Disney Plus' Launch Marred by Complaints of Service Failures, Login Problems (cnet.com) 58
Disney Plus launched early Tuesday, and users are already complaining of service failures. From a report: So far, Disney Plus complaints are clustered in big cities in the Eastern US and Canada, lining up with the the areas likely to experiencing peak demand early Tuesday morning, according to outage tracker DownDetector. The tracker also showed complaints in the Netherlands, where Disney Plus launched as a subscription service Tuesday after operating as a free beta app for weeks. Disney said that demand for Disney Plus has exceeded its "high expectations."
"We are pleased by this incredible response and are working to quickly resolve the current user issue. We appreciate your patience," the company said in a statement. The complaints run a gamut of errors, including difficulties logging in, inability to stream, app failures, shows and movies disappearing from the library and other problems.
"We are pleased by this incredible response and are working to quickly resolve the current user issue. We appreciate your patience," the company said in a statement. The complaints run a gamut of errors, including difficulties logging in, inability to stream, app failures, shows and movies disappearing from the library and other problems.
Uh huh.... (Score:3)
That's what they always say.
Usually- it means they deployed alpha software because management rushed things.
Re: (Score:3)
They didn't want to spend the money to overbuild their capacity just for a week or two and opted to have rough launch day instead. Somehow I doubt changing their capacity is as simple as spinning up and down AWS sessions.
Re: (Score:2)
They aren't; going to refund money, especially this is a free trial week. The most they would do is extend the trial a few days though I don't see that happening. Even if they do wait few extra days to start
Re: (Score:2)
"This will blow over and be forgotten pretty quickly."
Wait? so you are saying it is easy to take advantage of consumers and will only complain a little bit then forget about it?
where in the world would you get that idea from? it almost like you are saying that people are constantly seeing businesses do product launches and seeing them fail but not really do anything about being treated like worthless consumers that would be thankful for the chance to give these corporations top dollar for their less than
Re: (Score:2)
The people who sign up on the first day are the ones who are most excited about the service and the most forgiving of the problems. No one has paid top dollar, yet. There is a 7 day free trail.
Re: (Score:2)
Not top dollar, but a bunch like myself purchased 3 year subscriptions a few months back. There were offers going for 1/2 off.
Not that it matters though, launches usually don't reflect long term experiences.
Re: Uh huh.... (Score:3)
Exactly. Disney could serve you literal shit on a silver platter and half the people would claim it was artistic expression.
Re: (Score:2)
Giving preference to Apple TV users or to Google Chrome Cast, will just annoy users far more then everyone getting connection problems.
Humans are weird they much rather share suffering, then know someone else is enjoying something they cannot get, at the moment.
And culturally we are way too Tribal on everything, so people will feel like they are being insulted because Their Primary Streaming Hardware wasn't supported on day one.
Or if they Stagger base on Location it
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Uh huh.... (Score:4, Informative)
They didn't want to spend the money to overbuild their capacity just for a week or two and opted to have rough launch day instead. Somehow I doubt changing their capacity is as simple as spinning up and down AWS sessions.
Why? AWS is a pretty standard part of CDNs. It's also a normal way large game launches handle the first 6 weeks or so of load (even a fairly successful game with drop 85% of load by six weeks),
Seriously, you're way behind the times now if you can't use some cloud service for launch-week traffic spikes. It's moved well beyond "something new to try" to "the new normal". You always want to build that auto-scaling capacity in anyhow, just in case you have a unexpectedly successful marketing campaign or new offering - you don't want your lucky burst of new customers to have a bad first/only experience because your engineers didn't keep up with the times.
Fun fact: AWS internally has deployment blackouts around the Superbowl, because so many companies now rely on AWS to handle the spike if their Superbowl ad or related marketing campaign actually works.
Re: (Score:2)
> Why?
According to the person you are replying to, because Disney didn't want to spend the money.
> It's also a normal way large game launches handle the first 6 weeks or so of load
A surprising number of game launches (including DLC updates which bring a lot of players back) have server capacity issues at launch. I'm guessing they also don't want to spend the money.
My speculation is that someone made the decision that it wasn't worth spending extra money for a smooth launch expense when they can count
Re: (Score:2)
Possibly, but what's that saying about never attribute to malice what can be easily explained by incompetence?
Re: (Score:3)
Of course they did but simulated traffic is never the same as real traffic. Something this big and complicated being hit with this kind of traffic for the first time is going to have some issues that weren't expected or anticipated crop up even with the best effort.
Re: (Score:3)
Usually- it means they deployed alpha software because management rushed things.
Usually you'd be right, but the reality is the entire beta test (you know a proper free open beta test to iron out bugs) has been running in the Netherlands without a hitch. This is very clearly a capacity problem on launch day, or a USA content localisation problem.
