or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › Netflix to Nix Nearly 1800 Titles
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Netflix to Nix Nearly 1800 Titles - Page 4

post #91 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by stepyourgameup View Post

Is it really 4K if it is compressed? Wouldn't a non compressed bluray look better than a compressed 4K?

Blu-ray is also compressed. At issue is the amount of compression. A 4K movie compressed to fit into a 15GB download will be very highly compressed, but the perceived increase in resolution and sharpness could make it look "better" in some situations than a less compressed 1080P BD.

They are feverishly working on more efficient codecs that can compress more efficiently but it's at least a couple of years before the 35-50GB BD quality can be matched by a much more highly compressed file. It will also require new hardware that can play files encoded with these new compression algorithms.

The final footnote to all of this is that 95% or more of consumers could care a whit how compressed a movie is, because they don't notice banding, macroblocking, poor black levels, low color depth, etc.... usually because they have very poorly setup equipment that they sit very far away from. 10' away from a 42" screen you aren't going to notice jack about quality problems and would have a hard time telling BD from DVD anyway. That's the #1 target demographic for streaming I imagine, behind those who consume content on tiny phone, tablet and laptop screens.
post #92 of 132
This explains why suddenly, there seems to be less stuff on Netflix. There you have it. I knew this would happen eventually. Good thing we resubsribed to Netflix's disc rental service. Looks like I'll be using that a lot more often in the near future. (I prefer discs anyway, so no biggie for me)
post #93 of 132
I have Netflix, Amazon and Hulu Plus on my Xbox. I refuse to get another pay streaming service. Hopefully enough people feel like this. The studios want make no money and fold their streaming service if nobody subscribes. Then all the content will flow back to Netflix. People just gotta be smart. If not I can always fall back on DVDFAB......
post #94 of 132
Getting newer stuff on disc was impossible from Netflix for me. If you like disc you should consider the redbox streaming option. It's about the same price and you get free codes to get physical disc instantly from their kiosks.
post #95 of 132
A couple of things...

Firstly, anything that's niche, camp, cult following should be on physical media and then transferred to your media server.

Don't you have one???

Second, streaming is ready for primetime, however the US' internet infrastructure is not. If you live in a major cities and can get seriously fast fiber to home or business class speed DSL or Cable, then streaming it just fine. In some cases you can stream directly from uTorrent but that's for another thread I fear.

I watch the majority of stuff online, using the You Tube app for XBMC, Hulu for Windows with Media Center integration and Free Cableon XBMC which aggregates all the streaming web sites such as Crackle and NBC Classics. For the main auto racing I watch is very niche in the US (FIA WEC, FIA GT Series, International GT Open, WTCC, etc). I also don't like the tape-delayed V8 Supercar Series shown on Speed, so I watch it ummm in other ways same day usually.

I would move completely over to streaming if it wasn't for a few shows on HGTV and the NFL. I can watch a majority of College Football games with again XBMC via ESPN3 app, the rest can be seen OTA. NFL Sunday Ticket can be streamed but its expensive.

I also get physical media from Netflix and...it seems to be on my Windows Home Server, hmmmmm.
post #96 of 132
Who's Kenny?LOL.
post #97 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by dj4monie View Post

. I can watch a majority of College Football games with again XBMC via ESPN3 app

Don't you have to be an ESPN subscriber to access ESPN3?

Also, are you watching all of your television on a computer screen, or are you connected to a TV via an HDMI cable or something? (I realize an LED monitor for a TV and computer are about the same thing.)

TIA
post #98 of 132
Well, yesterday I saw that two series that were "lost", Trailer Park Boys and Southpark returned to our queue. The one thing I've noticed about Netflix is that a series or movie's streaming license will expire, only to be brought back a few days later. I wonder how many other titles this happened with this week? I have a feeling that this will turn out to be a lot of nothing.
post #99 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Burger View Post

Don't you have to be an ESPN subscriber to access ESPN3?

Also, are you watching all of your television on a computer screen, or are you connected to a TV via an HDMI cable or something? (I realize an LED monitor for a TV and computer are about the same thing.)

TIA

I was subscribed to ATT U-Verse and currently to Wide Open West cable for only internet and phone. I received ESPN3 both times through them.
post #100 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhufnagel View Post

I was subscribed to ATT U-Verse and currently to Wide Open West cable for only internet and phone. I received ESPN3 both times through them.


Hah! I was wondering about that.... I bet I'll be able to do the same when I end my Charter TV service (and keep Charter internet. ) They probably just look at a valid customer account as a credential.

Shhhhhhhhh - the walls have ears.
post #101 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blu_One View Post

Yeah that's true, now I'm wondering..

