Registered: Oct 1999
Location: Toronto
Posts: 953

Glad to see this may (is about to) happen!

"Another option would be to send digital movie files to existing set-top boxes like TiVo. TiVo CEO Mike Ramsey serves on the Netflix board."

...Dale

Netflix plans to deliver films via Web in 2005-CEO

http://www.forbes.com/home/newswire...rtr1345941.html

In the NEW YORK story headlined "Netflix plans to deliver films via Web in 2005-CEO" in the fifth paragraph, please read "...collecting $272 million..." instead of "...collecting $500 million..." Corrects amount. A corrected story follows:

By Michael Learmonth

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Movie rental service Netflix Inc. plans to do next year what its name has always promised: deliver a movie via the Internet.

"Our strategy is to get huge in DVDs and then expand into downloads," Netflix Chief Executive Reed Hastings told Reuters Friday. "When we get to 5 million or 10 million subscribers, eventually what we spend on postage becomes a prize for the movie studios."

Money saved by sending movies directly to consumers' homes via the Web could be plowed back into buying more DVD titles to meet customer orders.

When Netflix launched in 1999, some "digerati" were surprised to find that while they could select movies they wanted to see on the Internet, they would have to wait for their selections to arrive by mail.

Netflix built a good business on the back of postal workers, collecting $272 million in revenue last year by delivering DVDs to 1.5 million subscribers. The rapidly growing online service added another 445,000 subscribers last quarter and now boasts 1.9 million customers.

The company built 29 distribution centers around the country so members in major metropolitan areas would receive their selections overnight.

But next year Netflix plans to begin offering movies for download via the Internet, a business model that has felled many entrepreneurs in recent years. Hollywood movie studios continue to be in quandary over just how big a business movie downloading on the Web can be.

Hastings said he anticipates his service will have 5 million members paying $22 a month by 2006.



FUTURE OF NETFLIX

He said he's always viewed delivering movies electronically as the future of Netflix, just not its immediate future.

"From the beginning we believed in the Internet delivering movies, but we believed it would be 10 years, not two years," Hastings said. "We were right on that because everyone who got into downloading in 1998 is bankrupt now."

Hastings said he expects "moderate" consumer interest in downloads initially because most homes don't have Internet-connected television sets and because "DVD by mail works so well."

"We're not interested in downloading to the computer," Hastings said, but rather expanding wireless connections in the home from a broadband Internet connection to the TV.

Another option would be to send digital movie files to existing set-top boxes like TiVo. TiVo CEO Mike Ramsey serves on the Netflix board.

"This is something we talk about all the time, when are there enough units out there and when are there enough (movie) rights," Hastings said.

But delivering movies on-demand electronically will put Hastings in competition with some powerful, entrenched interests fighting for consumer and advertising dollars including cable and satellite TV operators and cable movie channels like HBO and Showtime.

Moreover, five of Hollywood's major studios have formed an online movie download service called Movielink, and a sixth studio, Lions Gate Entertainment, backs Web-based film provider, CinemaNow.

Hastings said he anticipates some tough fights for movie rights with powerful industry foes, but he believes the company will be well-positioned in both DVD and video-on-demand businesses.

...Dale

Dennis, I think this puts our long-standing debate on this topic to rest don't you think!

Last edited by Dajad on 04-29-2004 at 04:51 AM

POST #1 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2000
Location: Niceville, FL
Posts: 1100

Somehow, I don't think the ISPs will go for a good chunk of their customers regularly downloading several gigabytes of data. I don't think this will ever happen.