We've been using Disney Plus here for 2 months and at no time did any software feel alpha, beta, unpolished, nor did we actually encounter a bug.
I'm sure you've been using it for months and are a subscriber now as well right, since you have such
Usual Issues + Lack of Communication (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The ability to bundle all three was just made available today... Once you are subscribed under Disney+, you can go to your account page and add on the "Disney Bundle". It is also a little "hidden" because this first week is the "free preview" period and does not actually start billing until next week...
Re:Usual Issues + Lack of Communication (Score:5, Insightful)
Why? Just why? Disney is dragging everyone, kicking and screaming, back to the cable-TV-packaged-hell world that we came from, where we end up massively subsidizing expensive sports programming just to get Disney and ABC shows. Do not want.
Re: (Score:3)
The "problem" is that there aren't sufficient viewers for one or another genre but if you group them, you can negotiate on a much bigger platform. The media companies are basically the local co-op for content, they aggregate demand to get a much larger discount but sometimes you're going to get stuck with 5 kg of Kale.
Re:Usual Issues + Lack of Communication (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
That's expected given what Disney now owns (50%+).
Movies: Walt Disney Pictures, Fox (and their sub-studios), Pixar, Marvel, Lucasfilm
Stage Theater: Disney Theatrical Productison
TV: ESPN, ABC, FX, Disney Channel, National Geographic, A&E, Lifetime, History Channel
Streaming: Disney+, ESPN+, Hulu,
Re: (Score:1)
Basically four different packages: Disney+ only, Hulu only, ESPN+ only or all three... Still choices, not being forced one way or another...
Re: (Score:2)
Except that the cost of just Disney + Hulu ($6.99 + $5.99 = $12.98) is within one penny of the bundle price for Disney + Hulu + ESPN ($12.99). So you're literally paying for ESPN whether you sign up for the bundle or not. (Yeah, yeah, you get one extra Hulu stream if you buy it unbundled. Whatever.)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You save only one cent by buying the other two services without ESPN. You literally cannot avoid paying the ESPN tax, whether you subscribe to the bundle or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The same way that it hurts everyone who wants Disney and Hulu, but doesn't care about sports?
Re:Usual Issues + Lack of Communication (Score:4, Interesting)
You save only one cent by buying the other two services without ESPN. You literally cannot avoid paying the ESPN tax, whether you subscribe to the bundle or not.
I don't subscribe to the bundle. I'm paying (an amortized rate of) $4.24/mo. for Disney+. I fail to see how I'm paying the ESPN tax. Moreover, the ESPN tax paid by today's cable subscribers is a LOT higher than you seem to think.
Back in 2013, cable companies paid $5.13/month per capita [stratechery.com] in affiliate fees to bundle ESPN for each of their subscribers, and that number has since gone up significantly [businessinsider.com]. Also at that time, it was estimated that if you wanted to get ESPN à la carte, as people are doing today for $4.99/month with ESPN+, Disney would need to charge $15/month if they merely wanted to maintain ESPN's revenue. By 2015, that number was pegged at closer to $30/month [stratechery.com] by the WSJ, largely because ESPN's live sports coverage was "sticky" (i.e. prevented people from easily abandoning cable), effectively letting Disney dictate their price to cable providers.
And yet, here we are today, able to get a package deal that includes ESPN+ and more for a mere $12.99/month, or get it by itself for just $4.99/month. That tells me two things:
1) ESPN is facing an existential crisis. While ESPN may be stickier than any other cable channel, their viewership has been steadily declining for years as people decide that the cost simply isn't worth it (see graph linked above). If ESPN fails to (re-)capture subscribers, they may lose an entire generation to competing content (e.g. video games, movies, and, frankly, eSports, which are surprisingly faring quite well against traditional sports for viewing time among Millennials and younger). They're willing to take a revenue hit in the short-term so as to ensure their survival in the long-term. They need to get their hooks in the mostly younger, cord-cutting before it's too late.
2) We hit an inflection point. Disney saw the writing on the wall years ago. It's untenable for ESPN's affiliate fees to skyrocket on a per capita basis (see graph linked above) while it continues hemorrhaging viewers. Eventually, the cable companies will be unable to raise prices to cover Disney's demands, leaving them with no choice but to either drop Disney's content (Disney only licenses ESPN to cable companies as part of a bundle with other Disney-owned channels) or turn the Disney's content into an optional upgrade for people willing to pay through the nose. Either way, viewership and revenue go way down (alternatively, Disney could break up the bundle, but why would they go through the cable companies to do so when they can go direct to consumers with that option?). Of course, Disney isn't one to leave money on the table, so they've been milking those affiliate fees for all they are worth, but we're clearly at the point where that gravy train is coming to an end. Disney could have launched these streaming services years ago, but they didn't. That they're doing so now instead of 3-5 years ago tells me that the days of cable bundles are coming to an end.