I think if they extracted 1,800 titles from Canadians we're going to be left off with maybe 3 or 4 titles biggrin.gifbiggrin.gif
post #102 of 132
Lol
post #103 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

I think if they extracted 1,800 titles from Canadians we're going to be left off with maybe 3 or 4 titles biggrin.gifbiggrin.gif

They have Netflix in Canada? wink.gif
post #104 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by morbidcorpse View Post

I was going to make this same point. Utorrent just got a few thousand more downloads, thanks to this announcement. Cable cutters aren't going to go back to cable as a form of daily entertainment if streaming dies. They're just going to focus all their attention on piracy.

I can't speak for those who are older than me (I'm 23), but in my generation this is especially true. (Then again, most of my friends never plan to subscribe to cable/satellite in the first place.)

That said, the problem I have with streaming is -- as many people here have stated -- you do not really own the movie. It can be taken away at any time. My ideal solution would be for the movie industry to use do what the music industry and indie movie scene currently do -- offer DRM-free digital files that can be downloaded (as opposed to streamed). I don't see that happening, though. In the meantime, the only two ways to get what I want for mainstream films would be to A) rip from physical media into digital; or B) resort to piracy. frown.gif
post #105 of 132
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by drm870 View Post


I can't speak for those who are older than me (I'm 23), but in my generation this is especially true. (Then again, most of my friends never plan to subscribe to cable/satellite in the first place.)

That said, the problem I have with streaming is -- as many people here have stated -- you do not really own the movie. It can be taken away at any time. My ideal solution would be for the movie industry to use do what the music industry and indie movie scene currently do -- offer DRM-free digital files that can be downloaded (as opposed to streamed). I don't see that happening, though. In the meantime, the only two ways to get what I want for mainstream films would be to A) rip from physical media into digital; or B) resort to piracy. frown.gif

 

It's great to know that some people will willingly subjected themselves to prosecution so that they can spend a whole day downloading a file that might contain a virus in order to save a couple bucks. I guess that's why wisdom is something that comes with age.
 
Resorting to piracy is a classic example of one step forward, two steps back. There is nothing free about it. Yes, Steve Jobs use piracy as the stick in a stick and carrot negotiation over the price of music downloads, but that was a unique example. Your justification for stealing is that what you are stealing is not free to steal, so instead you'll take your chances with something that is already stolen, instead of buying—and owning the rights to repeatedly watch—a DRM-protected file.
 
The problem you have with streaming exists for physical media as well. You never own a movie, that's the nature of copyrighted works. With the physical disk you can pretend you own it, but in the end the data is subject to the same laws whether it is on a platter or in the cloud. Anyhow, Netflix was never about ownership. It is equivalent to renting movies. A Netflix membership could and should never have been regarded as a substitute for ownership. That would be a discussion about iTunes versus physical disks, or Ultraviolet versus physical disks.

Edited by imagic - 5/6/13 at 8:20pm
post #106 of 132
my time is worth more than the time spent to search for a good iso file and downloading it. I think everybody in this hobby is in the same boat as myself. Oh, that plus the illegal and potential virus thingie too. biggrin.gif
post #107 of 132
I typically buy my Blu-rays and (occasionally) rip for viewing on devices other than Blu-ray players. I don't really pirate movies myself (due to the security issues you mentioned as well as other reasons). What I'm more talking about is what some recent documentaries I've watched ("Indie Game: The Movie", "Transcendent Man", etc.) have done by offering a DRM-free, downloadable copy of the film either for purchase standalone or thrown in when purchasing the physical media version. I'd like to see that become commonplace, but to be honest I can understand why it probably won't.

Anyway, I was more trying to posit what I'd like to see happen than trying to defend piracy. That's all.

EDIT: As for the bolded comment, I was more trying to address how I don't see a lot of kids my age going for outright cable subscriptions over alternatives.
post #108 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by drm870 View Post

I can't speak for those who are older than me (I'm 23), but in my generation this is especially true. (Then again, most of my friends never plan to subscribe to cable/satellite in the first place.)

That said, the problem I have with streaming is -- as many people here have stated -- you do not really own the movie. It can be taken away at any time. My ideal solution would be for the movie industry to use do what the music industry and indie movie scene currently do -- offer DRM-free digital files that can be downloaded (as opposed to streamed). I don't see that happening, though. In the meantime, the only two ways to get what I want for mainstream films would be to A) rip from physical media into digital; or B) resort to piracy. frown.gif

I'm 28 and i don't like downloading free movies because the quality is crap. The movies that i tried a few years ago was nothing special. I'm all for quality. I would rather pay for a BD than DL the same movie for free. But that's just me. I have 0 interest in pirating films.

