Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Netflix To Lift Streaming Limits

Posted by kdawson on Sun Jan 13, 2008 06:49 PM
from the oh-my-groaning-pipes dept.
Media Movies Businesses
The AP has a story on Netflix's move to head off expected competition from Apple: the company will lift limits on streaming its movies for most subscribers. The story reports on rumors of an Apple movie-download service that may be announced by Steve Jobs on Tuesday. In the past Netflix has imposed limits on how long its subscribers could watch streamed movies; for example, those who paid $16.99/mo. could stream up to 17 hours per month. The limits will end on Monday for most subscribers (except for those paying $4.99 for two DVD rentals a month, said to be a small minority). The company has 6,000 movies available for streaming, compared to 90,000 that you can get delivered in the mail.
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Entertainment: Netflix and iTunes Rentals Aiming At Different Crowds 166 comments
Engadget notes an article in the New York Times discussing the substantially different markets that Netflix and Apple's movie rentals are aiming for. The site views the loosening of Netflix streaming restrictions as a reaction motivated entirely by the iTunes movie rental announcement, but beyond that the two services seem to have little connection. From Engadget's observations: "After speaking with Netflix's Reed Hastings, it was found that the vast majority of its streamable content was 'older,' and considering that users of this service can never look forward to brand new releases being available, the cost (i.e. free to most mail-in subscribers) makes sense. As for Apple, it's able to focus on crowds who are looking for a more robust, generally fresher selection, but of course, you'll pay the premium each time you indulge. Furthermore, Netflix has yet to make transferring video to any display / device other than your monitor easy, and while an LG set top box is indeed on the horizon, the differences in content selection are still likely to lure separate eyes."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Netflix To Lift Streaming Limits 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Awesome (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Mateo_LeFou (859634) on Sunday January 13 2008, @06:53PM (#22029354) Homepage
    I'll indulge as soon as they buy me a windows machine with IE and tasty WMP DRM etc.
    • Netflix streaming won't work on macs (or linux). It also requires you to watch from a computer. Most cheap PC computers--that is to say most computers--are not fit company for the living room. The idea of the media PC has always made me laugh. Too noisey. (in contrast all but the powermacs which sound like windtunnels, are very quiet and welcome in the living room). SO it's ironic that the computers that netflix is suited for are the ones it does not support.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        it's more ironic that LG is making a set top box to stream from Netflix for this very reason.....

        And that you didn't read far enough to even see this in the story.....

      • Re:Won't work on macs (Score:4, Informative)

        by gabebillings (1001269) on Sunday January 13 2008, @08:02PM (#22029916)
        My media PC is in a nice case that even the wife approves of, and is cooled by one nearly silent 120mm fan. Being able to stream movies directly onto my 52" LCD is very nice.
      • My mce pc is pretty quiet... however, I replaced the cpu fan with a quiet cooler master fan, reversed the flow, and fasioned a cowl to direct the air from the cpu out of the case.. also removed the two 60mm fans on the back.. I have one 80mm fan for intake, and the psu has a relatively quiet 14cm fan...

        Now, the default design of the case etc was noisier.. but it isn't too hard to do.. One thing that kind of upsets me is that all the cpu fan designs blow towards the cpu, instead of up and away from.. yeah

        • One thing that kind of upsets me is that all the cpu fan designs blow towards the cpu, instead of up and away from..
          For lack of better terminology, I thought fans work better at creating higher pressure than at creating a vacuum.
    • I'll sign up as soon as I can forgo the DVD delivery option. I used to use Zip.Ca (Basically netflix for Canada), but cancelled after too many movies got lost in the mail.
  • I've seen some typos in story bodies recently, but not in a story title... who is Netfilx? Are they the new, hot, up-and-coming competitor to Netflix [netflix.com]?

  • Compete with Apple? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Laguerre (1198383) on Sunday January 13 2008, @06:55PM (#22029366)
    Of course, you can't watch streaming movies on Netflix with a Mac...

