LG & Netflix Team Up to Offer Downloadable Movies on TV

eldavojohn writes "It might seem like they've come full circle, but the movie injection method has gone from TV to mail to online download to TV on demand. And Netflix & LG are betting it's going to be a hit. They're also betting you will want to buy yet another device for your home theater. A Wall Street Journal article notes: 'The partnership between Netflix, Los Gatos, Calif., and South Korea's LG represents another gamble by technology companies that video from the Internet, which is commonly downloaded to personal computers, will go mainstream when users can easily access it from TV sets. So far, Internet television products such as Apple Inc.'s Apple TV have largely been unsuccessful, stymied by a poor selection of videos, complexity of use and other shortcomings.'"

Comments

This is Why blueray vs hddvd is irrelevant

[2.7182]

Because it is going to come down to the difference of just being able to read different FILE formats, like jpg vs. gif.

Re:This is Why blueray vs hddvd is irrelevant

[crush]

And LG (along with Nokia and Apple and Samsung) has been one of the major players stymying the adoption of non-patentencumbered video formats as base webstandards

Re:This is Why blueray vs hddvd is irrelevant

[seanadams.com]

Because it is going to come down to the difference of just being able to read different FILE formats, like jpg vs. gif.

Wouldn't that be nice...

The problem is DRM. **AA isn't going to let you have it as a bunch of bits that you can store how you want and play on whatever you want. Even if you pay for it. So like it or not Blu-ray, HDDVD, and locked-down special purpose set top boxes are going to be the only sanctioned players for the forseeable future.

Yes, eventually it'll all shake out, all the relevant formats will be cracked, the dinosaurs will die. You fight the internet, you lose. But it'll take a while.

Re:This is Why blueray vs hddvd is irrelevant

[misleb]

Maybe in the long term, but in the short term (5 years?) there is plenty of room for 25/50GB optical storage for HD video. I don't mind torrenting and storing some SD TV shows now and then, but I'm certainly not going to want to waste my internet bandwidth (and harddrive storage) downloading high quality feature length HD video from the internet on a regular basis. I don't think the internet (or individual ISPs) could even handle that on a large scale.

Re:This is Why blueray vs hddvd is irrelevant

[Microlith]

Yes, how dare they interfere with the mandatory adoption of an already obsolete video format in a standard that has nothing to do with video.

Re:This is Why blueray vs hddvd is irrelevant

[Microlith]

So I can't have a collection? Just a list of filenames I need to pay for each time I access one of them?

Thanks, but I'd rather have a physical disk with me and not be forced to rely on network transfers and nickel-and-time payment schemes if I decide I want to watch video X.

Re:This is Why blueray vs hddvd is irrelevant

[badasscat]

So I can't have a collection? Just a list of filenames I need to pay for each time I access one of them?

New to this whole "video rental" thing, I guess?

Re:This is Why blueray vs hddvd is irrelevant

[Microlith]

That's not a collection. That's what we have now and I rarely (if ever) use it.

Re:This is Why blueray vs hddvd is irrelevant

[crush]

Yeah. Yeah. And of course there will be no video spec in HTML5, especially not one that depends on a patent-encumbered method. Yeah.

Re:This is Why blueray vs hddvd is irrelevant

[yabos]

Comcrap and many other ISPs are already throttling bittorrent and some other traffic. I can't imagine this will go over well with them if it actually takes off. I agree they should just fix their damn network but they aren't and anything like this service wouldn't work on their network if it gains a large adoption.

colossally stupid

[goombah99]

What's Netflix's bussiness advantage over the cable companies? Simple, it's hard to push 7.6GB of dvd info over the wire. It's faster to mail it. And bule ray/HDDVD would play to netflix advantage.

The only way to beat this effect is to reduce the bandwidth--which the cable companies can do just fine without netflix-- and to distribute the serving (bit torrent versus central caches).

Unless the TV set is going to also do bit torrent style distrubuted serving they won't gain anything on the cable companies.

The real magic is going to happen when apple or microsoft or adobe flips a switch one day that lets everyone opt in as a paid bittorrent node for some movie distribution company. You would get paid in credits for movie rentals based on how much bandwidth you served. then all of a sudden you could have high quality movie distribution.

Re:colossally stupid

[PrescriptionWarning]

Not so, says I...

You can currently watch some netflix movies online and it streams them perfectly fine over my RoadRunner connection.

Let Apple make their locked down AppleTV, these guys can probably make a standalone device which does what the netflix movie stream on demand does... only they had better get more selections.

Re:colossally stupid

[goombah99]

Not so, says I...

You can currently watch some netflix movies online and it streams them perfectly fine over my RoadRunner connection.

Let Apple make their locked down AppleTV, these guys can probably make a standalone device which does what the netflix movie stream on demand does... only they had better get more selections. You missed the point. Yes you can deliver reduced resolution movies over the web. Who is in a better position to do that, the cable companies or netflix? obviously the cable companies. In fact they already do it by a giant limited kludge on "digital tv". And they have a much faster connection between their caches and your internet connection than netflix can ever have (until they become an ISP. ) So no matter what the method of delivery, if it comes over the internet the cable companies can crush netflix for delivering on-demand low-resolution movies from a central server.

the only escape route is higher resolution which can't be served. Or distributed caching (managed bit torrrent), which beats the cable companies central caching.