My friend though has downloaded about 30 movies onto his PS3. He still has almost 300 BD's so i guess that's fair. lol.
post #109 of 132
Oh Netflix how crappy you are. Cancled my subscription after two months due to such a crappy pic quality.
post #110 of 132
Prepare for Ryan1 to show up and start telling you how your xyz internet connection or xyz playback device is to blame for Netflix ****** PQ.
post #111 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

but in the end the data is subject to the same laws whether it is on a platter or in the cloud. Anyhow, Netflix was never about ownership. It is equivalent to renting movies. A Netflix membership could and should never have been regarded as a substitute for ownership. That would be a discussion about iTunes versus physical disks, or Ultraviolet versus physical disks.

You keep saying this, when you know that there are many many differences. If I "own" the physical disc I can do what I want with it. There is no "law" that is going to prevent my playback of the disc. There is no "law" that prevents me from loaning it out to a friend and there is no "law" that prevents me from re-selling it later. All of the above are not possible with downloads. There's a "law" against defeating DRM on the media I "own" but no one has ever been prosecuted for making a backup or transferring media from one media type to another in this country. I also have the option of using this right of first use (making a backup) where as this is not an option at all currently with purchased cloud media.

With a download you can only play the media you "purchased" if the rights-holder agrees to it. This means anytime they decide your playback device is out of spec, etc, they can halt your playback. You cannot loan out or re-sell a digital download.

I would say that the difference is pretty enormous but you, and others, continue to act as if, because of DRM on discs that the two are in parity, when clearly they are not. A physical disc is a tangible item that can be sold, transferred, loaned, etc, a streamed media file is NOT.
post #112 of 132
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpage2 View Post


You keep saying this, when you know that there are many many differences. If I "own" the physical disc I can do what I want with it. There is no "law" that is going to prevent my playback of the disc. There is no "law" that prevents me from loaning it out to a friend and there is no "law" that prevents me from re-selling it later. All of the above are not possible with downloads. There's a "law" against making a backup of the media I "own" but no one has ever been prosecuted for making a backup or transferring media from one media type to another in this country. I also have the option of using this right of first use (making a backup) where as this is not an option at all currently with purchased cloud media.

With a download you can only play the media you "purchased" if the rights-holder agrees to it. This means anytime they decide your playback device is out of spec, etc, they can halt your playback. You cannot loan out or re-sell a digital download.

I would say that the difference is pretty enormous but you, and others, continue to act as if, because of DRM on discs that the two are in parity, when clearly they are not.

Is there some law that would prevent you from playing back a digital download copy of a movie that you purchased? I understand the argument that you can resell disks, although to me that's a rather weak argument because except for a few titles they are looking to become essentially worthless within a year or two of being purchased. But, you can be the guy that your friends go to to borrow disks. 

 

In terms of laws and whether you're allowed to playback a disk or not, all I really meant is that whether it's a digital download or Blu-ray, you are not allowed to publicly exhibit the content, or charge people to view it. It would be illegal for you to rent out discs from your collection, for example.
 
Nonchalance about the legal ramifications of backing up disks is understandable. It's filed under the same category as speeding on a highway. But, you must admit the law against breaking the copyright protection exists, and technically you really are not allowed to do whatever you want with your content. Physical disks to give you some options that downloadable files do not, but it does not elevate the status of the content to the level of ownership.
 
Anyhow, it's a bunch of semantics. I am not some advocate of downloads with an agenda. I simply think that the trend is accelerating, and that the end of disks as a viable mass-market medium is inevitable. But it's not like I have some time frame that I think it's an occur within.
 
Blu-ray could go the way of the flip phone and voice mail, rapidly abandoned for something better. It could go the way of vinyl, even enjoying a renaissance amongst aficionados.

Edited by imagic - 5/7/13 at 10:07pm
post #113 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Burger View Post

Don't you have to be an ESPN subscriber to access ESPN3?

Also, are you watching all of your television on a computer screen, or are you connected to a TV via an HDMI cable or something? (I realize an LED monitor for a TV and computer are about the same thing.)

TIA

1) Well yes and no. We have AT&T for land-line and cellular so I access on my laptop using say WiFi at McDonald's or on my Samsung Infuse 4G, which works quite well on 4G. But we have ESPN as apart of DirecTCV.

2) My HTPC is connected via HDMI for the video signal only because my receiver does not take HDMI in, only digital (Toslink) but its connected to a actual LCD TV not PC monitor in fact its dot matrix is decent but it sort of suffers being used as a monitor actually.

Its best used as a TV.

I've been watching the American Le Mans Series events since they are only shown completely live on ESPN3 and not on ESPN2 plus the on-air talent leaves quite a bit to be desired. Its "Hindy" from Radio Le Mans on the ESPN3 stream and I much rather hear him.

In fact this weekend's 4 hour race at Laguna Seca will be shown completely only on ESPN3.
post #114 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhufnagel View Post

I was subscribed to ATT U-Verse and currently to Wide Open West cable for only internet and phone. I received ESPN3 both times through them.

