I would take the offer if I really wanted to go to Netflix-World. But if I really did not want to go to Netflix-World and instead wanted to go to Cable-World, then I would not be so eager to take the offer. I see the ISPs as acting this way at this point in time. Someone will have to come up with some hard numbers as to how much of a burden it would be if they added Netflix's CDN before I will lighten up on the ISP's.

I just have too many questions still to blow off what Netflix is doing here. I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with Netflix being incompetent. They may be awkward marketers but they have incredible focus on what they are doing, and they have a great product. I'm not ashamed to admit that. I've watched more hours of content in the last 3 years than in the prior 15 mainly because of Netflix's buffet viewing model and NO commercials

No their hands are not tied - it was Netflix's decision to limit who gets the higher quality streams.

You can argue that they are trying to make their service more reliable - but there are many (not just me) who had no problems getting the old 4800 Kbps streams.

I say that the jury is still out. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever for them to have re-encoded the old SD streams at the same bit rates. It saves nothing and they would have paid money to Amazon for cloud computing without purpose or gain. Encoding the two HD streams saves bandwidth and storage on their streaming servers. I need to see 4800 Kbps compared to 3850 and 3600 Kbps compared to 3600.

Of course, if they did re-encode the SD streams, it really exposes their claim that eyeIO's encoder tech is better as a sham. Not only does it not deliver superior results at lower bit rates, it decreases quality of video encoded with it at the same bit rate .

 

1 - They are fixing it be offering the same level of quality in reduced bandwidth and long term by offering a new market. It's silly to even discuss bandwidth as one has to judge the image itself... not how it is delivered. Much like complaining Amazon shipped your package (undamaged) in too small of a box.

 

2 - Even you state while maybe reducing the quality... complaining about something you're guessing.

 

3 - Everyday companies introduce products that everyone can't purchase for one reason or another.

 

4 - Once again more guessing... complaining about something unknown.

 

5 - There are thousands of products I'd purchase if I could dictate how the were sold and at what price. Unfortunately, the world and companies can't operate that way.

Edited by Charles R - 1/15/13 at 6:30am

 

Just because they make a decision it doesn't mean their hands aren't tied. Everyday we make decisions based on what's best for the customer and hence the business. Big picture it's not about stream size (alone) it's also about where they are being delivered from and positioning oneself, not living in the past and expecting it to serve the future. Once again complaints about guesses... there are many who had no problems... I guess the other many don't count.

AVS rules state that you do not attack the poster.

If VUDU came out and said we offer content in HDX but you must contact your ISP and badger them to get on board with VUDUs CDN would probably create the same results as this Netflix fiasco.

None of this really matters, out of 20M subs I bet less than a few thousand even know or care about all of this.

Not sure if there is another thread where this is better suited but I have cablevision, use a ps3 hard wired with a ps3 measured 18 down and on titles labeled SuperHD in the app the Info displays High/SD even though it is clearly the new format. The Example Short overlays a bit rate of 5800 and it looks great. Other shows indicating High/SD don't all look as good, so clearly the original source still matters (duh).

Anyway just wanted to chime in that it's disconcerting to see SD indicated in the PS3 when it is in fact the highest quality Netflix offers!

Did the Example Short show "High/SD" when it reached 5800 Kbps? When you watch it climb through the indicators, does it go through "High/SD", "Medium/HD", "High/HD", etc? It's possible that it's just the indicator that's broken.

Probably somewhere in the chain is a piece of software that needs to be updated to reflect new labels. It sounds like you are actually getting the new streams.

I wish someone could direct compare the new encodes to the old ones but how can they unless someone is able to capture and save one of the old streams. I don't know if that is possible.

Warner which owns TWC made a deal to stream a bunch of there content so there are under good terms which means there is a chance that TWC might get SuperHD.

This screenshot was posted earlier in this thread showing Example Short 23.976 at 4300 Kbps with the PS3's info overlay showing "High/SD" (3 tiers below). The indicator needs fixing.

I doubt it. These companies are so large that each division acts as a separate company. If the Warner division wants to sell content rights to Netflix, great. More money for the company. Just don't be thinking that the broadband division will join Netflix's CDN unless it is in their best interest. Customers dropping cable TV service in favor of Netflix is one way to make it their best interest to join Netflix's CDN.

^^Time Warner no longer owns/controls TWC. It was spun off as an independent company, and merely continues to license the TW name. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Warner_Cable

Did not know that. Anyway this will be interested because we don't know which ISP's in the future will be joining Netflix CDN. It might be yours. For me as long as it streams reliable then I don't care much about Super HD as the 3850 kbps High/HD streams look really good and better than the HD channels on Dish Network. They are really soft and some look comparable to Medium/HD.

I only have a Toshiba 32" 1080p TV that I got in 2008.

You are correct. My bad. I guess that makes it zero chance Warner's announcement will have any influence. The rest is true. Customers dropping their cable TV portion of their broadband is the only way the ISP's will willingly accept Netflix's CDN offer.

Now who is guessing

Anyway enough is enough - nothing any of us say here is going change anything.

Hopefully one year from now we'll all have access to SuperHD and 3D if we want it.

We'll see.