Re:colossally stupid

[Jeff DeMaagd]

It won't be pushing 7+GB because it most likely won't be coded in MPEG-2 like DVDs are.

Netflix already allows direct watching from a computer, at no extra cost above the membership fee.

Re:colossally stupid

[hkgroove]

If this was Netflix working with LG and / or perhaps a cable/satellite providers to offer more movies on demand through your Netflix account, then maybe they'd have something more realistic at the moment.

Re:colossally stupid

[Tibor the Hun]

Not stupid at all.
I'm a Netflix subscriber, and having a nice organized Que is very convenient. If they found a way to stream that to my TV, I'd have no problems renting/buying another device for my "home theatre".
AppleTV doesn't appeal to me that much, because of it's too-tight integration to iTunes and iTMS, so a nice "open" device tied to my Netflix que would fit the bill perfectly.
And Steve may have been too late on the ball regarding the whole rental and movies deal.
Yes, my iPod touch displays videos beautifully, but guess how many of them I've watched? Maybe 2 hours of NBC's office (thanks trackers). Videos on the go, just aren't something that most people (other than the bus/train riders) would have enough time to do.

It will be a battle of content, and I'd rather rent movies from Netflix than from iTunes, considering Netflix's excellent customer service and ease of use.

Re:colossally stupid

[jedidiah]

The Netflix advantage is that they have a larger catalog of content and they are actually willing to distribute it.

That's always been their advantage.

The download aspect of this might not make as much sense yet but that won't remain the case forever.

This could also give consumers a cheaper path to HD content that would not require buying into one side of the format war.

Local cable providers are far too drunk on the power they think they have by being a natural monopoly to really listen to the customer.

Re:colossally stupid

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I think Netflix officers said last year that they knew that physical media wasn't going to be around forever, and that they were working on IP-based rentals. A simple box that does that would fit their goals. The only problem is that I don't want to get yet another box. Vudu, AppleTV, a Netflix box, TiVo+Unbox and so on are not all going to have the same selection, and it seems like an unnecessary expense at the moment if I already have a working media player that's as good. If my disc player died, then maybe I'd consider buying an IP-based box.

Re:colossally stupid

[misleb]

the only escape route is higher resolution which can't be served. Or distributed caching (managed bit torrrent), which beats the cable companies central caching.

Sure, but bit torrent has one huge drawback... it can't stream. That makes it pretty much unusable for ondemand movies. Not to mention that cable companies can and do throttle peer to peer sharing.

One thing the cable companies need to change is the pricing. For someone who watches a lot of movies, $4 per "rental" is pretty steep. Netflix easily beats cable ondemand movies in that regard. Plus I can make easy "backups" of DVDs from Netflix. ;-)

Re:colossally stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

And cable companies have been better placed to do this for a long time. But Netflix is the one doing it and winning. The cable companies aren't. I love it when someone tries to argue that something isn't happening because they don't think it could happen. Especially when that thing is staring them in the face. Movie streaming from Netflix is here, it works and it's pretty good. A lot of content, good controls, good pricing. The cable companies are doing nothing in comparison. Netflix is on to a winner here, especially given that they have the content already, and you don't need cable internet (I have DSL) to do it.

Re:colossally stupid

[jandrese]

Interestingly enough, my Cable Company (Verizon FIOS) does that with their Video on Demand service. The surprising thing: The movies from Netflix look better than the VoD movies which seem to suffer from an excessive amount of compression. The only advantage of the cable company is that their movie start streaming right away instead of waiting until it is downloaded. I've also tried Amazon's Tivo integration service and found the quality to be somewhere in the middle, although it too suffers from the need to download the whole movie before it is played.

I'm normally pretty forgiving of stuff like macroblocking and other such artifacts on my video, but the Verizon one was muddled enough that it was difficult to see what was happening in dark scenes and the blocking was really distracting during action scenes.

Re:colossally stupid

[samkass]

Depending on the device, you don't have to stream it live. Like the Netflix queue, it will be "mailed" to you electronically and may take a day to ship.

I don't understand, though, how this is any more "open" than what Apple has been doing for a year with AppleTV. It's tied to NetFlix's system, DRM, etc., so it's actually a lot more closed/proprietary. It's just that NetFlix will probably be able to line up significantly more studios willing to allow them to do digital distribution. (We'll see in 11 days when Apple shows their hand at MWSF.)

I know a lot of people really liked AppleTV because it was a LOT cheaper than cable if you were only into a few shows and an occasional movie, and it was very conveniently tied to iPods and iTunes. I'm not sure what Netflix/LG can do to compete with that for your average non-zealous user.

Re:colossally stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

That's because the cable companies are run by people with their heads up their own asses. Instead of trying to fight net neutrality, they could have been offering these "enhanced services" to their customers. It wouldn't be difficult to restrict these services to just their customers, so there wouldn't be any need for the bitching & whining about someone else "using their network to make money".