Yep we had U-Verse TV for a hot second, just long enough to get the $200 Visa Gift Card.... We kept the Internet part of it, typing on it now... 27Mb Up, almost 3 Mb down, Skype calls in HD work great without employing any QOS on the router(s).

Yeah ESPN3 on my phone is actually pretty good. Just to prove a point to the naysayers in the American Le Mans Series community who balked at the idea of having races only live on the internet because of how their system is setup (no smart TV's, smart Blu Ray players, too old for game consoles like Xbox 360, etc, etc). So connected my phone to my HDTV and played the stream over 4G on the phone to the TV. Was showing in the highest quality which is Enhanced SD or near HD, its 1024x768 its not bad at all. Even when Speed switched to the internet for longer races like Sebring or 24hrs of Le Mans, the stream is good and very stable. I haven't tired with with the phone yet...
post #115 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

Is there some law that would prevent you from playing back a digital download copy of a movie that you purchased? I understand the argument that you can resell disks, although to me that's a rather weak argument because except for a few titles they are looking to become essentially worthless within a year or two of being purchased. But, you can be the guy that your friends go to to borrow disks. 

In terms of laws and whether you're allowed to playback a disk or not, all I really meant is that whether it's a digital download or Blu-ray, you are not allowed to publicly exhibit the content, or charge people to view it. It would be illegal for you to rent out discs from your collection, for example.
 
Nonchalance about the legal ramifications of backing up disks is understandable. It's filed under the same category as speeding on a highway. But, you must admit the law against breaking the copyright protection exists, and technically you really are not allowed to do whatever you want with your content. Physical disks to give you some options that downloadable files do not, but it does not elevate the status of the content to the level of ownership.
 
Anyhow, it's a bunch of semantics. I am not some advocate of downloads with an agenda. I simply think that the trend is accelerating, and that the end of disks as a viable mass-market medium is inevitable. But it's not like I have some time frame that I think it's an occur within.
 
Blu-ray could go the way of the flip phone and voice mail, rapidly abandoned for something better. It could go the way of vinyl, even enjoying a renaissance amongst aficionados.

Saw lots of flip and candy bar dumb phones in Mexico City... Vinyl is being popularized by the Hipsters, some of whom are actually turntable DJ's. It never went anywhere anyway, those of us that DJ could still get vinyl. Record Pools still deal with wax anyway.

Who doesn't use Voice Mail anymore??? Its included with your plan? Yes people are turning to instant messaging like Facebook and Twitter but lots of people use voice mail because remember not everybody wants a smart phone. I believe only 32% of cell users in the US have Smart Phones, we're way behind South Korea, Japan and much of Western Europe.
post #116 of 132
Quote:
... access to rare and hard to find movies from the Warner Bros. archives ...

Because we made it rare and hard to find on purpose for the sole reason of further lining our pockets.
post #117 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

Is there some law that would prevent you from playing back a digital download copy of a movie that you purchased? I understand the argument that you can resell disks, although to me that's a rather weak argument because except for a few titles they are looking to become essentially worthless within a year or two of being purchased. But, you can be the guy that your friends go to to borrow disks.

There's not an on the books law against it, but most included DRM'd Digital Copies are good for one download to one device EVER. If you get a new tablet, phone, PC, etc. it's stuck on the old device. HDD crash? Rebuild / upgrade your HTPC? You're screwed! Whereas as long as a Bluray can be slotted into a device, it will play it.
post #118 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

The problem you have with streaming exists for physical media as well. You never own a movie, that's the nature of copyrighted works. With the physical disk you can pretend you own it, but in the end the data is subject to the same laws whether it is on a platter or in the cloud.

Umm, not really. When was the last time anyone received a notice that they are not allowed to view a physical disk that they own? The problem is, with streaming, the content provides can, and regularly do, remove content. If you purchase a disk, it is yours to play forever.
post #119 of 132
The only way for all of us consumers to stop the fragmentation is to not buy from the movie studios at all. They make billions, pay unbelievable to the actors and actresses for their work, and expect the public to keep paying more and more. If their streaming services fail to make a profit, perhaps then they will be happy to set Netflix, Amazon etc do the streaming.
post #120 of 132
I have always considered streaming as secondary to DVDs. There's no way the titles I want to see are going to be streamed. Streaming appeals to the masses and must do so. The quality is inferior and I don't get the extras that I may want to see. Forget about 4K streaming it's not going to happen, for a lot of reasons. Actually a DVD created from a 4K master looks incredible on my 72" display. And I'm not talking about BluRay, but a Standard DVD. BlueRay and eventually 4K discs are and will be just more marketing ploys to squeeze more money out of the consumer. They are not necessary for home viewing. IMO. Perhaps for super sized home theater, but not for the average home theater.

So, streaming is an added value to my DVD service.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Latest Industry News
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › Netflix to Nix Nearly 1800 Titles