    • Re:Compete with Apple? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Mateo_LeFou (859634) on Sunday January 13 2008, @06:59PM (#22029410) Homepage
      That's because only Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium's Digital Rights Management Trustation Computing can secure Intellectual Property for your Enterprise etc.

      • Re:Compete with Apple? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by hedwards (940851) on Sunday January 13 2008, @07:12PM (#22029524)
        I realize you're kidding, but if Apple cared about its customers they would just license the WM DRM codecs and allow access on Macs.

        It makes 0 sense to pay for a second DRM codec for a user base which is only 7% or so of the total. I don't like it either, but they can't just hand out free copies of every movie no strings attached, people who want that can already go with torrents.

        Apple has chosen not to license any of the DRM types available to the rest of the mainstream computing world, it's unfortunate that the Mac users are ultimately the ones that lose out. 7% isn't really a that much leverage, especially since the majority of the account holders don't use the download service at all.
          • Apple is one of the largest, if not the largest, sellers of DRM protected products on the entire Net.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by MBCook (132727)

            Really? I'd blame Netflix for using a de facto single platform codec. They could have used Theora, which is open. They could have used QuickTime, which has Windows support. They could have used RealPlayer (as horrid as that would be), because it's at least available on both platforms. There is also Flash which is immensely popular and multi-platform. Instead they chose the one that promised all the lock-in of Windows with all fun of Windows.

            Don't blame Apple because their competitor who has been trying to

            • Re:Compete with Apple? (Score:5, Informative)

              by Sri Ramkrishna (1856) <sriram.ramkrishna@noSpam.gmail.com> on Sunday January 13 2008, @09:28PM (#22030442)
              Dude,

              Netflix is forced to use Windows because the MPAA only allows windows DRM to be used. So they aren't mandating the codec, the MPAA is. They would love to use everything if they could, but the restriction is coming from the movie industry. So complain to the MPAA who seems to be propogating a (former) monopoly.

              sri

              • Netflix is forced to use Windows because the MPAA only allows windows DRM to be used. So they aren't mandating the codec, the MPAA is.

                Bullshit. The MPAA sells movies protected by CSS, MS's WMP, and Apple's FairPlay. What makes you think they wouldn't approve another DRM format if someone presented it to them? It is in their best interests, in fact, to have as many stores and DRM types as possible for two reasons. First, they are a cartel that makes money by being gatekeepers and having a single DRM as a choke point would give another company as much power as they have. Second, they make money when consumers repurchase content because th

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Basehart (633304)
      On Tuesday at at the Macworld keynote you'll see why Mac users won't give a rats ass about watching Netflix movies, hence the timing of the Netflix announcement. As usual, too little too late.

      FWIW Mac users still can't buy music from Napster, or any of the so-called "Plays Fer Sure" online outlets, and play it on an iPod.
    • That is what I would say, but I would go one step further. The point that most analysts and pundit miss is that, like the Windows desktop monopoly, users want thing to be cheap and easy. They have a MS Windows machine at home because that is what they learned in school and hove at work, and they get most software for free.

      In the same way, most people have an iPod, most people have iTunes, and anything else is going to require extra effort, especially for those users that have Macs. I know the reply to

      • To be fair, I would be willing to be that the average paid-for song is played many more times far more than the average paid-for movie, so one hour of music might represent more actual play-time than 90 minutes of movie.

  • God those summaries are entertaining (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 13 2008, @07:00PM (#22029426)

    In the past Netflix has imposed limits on how long its subscribers could watch streamed movies; for example, those who paid $16.99/mo. could stream up to 17 hours per month.
    That's an example of how *much* movie-time you can stream, not how *long* you have to watch it.