Of course, just because the cable bundles are dead doesn't mean that bundles are dead. Honestly, I expect a return to the bad old days of bundling, but I also expect that we'll see the bundles eventually broken up as the FTC steps in soon(ish...hopefully after the current administration) with regulatory oversight. I expect that the same rulings from the 1930s that prevent movie studios from owning their own theater chains will soon be interpreted for the modern age and applied to this situation, resulting in companies like Apple, Netflix, Disney, and others needing to choose whether they want to be a content producer OR a streaming provider. Not both. Bundles will get broken up again as content
Re: (Score:2)
How? Disney+ is $6.99 per month. Yes, you can do an annual subscription, but even that's $5.83 per month — unless, of course, you're getting a subsidized price through your cable company, who is presumably paying the ESPN tax on your behalf....
Oh, don't get me wrong, this isn
Re: (Score:2)
I paid for three years up front. They had a special deal that ran for a few days for D23 members. I wasn’t a D23 member, but I signed up as one to get the deal, since it effectively knocked a year off the price of the three-year deal.
Re: Usual Issues + Lack of Communication (Score:2)
You donâ(TM)t have to buy the bundle. You can buy Disney+ by itself for seven dollars or bundle the other two together for 13. If you already have Hulu, according to Hulu, when you put in your email address it will know that you have a Hulu subscription and it will credit you six dollars off the bundle price and you keep your current Hulu subscription. The Hulu in the bundle is the one with ads.
Quality Control (Score:5, Funny)
Some users described the software quality as, "Micky Mouse", while others said their experience was Goofy.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Disney is counting on it monopoly of content, not quality of service cas long as a kid NCAA use it parents sill pay for it to find an hour of peace.
Re: (Score:1)
It is true the UI/UX is better for Netflix, but the content has not interest to me on Netflix.
Duh+ (Score:1)
Really cold weather front has hit the Eastern US (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Wait-PERSON"? Way to assume my species. Typical speciest behavior. I'm identifying as a chipmunk this week.
Re: (Score:2)
Playback (Score:2)
a gamut of errors, including difficulties logging in
don't need to log into Services when it's your video
inability to stream
don't need to stream someone else's video when it's your video
app failures
don't need to be nested in layers of programs when it's your video
shows and movies disappearing from the library
don't need fallible software asking permission from a blackbox to display shows and movies
and other problems
inb4 your toilets have to be able to phone home and authenticate before flushing
You know who had no trouble? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Begun, the streaming wars have. And Apple showed up to a light-saber duel armed with a drinking straw.
Disney has a long history... (Score:3)
Disney has a long history of launches marred by technical difficulties: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
BAM Tech (Score:2)
I am surprised to hear that they are having scale issues, honestly. Disney is the owner of BAMTech [wikipedia.org], the highly successful streaming services provider for MLB.TV and HBO. They are a proven commodity in the space and have a history of doing this well. I wonder if they are leveraging the same infrastructure for Disney+ or built an entirely separate network from scratch?
Re: (Score:2)
It turns out that, about a year ago, HBO decided to change streaming services providers. So, I was incorrect in my previous post: BAMTech did, but no longer does, power HBO's streaming services. Here's some additional context: https://www.fastcompany.com/90373706/hbos-tech-is-prepping-att-for-the-streaming-wars [fastcompany.com]
It's just a delay (Score:4, Funny)
Hammond: When they opened Disneyland in 1956 nothing worked.
Malcolm: If the Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down, the pirates don't eat the tourists.
I'll wait until they get all the raptors sorted out before I subscribe.
Considered trying it (Score:2)
I was curious about a few of the Marvel shows... mostly because Winter Soldier was one of my favorite comic characters. Moon Knight as well. Considering they weren't offering the Winter Soldier one at launch I figured I'd wait. I'll probably only sub long enough to watch that and not much else. And in the end the only reason I really consider that in the first place is I recall the price was fairly cheap. Wasn't it something like $7.99/month?
If I'm wrong, I forgot..... mainly because I almost comple
Re: Considered trying it (Score:2)
I didnt care either till they threw up a trailer for a series called The Mandalorian. Considering Han and Boba Fette were my favorite characters, not those overly crybaby and over-fucking-powered jedi, I was intrigued. Esp the way Opie totally fucked up the Solo movie. He might as well have turned it into steel fucking magnolias.
How can PornHub manage what Disney canâ(TM)t? (Score:3)
Wait (Score:2)
You log in to Pornhub?