Re:colossally stupid

[origin2k]

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a mail truck full of DVDs!

Re:colossally stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

Netflix already allows direct watching from a computer, at no extra cost above the membership fee.

And it's really not bad, either. Sure, it uses WMV, but if you remove yourself from the politics of the situation and simply look at the end product, they've done a pretty good job.

Re:colossally stupid

[mccabem]

Sure, but bit torrent has one huge drawback... it can't stream.

True, but that really seems like a surmountable technicality. Even with bittorrent clients on the market today, you can prioritize a stream to get the parts in sequence. At least with well-seeded torrents it works OK. Can it be that much of a stretch to imagine those parts being played "on-delivery" much like streaming content?*

-Matt

*IANASG. (I am not a streaming guru.)

Re:colossally stupid

[Itchyeyes]

Simple, it's hard to push 7.6GB of dvd info over the wire. It's faster to mail it. And bule ray/HDDVD would play to netflix advantage.

Funny, my experience with Netflix's streaming services on the PC says otherwise. Just last night I watched a 2 hour movie with only about 60 seconds of buffering. Oh sure, it might be slightly compressed, but it's close enough for me not to notice and/or care about the difference.

Re:colossally stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

I honestly doubt that a bit torrent will make much difference vs some central server.
If we assume you have cable and you get 6Mb/s, no matter what your source, a 15GB movie
is going to take 5.5 hours to download assuming no network overhead. (15*8*1000/6*60*60)

You can quible that an HD movie isn't going to use all the space, but we've skipped network
overhead, congestion and other stuff as well. You can start the movie before it finishes
downloading true, but you still will need to wait 3-3.5 hours before you start or you'll be
waiting while you're trying to watch it.

When I was younger the old system admins (we called them systems programmers back then) had
a saying "never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with mag tapes". I can
still go to Bestbuy and purchase a Blu-ray or HD-DVD and be back home in under 15 minutes.
That's a 1GB/minute and I can increase that by N by purchasing N movies (limit is my wallet).

Re:colossally stupid

[Lurker187]

The Netflix advantage is that they have a larger catalog of content and they are actually willing to distribute it.

That's always been their advantage. Yes, but the digital distribution rights are completely separate from the rental rights, hence the writers' strike. They're going to run into the same barriers that VUDU is running into, although with their established relationships, they might have an easier time of it. But they can't just rip their whole rental catalog. (At least, not legally.)

Re:colossally stupid

[mccabem]

Technically, the biggest difference between Netflix streaming and AppleTV is that Netflix is Windows only and AppleTV is cross-platform with the Mac. (Apple TV can also play other non-DRM content, of course.) Oh, no WGA cert needed for AppleTV either.

Both are DRM laden for their own content.

Enjoy!
-Matt

Re:colossally stupid

[91degrees]

The only way to beat this effect is to reduce the bandwidth--which the cable companies can do just fine without netflix-- and to distribute the serving (bit torrent versus central caches).

The other way is to wait for bandwidth to increase. This will happen. In the meantime, Netflix have a capable offering and are in a posityion to exploit better quality when it comes. And remember, not everyone is in a position to get Cable. They may even not like the offering their cable company is providing.

Re:colossally stupid

[assassinator42]

And what happens when ISPs start enforcing the no server clause that most of them have in their terms of service and start demanding recompense from Microsoft/Adobe/etc?

Re:colossally stupid

[cashman73]

TVU Networks has a peer-to-peer streaming application, that works fairly well, too. So technically, it can be done.

Re:colossally stupid

[bcrowell]

The Netflix advantage is that they have a larger catalog of content and they are actually willing to distribute it.
Yep. I was just visiting some relatives in Diamond Springs, Ca. The Diamond Springs post office used to have one slot for local mail, and one for mail that was going outside the local area. Now they've changed the local slot into one that's dedicated solely to Netflix envelopes. In rural areas, watching videos is a big deal, because there's not much else to do, and it doesn't take long to get to the point where you've watched everything at Blockbuster you have any interest in watching. My sister happens to work at a Hollywood Video in that area, and the corporation is going through chapter 11 bankruptcy -- you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out why.

Re:colossally stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

This is what you said: "I don't want o use AppleTV because it's locked in. Instead, I'll use Netflix which is not locked in because... well, because I like it's UI better". So how exactly is this unreleased TV set more free than AppleTV? What you're really saying is that Netflix has more content that you want, and that's the real differentiating factor.

Re:colossally stupid

[TooMuchToDo]

Dlink has a really snazzy box (both SD and HD) that lets you stream web content to your TV. I wish Netflix had partnered with them, instead of me needed yet another box just for Netflix.

Re:colossally stupid

[adminstring]

When I watch movies online from Netflix, the movies start playing after about 10 or 15 seconds. I suspect that you might have worse bandwidth from your ISP than I do, causing the app to want to get the movie downloaded before starting playing, because it doesn't think it can download it fast enough to play it without running out of video, which would be annoying.

FWIW, my ISP is Cox Cable.