  • But is it still IE and Windows only? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Sunday January 13 2008, @07:01PM (#22029434)

    System Requirements:

    • Computer running Windows XP with Service Pack 2 or higher, or Windows Vista
    • Internet Explorer version 6 or higher
    • Windows Media Player version 11 (DRM version 5145) or later

    Well gee, that makes the service pretty much useless to me unless I want to watch movies in a VM on my laptop, instead of on my TV. No thanks. I told them a year ago that if they didn't come up with viable solution Blockbuster or Apple would and that would probably be enough to make me switch. They replied back with a comment that it was impossible but that as soon as MS's silverlight technology was good enough they'd use that. Who in their right minds would bet the future of their company on a technology that is both completely controlled by Microsoft and in a market MS will probably want to compete in? I foresee the end of Netflix.

    • Since Netflix streaming is only a value-add, I don't think it's a big deal. Their core business is DVDs through the mail. Hell, their streaming selection is piss-poor, anyway.
      • For movies, yeah, the selection isn't that great. But as far as classic TV shows go, they have tons and tons of stuff to dig through. All the old Alfred Hitchcock Presents. Lots of stuff from the BBC, including what looks to be nearly every episode of Dr Who. And they seem to have a deal with NBC/Universal, whereby they were posting episodes of Heroes up a few days after they aired. Not to mention, as someone else already did, this service is the 'value added' upgrade to the primary service that you went to
    • If that is actually a reasonably accurate description -- that it's "impossible" -- well, there's Flash, which sucks, but works for YouTube, and there's a good ol' <embed> tag, with some actual mpeg streaming. I bet most machines would do well if you stuck a .mp4 file in there.

      And before people start bitching about having to install a player... They're forcing what for many people is an OS upgrade (or wholesale switch), browser upgrade, and/or Windows Media Player upgrade (or fresh install). If they're

    • Re:But is it still IE and Windows only? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Yold (473518) on Sunday January 13 2008, @08:10PM (#22029982)
      Umm... buy an s-video cable and a mini-jack to rca converter, grand total $15. Watch it on a television. And most of the on-demand movies are so-so anyway.

      Netflix probably picked Microsoft DRM because it was ready off-the-shelf, and suits the needs of 90% of its users. They don't have the luxury Apple does, that is to say controlling the source of a widely popular media player. And software development, especially a cross-platform DRM system, isn't cheap or easy. Can you suggest any viable alternatives to Microsoft DRM?

      Netflix has a great business model, returning movies in 3-days is a pain in the ass. The on-demand is just a nicity that a minority of customers use.
    • unless I want to watch movies in a VM on my laptop, instead of on my TV

      Netflix streaming + spare laptop + video out + (gov surplus)projector + wall = 100" movies. Sorry if this doesn't work for you. All these parts are easy and cheap to come by.
      Yes, it is a bit esoteric for Joe SixPack, but not that bad.
  • None of the movies I'd be interested in are provided by Netflix. None of the television shows, either. Sure, I'm only one person out of, oh, seven billion or so on the planet, but it would seem to indicate that Netflix have scope for improving their range. Given the power of data mining techniques and the ability for an Internet-based system to get direct feedback, one would have thought that they would have ways and means of predicting what would be good to add to their service, but given that my interests
    • None of the movies I'd be interested in are provided by Netflix.

      Really? Nothing? Seeing as they do have a pretty wide selection, that's interesting.
      What do you like, specifically?
      • Indeed. If nothing else, they have The Office (both versions) available for streaming.

        My only complaint about the streaming service, being an Anime guy, is the inability to pick which language I get to listen to. In general the streaming is great, if low quality, and "free". It's the reason I finally killed my excellent but uncompetitive Greencine subscription.
      • I guess they don't have hentai pr0n

    • Re:I'd be interested, but... (Score:5, Funny)

      by SageMusings (463344) on Sunday January 13 2008, @07:29PM (#22029668) Journal
      None of the movies I'd be interested in are provided by Netflix

      Yes, their snuff film collection is rather weak at the moment but I understand the studios in East Los Angeles are picking up the pace.

  • Great! Now how about better OS support? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by proxima (165692) on Sunday January 13 2008, @07:07PM (#22029484)
    It's a shame that Netflix only supports Windows XP/Vista for streaming. I'd love to have a Mac OS X or Linux client.