__________________
Dave Lessnau

TiVo TCD240080 w/ Belkin F5D5050 USB Ethernet Adapter and 160GB 7200RPM Samsung SP1604N drive (150hrs 53mins @ Basic) with 4.0.1 Philips HDR112 w/ TurboNET and 120GB 5400 RPM Maxtor drive (145hrs 6mins @ Basic) with 3.0. Both hooked through powerlines to the internet via LinkSys PLEBR10 PowerLine EtherFast 10/100 Bridges, a D-Link DSS-5+ Switch, a SonicWall SOHO3 Internet Security Appliance, and finally a Toshiba PCX1100U Cable Modem (PCX DOCSIS)

POST #2 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location:
Posts: 984

i was thinking aout this the other day. Most responces here seem to be that it will take too long, ISP's will get pissed, etc, etc.

What if they had a system in the tivo where you see a tv commercial for a movie in the theaters and then you enter it into the tivo on your netflix cue. They could start downloading it weeks or months before it is out on DVD, then the night it comes out on DVD they send down the key to unlock it. I know its a small little thing, but ther eare creative ways to make this work.

I guess all you folks with cable modems will be longing for DSL but such is life- you shouldnt get your service from the evil cable empire!

POST #3 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2002
Location:
Posts: 193

quote:

---

I guess all you folks with cable modems will be longing for DSL but such is life- you shouldnt get your service from the evil cable empire! [/B]

---

__________________
Jay

HDR112 196 hrs

POST #4 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2003
Location:
Posts: 29

www.cinemanow.com

you can download full lenght movies here, its nothing new.

POST #5 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2000
Location: Waltham, Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 811

quote:

---

Originally posted by DaveLessnau
Somehow, I don't think the ISPs will go for a good chunk of their customers regularly downloading several gigabytes of data. I don't think this will ever happen.

---

__________________
There is no pony.

POST #6 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 1999
Location: Toronto
Posts: 953

quote:

---

Originally posted by jaynas
www.cinemanow.com

you can download full lenght movies here, its nothing new.

---

POST #7 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2002
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 1997

I beta test for Microsoft and regularly pull stuff off MSDN which could be anywhere from 500 to 2 gig per download. My ISP has never complained, and for the most part I do not think they will care.

On average I must pull down 10 to 15 gig per month plus my surfing habits.

__________________
Ron

TiVo | SERlES2 - 302 Hrs
TiVo | SONY SVR3000 - 273 Hrs

POST #8 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2000
Location: Niceville, FL
Posts: 1100

But there's a difference between a few "early adopters" here and there doing these downloads and a good chunk of the mainstream viewers doing this. That's especially true with cable modems (which share the bandwidth near the consumer). Now, if they can "trickle" that download to the consumer over a day or two, that'd probably be ok from the ISP point-of-view. But, in this "I want it NOOOOOOW" day and age, my guess is that most people would complain if they're not watching the movie within five minutes of ordering it. So, to be viable, I'd say these movies would have to be real-time streams and not slow background downloads (regardless of compression).

__________________
Dave Lessnau

TiVo TCD240080 w/ Belkin F5D5050 USB Ethernet Adapter and 160GB 7200RPM Samsung SP1604N drive (150hrs 53mins @ Basic) with 4.0.1 Philips HDR112 w/ TurboNET and 120GB 5400 RPM Maxtor drive (145hrs 6mins @ Basic) with 3.0. Both hooked through powerlines to the internet via LinkSys PLEBR10 PowerLine EtherFast 10/100 Bridges, a D-Link DSS-5+ Switch, a SonicWall SOHO3 Internet Security Appliance, and finally a Toshiba PCX1100U Cable Modem (PCX DOCSIS)

POST #9 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 424

I use SBC Yahoo DSL and get 1.5 MPBS / 256 KBPS. I have it hooked to a network of about 10 computers and we pull in gigs and gigs between me and my nephew thats 20 and my sister works out of home and I have a home business. They don't care what you do, I have linux set up with web servers and mail servers and all sorts of stuff. I have used them since 1996 before it was SBC and even before DSL came out and when it was Dial up I used to stay connected 24/7 and had tons of downloading then it just took a whole lot longer. I think the only complaints I ever got where being connected over 1000 hours but they never did anything about it and now since I have DSL they don't care anymore. I have heard a few cable companies complain about running servers and they would block it or cut the customer off. The ones that care about bandwidth use usually put a cap on it. I had a friend online in Canada a few years back that used over a gig then they cut his bandwidth to the speed of dial up for the rest of the month. So unless your ISP has something like that I doubt it will matter how much you download. Most of the big ISP's have unlimited supply's of bandwidth now. I do hosting on co located servers and I get a limit of 9,000 gigs a month of bandwidth for those 6 servers.