Re:colossally stupid

[badasscat]

You missed the point. Yes you can deliver reduced resolution movies over the web. Who is in a better position to do that, the cable companies or netflix? obviously the cable companies.

It doesn't matter who is in the better position to do it. It matters who is actually doing it better. And that's already Netflix.

Some of you guys have obviously never used Netflix and have no idea what they're doing. A couple of points - I feel like I'm stating the obvious, but apparently not:

a) You can still rent pretty much every non-pornographic DVD ever made
b) You can also rent every HD-DVD available
c) You can also rent every Blu-Ray movie available
d) You can also stream movies over the internet

and all on the same plan, which costs the same as it ever did. This is *already* the case; the only new thing here is that LG is going to sell some DVD players with the streaming function built in. Tell me one cable company that offers this, at any price, let alone the $60+/month cable companies charge for DTV. Netflix charges me $17.99 and I can do all of those things.

Not to mention that Netflix' streaming absolutely crushes any cable company VOD offering, in every way. Netflix has 6,500 titles in their streaming service - no, not all of them are great, but that's no less true for cable VOD. Netflix also streams immediately up to DVD resolution, which again is not an option with cable. Cable companies *sometimes* offer HD VOD, but only with an extremely limited number of titles (usually about 20). Netflix also does not remove any of their titles month to month due to bandwidth issues; cable companies only ever have a hundred or so VOD movies at any given time.

And Netflix' service just works better. Smoother fast forward and rewind, more responsive controls, etc.

I mean, your point about the cable companies being in a better position than Netflix to deliver movies over the internet is the same as saying the RIAA is in a better position than Apple to deliver music over the internet. Maybe they would be if they could ever actually get their act together, but is that really where you're going to place your bets?

Re:colossally stupid

[Dantu]

What's Netflix's bussiness advantage over the cable companies? Simple, it's hard to push 7.6GB of dvd info over the wire. It's faster to mail it

I have 5Mbps service and from a good server I can get sustained downloads around 4Mbps. By my math I could pull down a 7.6BG video in around 4.5 hours; I could start watching it after about 3 hours for a 2 hour movie... better than my mail service. But that's sticking with MPEG2. I'm fairly sure that if you re-mastered to MPEG4 you could send a substantially smaller file for DVD-quality "nearly on demand" service.

Now, I'm not saying that the bandwidth costs for the provider would be less than the postage, just pointing out that the limitation isn't technical at this point.

Re:colossally stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

Well I think the selections are chicken/egg problem. Have lots of great selections, face heavy bandwidth demands. They need to pony up some cash to get the high bandwidth, which probably means charging more than they currently are for downloaded movies (1 hour per $1 of monthly subscription, essentially free for me since my cost has dropped $1 since I signed up and they didn't have this feature then). Plus they currently aren't doing HD either.

Re:colossally stupid

[CharlieHedlin]

The series 3 TiVo will allow starting Unbox movies while they are still downloading.

Re:colossally stupid

[Moofie]

Integration with iTMS is bad, but integration with Netflix is great? Why? What makes you think this box will be so "open"?

Re:colossally stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, I've been using Netflix "watch instantly" for a couple months now, and my only complaint is the lack of available movies (most are old). But I'm sure with greater demand more movies would be available. Meanwhile, I've been filling hours and hours of time with Law & Order episodes and laughing at old SeaQuest episodes without having to pay extra for them. Netflix does this feature very well. With cable internet, tv episodes and movies load quickly for me and most of the time I can play them instantly without delay.

Re:colossally stupid

[jandrese]

Ironically, I don't think it's the broadband connection but the slow as balls USB 802.11b wireless connection I'm using on my Series 2 Tivo.

Re:colossally stupid

[weirdoactor]

Who is in a better position to do that, the cable companies or netflix? If the box uses your fast cable connection (as I've read it will), it's win/win. If I can watch HD quality movies from a wider library (e.g., Netflix), and the price I pay is that it takes longer to deliver (minutes/hours instead of days via mail), this is also win/win. I do wish that Netflix had simply made the deal with Comcast, as they already deliver HD on demand, although the selection is poor in comparison with that of Netflix. If Comcast could deliver the Netflix library, as well as films that are now in theatres...oh, dream big. Dream big.

When push comes to pull...

[cromar]

Yes, it'll be nice to have new, alternative uses for my TV. No, I don't particularly care if it's on my TV or over more conventional appliances used for internet connectivity (tower, laptop, etc). The real revolution will be when all my media appliances work together seamlessly, all accessing my in-home centralized media server or some such.

what about our divx collection?

[chipace]

As long as they keep their existing service, I'm still in. I guess I could use the supermarket kiosks if they ever stopped physical mail service.

Re:what about our divx collection?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I doubt the mail service is going away for a good while. It's a transitional time, not an abrupt leap time. It takes a while for media formats to go away.

Wait for Macworld

[qengho]

So far, Internet television products such as Apple Inc.'s Apple TV have largely been unsuccessful, stymied by a poor selection of videos, complexity of use and other shortcomings.

Yeah, but it's clear that Jobs is about to turn the Eye of Sauron on the long-neglected Apple TV segment of the product line. Looks like he'll have some competition right off the bat.