    Of course, I consider the mailed DVDs worth the subscription price, so Netflix doesn't have much incentive to make clients for people like me. I wonder if they would get many more subscribers if they offered a Mac client.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by NothingMore (943591)
      Id love to see a Linux client for this service. Especially if it could be built into a MythTV box (and there selection was a bit better). It would be awesome to have a large selection of movies that i could watch without even putting down the remote.

      • To me the real issue is that I've been paying the same amount for a lesser service. If they can't offer me the streaming that they offer Windows users, they should charge me less. Certainly they can see that I've never streamed a single movie.

        The marginal cost of the service to you is probably minimal. Unless, of course, they pay per-view licensing fees, which I doubt. Everything about the streaming service indicates a large fixed cost (setting up the software/interface, ripping movies into the appropriat

  • Seriously, the "Watch Instantly" selection sucks. I have 24hr/mo and I think I've used maybe 24 hours since I signed up for the service 6 months ago.

    On an unrelated grammatical note, should that be Netflix' or Netflix's?

    On yet another unrelated note: I wish people would stop editorializing in tags. I'm looking at you Mr. "!netfilx"

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by X0563511 (793323)
      Too bad [slashdot.org].

      Several quotes:

      We don't know exactly how this will all work, and a lot of it really depends on you.

      We're excited about this, and see huge potential for this system. From user feedback on articles, to comment moderation, the system is really limited only by your participation, and our database hardware!

      Other tagging systems let users make up any tags they want, and punt on the issue of objective meaning. So the tag "foo" means for each user whatever they want it to mean, and to the system it means

  • While netflix does currently offers such gems as 'Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter' and 'The Glamorous Life of Sachiko Hanai', a quick look at the top-50 for streaming shows just how hard it would have been to even use up 17 hours with their selection of movies. It'd also be nice if there were more options for playback, instead of just windows+ie, but I already have a laptop running windows hooked up to my display full-time anyway, so it's not a big deal to me.

    Still, can't complain too much about it, as it's
  • Sadly their streaming movies are crappy quality I've read, put up some HD movies, 720p even, and I'll gladly pay $20/month. http://www.vudu.com/ [vudu.com] seems to be the only doing this, and its expensive as hell, then there is the 360 downloads, but their selection is crap and its still quite expensive at 3-4 bucks per movie.
    • Apart with the obvious bandwidth issues with streaming HD video, why would you really need HD video. Most of the stuff you're getting from Netflix in the mail is only 480p (DVD). Why are you complaining that the streaming content isn't HD, when most of their in-the-mail selection isn't HD either.
  • I already subscribe to Netflix, but will probably still use whatever Apple service comes along over this one. Mostly because it wouldn't work on my media center Mac or PS3...

  • Let's Check (Score:5, Insightful)

    by markdavis (642305) on Sunday January 13 2008, @07:32PM (#22029698)
    DRM: Check
    Low-def only: Check
    Low bitrate: Check
    Watch only on computer: Check
    Poor selection: Check
    No non-streaming option: Check
    No Linux support: Check
    No MacOS support: Check

    I am ***so*** excited about the limits being lifted on my Netflix account!! Guess I will continue to use their old-fashioned DVD's. I *do* like Netflix, have used them for years, but this whole "Watch It Now" thing is about as interesting to me as watching grass grow.

    • DRM: Check
      Low-def only: Check
      Low bitrate: Check
      Watch only on computer: Check
      No non-streaming option: Check
      No awareness of what 'on-line rental' means: Priceless.

      • Gaa, when will slashdot let us put some basic filtering in our comment preferences. I've never seen a post with that word in it that was worth reading, and they're almost as prevalent as that stupid minicity dealy was a couple of weeks ago.

        If server side filtering is too expensive, then maybe they could shove a couple of routines in with the javascript includes for client-side regex filtering.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ScrewMaster (602015)
      What? I assume you're shooting for a +2 Funny or something. Copyright law doesn't make any statements about how content must be distributed ... it just says that the copyright owner gets to set the terms. Presumably they have deals with the major studios that allow them to stream content for a set fee.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.