Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Television Media Technology

LG High-Def TVs To Stream Netflix Videos 190

DJAdapt writes to tell us that LG has launched a new line of high definition TVs that will be capable of streaming Netflix videos with no additional hardware. This is just another in a long line of expansions from the once DVD rental service, which has expanded to the Roku set top box, Xbox 360, PC, Mac, and Linux platforms recently. "Piping movies directly to TV sets is the natural evolution of the video streaming service, said Reed Hastings, the chief executive of Netflix. "The TV symbolizes the ultimate destination," he said. That idea -- shared by Sony Corp., which already streams feature films and TV shows directly to its Bravia televisions -- is still in its early stages. Netflix's streaming service taps a library of 12,000 titles, while the company's DVD menu numbers more than 100,000 titles. Hastings expects that gap will "definitely narrow" over time, but he noted that DVDs maintain an advantage over streaming, which is that "they are very profitable" for film studios."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

LG High-Def TVs To Stream Netflix Videos

Comments Filter:
  • Linux? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by smartin ( 942 ) on Monday January 05, 2009 @01:31PM (#26331851)
    Is this available or does the poster mean Tivo?
  • by Benanov ( 583592 ) <brian...kemp@@@member...fsf...org> on Monday January 05, 2009 @01:45PM (#26332031) Journal

    The TV supports the DRM scheme used. It's going to be *that much harder* to put some box in between the TV and the servers in order to capture, rip, and copy the movie.

    That's why this is important. Before, TVs were just dumb display devices. Now that most have firmware instead of just solid state circuits (hell my parents TV has a bootup sound) this sort of thing is possible.

    The push to having every little device do everything is that these days devices start out obeying their creators instead of their owners. Eventually many devices end up being Freed or at least placed more under consumer control, but it'll be a harder effort for consumers to hack everything all at once.

  • by Dadamh ( 1441475 ) <[Dadamh] [at] [gmail.com]> on Monday January 05, 2009 @01:52PM (#26332151)
    While I can see where you are coming from, in a reactionist YRO sorta way, there is something odd about complaining about inability to copy a rented film. You aren't even talking about making a legal backup of a movie you own, you are talking about outright theft (duplication not being theft aside). I don't think having some DRM on a movie that is inherently rented is exactly a bad idea. I agree that purchased hard copies (CDs, DVDs, Games) should be copyable, but whining because you can't copy a rented DVD is a bit of a stretch.
  • by deraj123 ( 1225722 ) on Monday January 05, 2009 @02:08PM (#26332377)

    That didn't look to me like an argument that he wanted to copy a rented film - it looked like an explanation of why it better suited the providers to do it that way.

    Personally, I want my TV to be a dumb display device because I want to be able to control the "experience". I would prefer to have my own "set top box" that runs my own software, consumes services that I pay for, and outputs to whatever sort of viewing device I choose (whether this is a TV, or my stereo, or my computer screen, or a projector, or some newfangled intercranial content delivery system).

  • Awesome (Score:2, Interesting)

    by man_ls ( 248470 ) on Monday January 05, 2009 @02:19PM (#26332535)

    I was concerned for a while about how Netflix would handle the transition from media being consumed primarily on disc, to being consumed over a network. It looks like they're handling the change extremely well.

    What I'd absolutely love to see would be the protocol used to do the streaming to be released, and for there to be some sort of option in the TV's set up to specify your own server if you're so inclined. Then, the TV could stream movies from your computer by itself.

  • Re:No thank you (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tgd ( 2822 ) on Monday January 05, 2009 @02:23PM (#26332615)

    Some people like to live in houses with better design sense than a 80's-chic man-cave black entertainment center tower with 12 big black ugly devices all blinking lights into the room.

    While this seems a little extreme since the odds are very low that someone using this wouldn't have a DVR box (which is a better place for it), the desire to get rid of components is something I completely understand now that I have tried to live in a house that isn't decorated in "college bachelor pad chic".

  • Meh. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by argStyopa ( 232550 ) on Monday January 05, 2009 @02:38PM (#26332839) Journal

    I just got a Roku for Xmas, and I'm quite pleased with it.