Re:Wait for Macworld

[ksheff]

Apple TV would have sold better if it had the ability to download content directly from iTMS instead of having to have another computer do that step first.

Re:Wait for Macworld

[qengho]

Apple TV would have sold better if it had the ability to download content directly from iTMS

Exactly. I wonder if there will be an upgrade announced in a couple of weeks.

Re:Wait for Macworld

[yabos]

That's exactly what I'm hoping for. If you could do that and rent movies for a reasonable price near that of regular DVD rentals I'm sold(if it's in Canada). It's dumb to have to download it all to your computer first and then stream it to the TV. The Apple TV is much more capable than what Apple has it doing right now.

What, what Apple TV?

[Applekid]

If you're like me and read the story doing a doubletake on:

Apple Inc.'s Apple TV It is to distinguish that product from this apple TV.

On my TiVo please

[MBCook]

Just please let me do this on my TiVo, my Series 3. I don't want to watch movies on my laptop (especially if you make me use Windows to do it, I'm a Mac guy). I don't want to watch them on my iPod (mine can't play movies, but if I want to watch a movie on the go I'll stick a DVD in my MacBook Pro). I don't care about DRM that only lets me have 3 DVD at a time (ala the current subscription model I use on Netflix). It's OK if I can't transfer it between TiVos, or copy it do my computer. I really don't care.

Just let me download and watch movies and TV shows to my TiVo. Like Amazon Unbox, but tied to my Netflix queue and subscription model. Unbox looks nice enough, but I already pay Netflix, so I haven't really used it (my parents like it though).

It doesn't have to be HD. HD would be fantastic, but as long as it's 480p I'll be happy (since that fits with the DVDs I use now). Note that this doesn't mean 480p letter boxed that my TV can zoom, so I lose 150 lines to black bars, the wide screen content should be 480p tall.

Do that, I'll gladly sign up. I'll pay a tiny bit extra, say $1-2 per month on my Netflix account for the privilege. I would find this tremendously useful.

Netflix says they don't want a "Netflix Box", they want 100 of them. Good! Make the TiVo Series 3 one of them. I don't want another box either. I don't want to buy a new TV to get the functionality. I love my TiVo's UI, and I love Netflix's content. Please put them together. Make me a happy consumer.

Re:On my TiVo please

[Dynedain]

And make my Media Center or MythTV one of those boxes as well.

Just getting Netflix listings on Media Center requires a 3rd party html app that fakes the http calls made by Netflix' RSS features. Why can't Netflix take a little bit of time and write an installable app to do this that would integrate nicely into existing products?

Re:On my TiVo please

[bonkeydcow]

I can do this now with my DirecTV HDDVR with OnDemand. I can download movies etc to the hard drive. I can even start watching them before the download is finished. There is little to no HD content yet, but a good amount of standard def stuff. A lot is free, some is pay.

Re:On my TiVo please

[MBCook]

I could do the same thing if I used a Comcast box, but they're crud and I don't want one. But having one of those means you get a selection of what they want. I want a selection of what Netflix has now. I want it integrated with my queue, so I don't lose all the time and planning that went into that. I want it to use the Netflix model so I can watch 12 things in a weekend if I can turn 'em over fast enough, or watch 1 a month, all for the same monthly fee. I don't want to mess with the "this content is free, this is $2" stuff. I don't want to re-create my queue somewhere else. I wan exactly what I have with DVDs, but without the physical media.

Re:On my TiVo please

[gatzke]

Unbox is not bad on the Tivo. I have had troubles with some low quality encodings (Chuck and Larry) and sometimes it is confusing since their stuff has three different cost levels (rent 24, rent longer, buy). Some things are released rent only, some buy only. Also, they don't always immediately start to download, so you sometimes can't watch for a few minutes at least.

I was hoping the same thing, get netflix involved for the Tivo. I bet Tivo and Amazon are in bed exclusively, so they probably can't bring Netflix in.

I doubt they will ever support third party hardware due to DRM. Vista, XP media center, or Tivo type devices. They don't want to get their silly movies out in the open faster.

I can currently stream or transfer Mpeg 2 from my HTPC to my tivo. You would think someone other than Amazon could let you download movies encrypted with your tivo media access key that get transfered onto your tivo... Two step process, but it would allow for HD movies if you are patient...

Re:On my TiVo please

[klausboop]

I second that, and add, make this work on the Wii. Like your Tivo, it's already plugged in to my HDTV and can get on the internet. In fact, make it work on all the game consoles. You always read about the PS2 helping the adoption of DVDs because people evidently said, "Whoa, we already have a DVD player!" Why not do the same thing for the XBox, Playstation 3 and Wii, where suddenly everyone says, "Hey, this works with Netflix!" Sounds like a winner to me.

Note that if Netflix's current streamed movie stuff worked with browsers other than IE that perhaps it WOULD work on the Wii...and any other internet-enabled device including phones or whatever. In lieu of that, maybe they could actually release software, i.e. "game" discs for the Wii and Playstation and Xbox, and a Palm app, and a java app, etc.