-Joe

POST #10 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2000
Location: Waltham, Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 811

quote:

---

Originally posted by DaveLessnau
But there's a difference between a few "early adopters" here and there doing these downloads and a good chunk of the mainstream viewers doing this. That's especially true with cable modems (which share the bandwidth near the consumer). Now, if they can "trickle" that download to the consumer over a day or two, that'd probably be ok from the ISP point-of-view. But, in this "I want it NOOOOOOW" day and age, my guess is that most people would complain if they're not watching the movie within five minutes of ordering it. So, to be viable, I'd say these movies would have to be real-time streams and not slow background downloads (regardless of compression).

---

__________________
There is no pony.

POST #11 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2001
Location: East Freetown, MA
Posts: 917

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dajad
Dennis, I think this puts our long-standing debate on this topic to rest don't you think!

---

__________________
Dennis

POST #12 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location:
Posts: 984

quote:

---

Originally posted by jdfs
I don't quite understand the comment about cable modems. They are on average much faster than DSL. Mine provides ~9Mbps down ~1Mbps up and no caps on download ($44.95). .....

---

POST #13 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: May 2002
Location: San Mateo, California
Posts: 492

I love the idea, but for one fundamental drawback.

When I watch a movie - I want the full 5.1 soundtrack. That's not going to be possible on my SA Series 2

POST #14 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: May 2002
Location:
Posts: 327

quote:

---

Originally posted by MichaelK
I was just playing around but basically the crux of the DSL vs cable debate is this:

Cable allows for a much faster 'maximum' speed for the same amount of money. For example you get 9Mbps where a similar price for DSL would probably only get 1.5

No brainer for cable right? Nope not so fast. See cable sells you "maximum" speeds where as DSL basically sells you a speed like 768 k or 1.5M. Well the DSL should thoeretically always get that speed (I say theoretically becasue usually you pay for 1.5 and get something like 1.2 in the real world and depends on how far you are from the central office as to the maximum you can get). But with Cable modem you are sharing that 9m with everyone else in your area on that cable. So if you are the only one downloading a 5gig DVD you are living large and getting you whole 9m but as soon as 10 of your neighbors on that same cable get a cable modem and they all are downloading netflix dvd's 24/7 and maxing their usage you all get cut down to .9m and if 20 of your neighbors did it you would only get 0.45 and so on.

Basically right now cable beats DSL for speed/dollar as a general rule but unless the cable companies upgrade their systems the actual speeds will theoretically only go down over time for cable users as more people buy into it, so eventually DSL becomes a better bargain.

---

Unfortunately this is mostly marketing spin at best and misleading at worst.

A cable connection is shared from the house to the local node, then it's on the cable companies data network. That shared connection supports significantly more bandwidth than could be consumed by one or two people to reduce everyone's performance. At the point when it does become a problem, the cable company can split the node and create two nodes each with the original shared bandwidth. Now, if the link from the node to the backbone or the backbone to the Internet is overloaded, everyone still suffers. Keeping those links, along with "because the can" is the reason most cable companies don't offer faster service. Mine recently added a faster tier. This wasn't always true. In the pre-DOCIS days, each users usage had more impact on the other users. Of course, back then you could see your neighbors computer on the network as if it was just a LAN.

A DSL connection connection on the other hand is individual to the DSLAM. From the DSLAM to the backbone, and the backbone to the Internet, it's shared just like cable. The DSLAM may be at the central office or it may be remote in the field. The limiting factor is the DSL technology for how fast the connection is between the house and DSLAM. After that, an overloaded DSLAM or backbone is just as possible with DSL as with cable.