    Frankly, I prefer my hardware modular. I understand the appeal of having "all in one" boxes, but if I have a DVD player, and a monitor, I'd rather they be SEPARATE (at least insofar as the separation doesn't impair quality) so I can upgrade/replace parts as needed.

    And FWIW: "...Netflix's streaming service taps a library of 12,000 titles..." of which about 11,900 are truly SUCKY MOVIES.

    Most of the good ones are STARZ-licensed, meaning they are only available for as long as they are up on the STARZ network, meaning a handful of months at most.

    Don't get me wrong, I love my Netflix, and I really like Roku (lots of good TV stuff there), but don't for a minute think 12,000 movies means anything close to 12,000 GOOD movies you want to watch.

  • Re:Oh no, not again. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by 91degrees ( 207121 ) on Monday January 05, 2009 @02:46PM (#26332977) Journal
    Hopefully DVD streaming services will standardise and any TV will work with any streaming service.

    Hopefully that $200-300 extra on the price tag comes with other benefits like a built in hard disk.
  • Dumb Devices (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Ohio Calvinist ( 895750 ) on Monday January 05, 2009 @03:01PM (#26333219)
    TVs have always been one of the most reliable appliances in ones homes specifically because they don't have updatable components and had "better be right" out the door. Firmware upgrading has allowed companies selling hardware to control what users do with their devices, prohibit legal modification, introduce poorly developed products with a promise that 1.1 will be better, and introduce planned obselescence when 2.0 requires hardware rev. 2.0. HDTV has already had a hard enough time gaining widespread adoption in the US; the single most TV obsessed nation with a high per-capita income in the world. One of the few things that inspire consumer confidence is that TVs are built-to-last and they are a zero-maintainence piece of equipment. Even a stove requires more maintainence.

    Most folks I know have the ugly wooden console set that is almost 25 years old, and won't replace it until it breaks or bit the bullet on a 27"-32" when their console died. They aren't going to go out and drop $2,000 for a set that has feature X,Y,Z to have features suddenly drop because Sony or Universal decide to take their ball and go home; or have it bricked by a hack programmer trying to patch a DRM flaw before his boss fires him because Big Content is going to walk if they don't fix it.

    They should work with cable/sat providers to include the software in their boxes because most folks have digital cable or satellite and need some kind of reciever box anyway, and other than the TiVo loyal; the market has proven folks would much rather rent than buy these boxes, and if bricked they can take it back to their Cable Co for a new one and let them worry about getting it fixed. I would think this would only drive acceptance of PPV purchases for those not on NetFix yet if people can be swayed from the physical media and/or physical video store habit of entertainment. This way no TVs are harmed or depreciated while those displays still work, and I can let the provider worry about getting the content to my screen... whatever that form takes or changes in the 10-20 I've got this display.
  • by aggles ( 775392 ) on Monday January 05, 2009 @04:57PM (#26334871)
    When I bought my ROKU, I was just about to purchase HBO from Time Warner because I couldn't find anything good to watch on TV. Granted, ROKU/Netflix has a limited selection, but its enough to get by. As content gets better and the masses start going to steaming video, the cable companies get positioned as bit slingers and cut out of the middle of the content cash flow. I'm all for that after the high subscription fees I've paid for crap, but Time Warner, Comcast, Verizon and others are not going to stand for this attack on their revenue streams. Not only do they lose premium subscription revenue, but the streaming is going to consume way more of their bandwidth - especially as better quality HD becomes available. The cable companies will shape the bandwidth or start charging by the gigabit, and that is just a start. Their model is to attack by creating regulations that favor their business model - and that will slow down Netflix and others.

    I'm already suspecting Time Warner of shaping ROKU/Netflix traffic. My ROKU/Netflix movies start out at "four dot" quality and quickly shift to "two dot" quality - with the ROKU reporting 0.5 megabits/second throughput at the same time my PC can get 5-7 megabits/second to various speed test sites. ROKU is unusable until the throughput issue is fixed - but neither ROKU, Netflix or Time Warner has determined what the problem is.

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson

Working...