Re:On my TiVo please

[Quiet_Desperation]

They are set top boxes. The whole point of the venture is to move them from computer screens to televisions.

I'm just hoping for an analog hole. Maybe a component output?

Re:On my TiVo please

[TooMuchToDo]

Netflix tried to work a deal out with Tivo. Tivo wanted too much money. Tivo went to Amazon instead.

Re:On my TiVo please

[horatio]

I'm 110% with you. I've been begging for this and have emailed both Netflix and TiVo to that effect, but apparently it ain't gonna happen.

I don't want another box, another input/output to hassle with, more cables behind my tv, another remote, another stupid UI to deal with, etc. I like my TiVo, and I like the UI. I like that Netflix has a huge selection - typical movies to now canceled shows. I had a Netflix subscription to catch up on episodes of Farscape when a friend introduced me to the show in the middle of season two and I had no idea wth was going on. So put the two things together -- this seems obvious to everyone but the idiots who handle so-called "content licensing". If they would get their heads out of their collective ass, they could make money from people like me, because I would pay to download content to my TiVo.

I don't like Amazon Unbox, honestly. Titles are hard to find, and most random things I look for seem to be not found or unavailable - or are only available to "purchase" or "rent to your PC". Dumb. I assume the TiVo deal with Amazon is some kind of exclusive contract that prevents TiVo from even talking to Netflix. TiVo, from my perspective as a customer/consumer, has done a lot of things right. This is not one of them.

Re:On my TiVo please

[rmerry72]

Just let me download and watch movies and TV shows to my TiVo.

You're generous. I want to be able to download and watch movies, TV, music videos and porn on any screen in the house at any time me or anybody else in the house wants to, even if its on a laptop whilst sitting on the trampoline in the back yard.

Oh wait. I can. I do. Carry on without me.

is another box necessary?

[solarlux]

Could the wi-fi/hard-drive capabilities of the PS3 & Xbox360 be utilized to receive/store/play internet video content?

Re:is another box necessary?

[Tibor the Hun]

Absolutely,
but unfortunately no one at Sony believes that there is any future to Moving pictures. For something like that to succeed, Sony would need:
-a large catalog of moving pictures,
- some form of a magical network connection for distribution, and lastly
-a device connected to a TV
Sadly, none of those things are yet feasible.

Microsoft, on the other hand doesn't have neither the money or clout to do something like that. Their true strengths are search, web-mail, MP3 players and Live.
The moving pictures - on demand are not yet a very lucrative market.

Re:is another box necessary?

[timeOday]

Nailed it. Microsoft, at least, has the excuse of no content. But why isn't Sony all over this? It just seems so obvious.

Re:is another box necessary?

[Tibor the Hun]

Not only does it seem obvious, but it seemed obvious 5 years ago!
And in all those years, they could have slaughtered the market, considering their media library.

That they don't have this capability, to at least distribute their own movies, to this day, is way beyond my simple way of thinking...

About bloody time

[SirGarlon]

Programming-on-demand is about the only future I can see for television. The advertising-supported broadcast model falls totally flat for me. I subscribed to Netflix so I can watch movies the few good TV shows when I want, without commercials. If I can do this for a reasonable price with instant gratification (instead of the current Netflix three-day latency), then count me in.

Throttling anyone?

[w00ten]

What happens if your ISP decides it doesn't like this service and starts to throttle it because it takes too much bandwidth? Or the whole net neutrality deal ends in the worst way possible and all the ISP's and companies that provide both Digital Cable/Satelite and Internet decide that this netflix thing is bad for their business so they just completely block it? There are WAY too many variables out there right now for me to even begin to feel comfortable buying into a service like this. If the ISP's can't keep up with torrents, they sure as hell won't be able to keep up with this service if it takes off.

Re:Throttling anyone?

[billcopc]

If the ISPs ruin the internet, we'll just have to take our business elsewhere.

I'm a firm believer in shaking shit up, whether it's for an ISP/telecom, government outfit, or that little sandwich joint down the street. If you, as a customer, are not happy with their service or product, it is your duty to stop consuming it. Apathy is a dangerous thing!

I've been doing this for 7 years...

[RPI Geek]

... with an s-video cable. The only difference is that now they want me to pay for it.

This will result in blueray and HD DVD both dieing

[Raisey-raison]

As a consequence of a loony civil way between Blu-ray and HD-DVD, Microsoft, apple and now Netflix will kill both formats.

Microsoft has helped keep the civil war alive.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20071205123352_Microsoft_Accused_of_Eventual_Blu_Ray_HD_DVD_Formats_Fiasco.html

Without a stalemate Christmas 2007 would have seen massive buying of cheap HD players. We would all being watching HD movies and be getting used to them. We would get so spoiled by the superior picture quality that we would not succumb to inferior download quality.

However now that there there is a stalemate going on people are nervous to buy either standard and each standard is still quite expensive. Some people including myself don't want to buy some standard that wont play all movies because some are exclusive to only one format.

Now people will simply say since there is no reliable HD standard why not download a lesser quality version from Netflix or apple or Microsoft. They will do this for both rental purposes and to buy a permanent copy. Then they will get very habituated to it. As time goes watching movies buy obtaining a physical medium will seem less and less attractive. In 2012 there will be enough bandwidth for most high speed internet connections to download HD movies. HD-DVD and blue ray will be both be dead and buried by 2014.

But this requires the stupidity of both Sony and Toshiba to keep their rivalry going and be unwilling to compromise even though it is both of their interests to do so. They seem though to have come through 100% on the doofus front.

Business advantage: Price

[Anonymous Coward]

Netflix's business advatange is price.
Netflix -> $20 for multiple DVDs out, unlimited DVDs per month. Good customer service.
Cable -> $80-$120 for crap with ads, and ads that pop-up during the show I am watching. Horrid customer service.

I watch about ~2 hours of TV a day. Oddly enough a DVD is usually ~2 hrs long.
So, if I get on a lower-middle tier NetFlix plan I can watch ~2 hrs of TV per night for about 20% of what cable costs me.
With multiple DVDs out, I can keep some DVDs in flight between me & NetFlix and 1 or 2 at the house.

The only thing I miss is sports. And as my son gets older I might relent on that and get cable.
But the only sports I want to see are Ice Hockey (NHL) and Aussie football (AFL), neither of which I am going to get on the West Coast of the US.
I could pay to get the premium packages but that would push the cable/sat bill to the $200 range.

Price, that is where NetFlix kicks Cables ass.

Re:Business advantage: Price

[AgentPaper]

Do you not have a local station that broadcasts NHL games? If you're in or near a city that has an NHL team, you should be able to pick up at least some games OTA. (Grant you, we live and breathe hockey here in metro Detroit, but even when I lived in Vermont, the local Fox affiliate would simulcast Bruins and Canadiens games on a regular basis.) Alternately, if you don't mind listening rather than watching, XM has the entire NHL package and a bunch of other sports besides for $13 a month (less if you sign up for a year or more).

For Australian Rules football, though, I can't help you. Perhaps it might be worth it to sign up with one of the satellite providers for the three-month trial or whatever similar deal is on offer, and then cancel at the end of the season. (I've been going through the same problem trying to find the rugby league World Cup. Good luck with that in this country.)

Re:Business advantage: Price

[Anonymous Coward]

1) Thanks for the help

NHL
Two problems. I don't live in a hockey city anymore. In Portland, OR the nearest hockey is San Jose or Vancouver. So, OTA is out. Go to the Wiki page on the NHL. There is a huge black out spot in the northwest, that is where I am.
Also, while I can pretend to care about Vancouver, I hate San Jose. Plus I really don't care about the Western Division (well I can pick out old & Canadian teams), but I am stuck with the Pacific Division of the Western Conference when I can get ABC/NBC/CBS/Fox to show hockey. And the big 4 only show hockey during the play offs and then only some of the games.
What I really want is the Atlantic Division. I know I am picky but when you're passionate about something you have strong opinions about it. I have a mental line that runs across the Mason-Dixon line. Below that you are an illegitimate team. Above it you are a good team. The Mississippi acts as a east-west line for the same thing, but I am less passionate about that, and here is kind of a Canadian pass that some teams get.
Oddly enough if you live close enough to the border, you can get Hockey Night In Canada which is fantastic, but I am far too removed for that.

The AFL, my only hope is torrents, but that is a little tough to get into a taped game. It does loose something.

Another DIVX?

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't someone try this about ten years ago with something called DIVX (not to be confused with today's DivX codec)? I don't think it even lasted a year.

mythTV / IE Content and 8 year-old t.v.s

[zyzzx0]

I ditched my MythTV box over a year ago. I'm sad to say it, but plugging a Windows box into the t.v. has been more than awesome... I still wonder why someone hasn't made a simple set-top box that can access all the video content that is only available through IE providers (abc, cbs, nbc, netflix, movielink, cinemanow, etc.)

Also, why the hell haven't the same providers made separate web pages (similar to the old m. sub-domains) for television content... I still have an old crappy big screen t.v. and can't read a flippin' thing on a web browser on my t.v. Come on - cater to the little guy!

Re:This will result in blueray and HD DVD both die

[kannibal_klown]

In my opinion unless you want HD, bandwidth is now second to storage in terms of problems. This is doubly-so if you're talking about replacing Discs (as the parent mentions). So I'll stick with Discs for now (thank you).

I have a 20Mbit Fiber connection for a decent price that I could afford to upgrade even further (but I won't). 20MBit is pretty nice for downloading movies, though I might prefer 50+MBit for true HD downloads.

Anyhow, the problem with purchasing online is now leaning towards storage. Let's say I purchase some Unbox movies on my Tivo HD, I'm filling up my valuable storage. After a while I'd need to setup external storage, copy to other media, or sacrifice the old for the new. With optical discs (or some other new individual media) I just have to get another DVD rack to keep the new stuff.

Hard Dricves aren't expensive, but complicated. How does one legally back up copyrighted purchased content? Sure, iTunes is no big deal but what about Tivo? You can't (legally/easily) grab copyrighted stuff from there to backup and you can only expand the storage so much. I'd imagine other boxes work the same.

So unless "service box X" lets me download and backup the movies somehow legally, easy, and cheap, or I can re-download my purchases at later time for free, I think I'll pass on the replacement. I'll still download, but I'll buy discs too.

I 100% Agree!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

All Netflix has to do is partner with Tivo and they will have an instant audience that has the existing technology to handle this. Add in all the other Tivo goodies (suggestions, recording in the background, etc.) and you have a perfect match. In fact, I think that the 2 companies combined would make a good opportunity, especially if the movie companies don't get too greedy. Even if you have low bandwidth, just have Tivo begin downloading while your are doing other things, and then watch the movie at your leisure after it is complete.

I'd take this over "overpriced cable plus pay per view ripoff" any day!

Netflix, Tivo PLEASE MAKE THIS HAPPEN!!!!!

XBOX 360

[tyrantking31]

If I could stream the TV on my PC to my TV through my XBOX then it would be a huge success at my house. Of course Microsoft will wait until someone else does this before they invent it.

Re:XBOX 360

[Osty]

If I could stream the TV on my PC to my TV through my XBOX then it would be a huge success at my house. Of course Microsoft will wait until someone else does this before they invent it.

Huh? The Xbox 360 already does that. The only "problem" is that Netflix doesn't actually have downloadable movies. They stream, and you can't stream a stream from your PC to your 360. This would be a perfect opportunity for Microsoft to partner with Netflix and give access to Netflix streaming videos based on your Netflix subscription (possibly using Netflix's current model of 1 hour of online video per $1 you pay for your physical DVD subscription, so a larger subscription like 4-out or 5-out will give you more online video time as well).

I'm not going to hold my breath, but Xbox 360 + Netflix content would be the home media holy grail.

Re:XBOX 360

[DarthJohn]

umm... that's exactly what I've been doing since the Fall update. They added MPEG4 (and some others) support. A little while later, uShare has been patched to serve these. Ever since I've been ripping my DVD collection with mencoder and have nearly filled up my shiny new Christmas present

Thank God

[elrous0]

As of right now, I can only do this on my Xbox 360, my PS3, my Tivo, and my computer. Just the other day I was thinking "Man, I just wish I had yet ANOTHER way to do the same damn thing!"

Re:Thank God

[rpillala]

this one is too easy:

how about a bigass table?

Re:Thank God

[elrous0]

Please Microsoft, tell me it comes with GPS.

Re:RON PAUL 2008!

[Anonymous Coward]

we can't help it if you're an idiot.

I called this one nearly a month ago

[rbgrn]

I submitted to Slashdot but apparently you guys weren't interested yet :)

From my article:

After having read the article about a new USPS surcharge that could cut into Netflix's profits I got to thinking about the future of movie rentals. If you're a Netflix customer and haven't tried their streaming video service, I recommend you give it a shot. I've noticed the weak selection of titles available on it and can only imagine that it must be a licensing issue with the MPAA or specific rights-holder. While I enjoy their online video-watching service, I don't enjoy watching movies on my laptop as much as on my TV and I also don't enjoy having to plug my laptop into my TV. There is a feasible solution for all of this covering concerns like licensing agreements (giving consumers better selection) to proper television integration (no more laptops plugged into the TV.) Read on to find out how I see a successful movie rental business operating in the near future.... Full Article (Online Movie Rentals 2.0)

Tragedy of the Commons

[Aging_Newbie]

So - we have lots of people going out to buy boxen that display movies over the Internet. Wonderful. Now, let's have lots of people in my neighborhood download a movie tonite. Do you really think I will be able to read Slashdot or find Google with 1 Gb/s of movies going through my lan segment?

It is a wonderful idea if somebody can build out the bandwidth in cable Internet but somehow I suspect that increasing bandwidth so that people have an alternative to cable movies on demand is not one of the brighter things my cable company could do. Oh, maybe they will offer an extra charge service that includes 4 extra Mb/s of bandwidth for movie downloaders. Makes the Netflix offering not quite so economical.

My cable Internet already crawls for a day or two around Patch Tuesday every month. Maybe with some effort it can crawl even more during evenings.

I have a wonderful idea - how about mailing DVDs to people's houses! Brilliant!

Re:Tragedy of the Commons

[crunzh]

Maybe you should buy a decent internet connection insted of a shared (cable?). My ADSL gives me the speed I pay for all the time, no matter what other people download.

Way cheaper then cable

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see:

* I can get a new cable subscription for $100/month, and can watch 'Video on demand' -- but the cable company offers a pitiful 30 different videos.

- or -

* I can use my existing $20/month Netflix subscription, and my existing $20/month DSL connection, and download one of 20,000 different videos from Netflix...

Which is a better deal, hmmm....

What will Roadrunner charge me?

[gelfling]

To download and buffer an 8.4GB DVD? And how long does that take?

Re:RON PAUL 2008!

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah yes, and how you countered the points. 10%. Bye-bye Paulies. Good riddance to racist, pathetic trash.