The question of "Unless the upgrade it's only going to get slower" is valid for both cable and DSL, since they both have choke points. The difference is that DSL has technology limit that is lower than cable.

The question of which is right for an individual is still valid. The answer of shared versus dedicated just isn't a valid deciding factor. Cost, speed, reliability, terms of service, availability and others are all much more important.

POST #15 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2003
Location: Clovis, CA
Posts: 254

I wouldn't pay $0.02 to watch a movie through my TiVo. It's nowhere NEAR DVD quality, let alone HDTV quality.

POST #16 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2001
Location: East Freetown, MA
Posts: 917

quote:

---

Originally posted by rodneyremington
I wouldn't pay $0.02 to watch a movie through my TiVo. It's nowhere NEAR DVD quality, let alone HDTV quality.

---

__________________
Dennis

POST #17 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location:
Posts: 984

I've said it a million times here - learn something new everyday.

Not being a wiseguy- trying to learn since my knowledge is admittantly years old but only recently changed in my neck of the woods- besides the one way silliness in my part of the town other people around here saw their neighbor in their network neighborhood until the upgrade this winter) and only based more recently from youngins complaining about their free music downloads being slow--

Would 10 people or 20 people all maxing out their download speed 24/7 doing netflix like downloads significantly degrade a node- or is it more on the order of 100's ?
And in the real world do the cable companies care and then split the nodes when they get overwelmed?
And when they split a node does it require they run a new home run from the node to their CO or whatever they call their local plant to get onto their data network (I dont get what happens to the connection after the node)
And last question- how many people are typically on a node- is it like one block or 2 square miles?

I suspect that their will be fiber at my curb around the same time- everyone starts downloading Netflix anyhow- so i think the whole DLS vs cable thing goes out the door then.

quote:

---

Originally posted by mmascari
Unfortunately this is mostly marketing spin at best and misleading at worst.

A cable connection is shared from the house to the local node, then it's on the cable companies data network. That shared connection supports significantly more bandwidth than could be consumed by one or two people to reduce everyone's performance. At the point when it does become a problem, the cable company can split the node and create two nodes each with the original shared bandwidth. Now, if the link from the node to the backbone or the backbone to the Internet is overloaded, everyone still suffers. Keeping those links, along with "because the can" is the reason most cable companies don't offer faster service. Mine recently added a faster tier. This wasn't always true. In the pre-DOCIS days, each users usage had more impact on the other users. Of course, back then you could see your neighbors computer on the network as if it was just a LAN.

A DSL connection connection on the other hand is individual to the DSLAM. From the DSLAM to the backbone, and the backbone to the Internet, it's shared just like cable. The DSLAM may be at the central office or it may be remote in the field. The limiting factor is the DSL technology for how fast the connection is between the house and DSLAM. After that, an overloaded DSLAM or backbone is just as possible with DSL as with cable.

The question of "Unless the upgrade it's only going to get slower" is valid for both cable and DSL, since they both have choke points. The difference is that DSL has technology limit that is lower than cable.

The question of which is right for an individual is still valid. The answer of shared versus dedicated just isn't a valid deciding factor. Cost, speed, reliability, terms of service, availability and others are all much more important.

---

POST #18 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location:
Posts: 984

quote:

---

Originally posted by rodneyremington
I wouldn't pay $0.02 to watch a movie through my TiVo. It's nowhere NEAR DVD quality, let alone HDTV quality.

---

POST #19 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Earth
Posts: 830

mmascri, you covered the speed thing pretty well. nobody cares what you download, other than direcway, which is capped @ 150 something per day, then goes to dial-in speeds. FOr people who are out of range of wireless, cable, dsl, and a neighborhood shared t3 line, starband is the way to go.

__________________
80 HR Series 2 Lifetime Activated 4/11/04

POST #20 | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged