Slashdot Mirror


Netflix Throttling Instant Video Streaming

rsk writes "For the last few weeks I've been experiencing terrible streaming video performance from Netflix on both my Xbox 360 and PC. While my Xbox 360 would at least stream at a lower resolution, my PC cannot seem to avoid 2-hr. buffering times before playback even started. I smelled shenanigans and started digging. With some help finding the debug menu for the streaming video player, I set out to figure out why playback was so slow. It seems that Netflix is significantly throttling Watch Instantly users (on the PC) down to an unusable cap — in my case, 48 kbps — on a per-connection basis."

207 comments

  1. Sue them by kentrel · · Score: 0

    See what happens

    1. Re:Sue them by AngryNick · · Score: 1

      Sue them and you will lose. It's probably your ISP's fault. Cart your ass over to your local Starbucks (I'd suggest a friend's house, but this /.), connect to Netflix using their non-Qwest ISP (which I assume you use at home based on your tracert log), and run your "test" again. Then think, "Why would Qwest want to interrupt my Netflix viewing?" THEN submit your results as worthy of review.

    2. Re:Sue them by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >>>Qwest Zone - download videos

      I thought internet neutrality made it illegal for ISPs to block other providers (like Netflix) simply to boost their own products?

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    3. Re:Sue them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Nope, because internet neutrality doesn't currently exist.

    4. Re:Sue them by Firehed · · Score: 2, Informative

      No laws currently exist either way, but ISPs (at least US-based ones) are currently operating in a net-neutral manner in order to keep common carrier status and therefore not be liable for any of the illegal downloading their customers do. It's certainly in their best interest to continue doing so; trying to force their own service over a competitor's may net them a bit more cash, but it would also allow them to be put directly in the crosshairs of $100B mass copyright infringement suits from the RIAA and MPAA, among others.

      Don't confuse that with QoS between protocols, though. AFAIK, it's okay for them to prioritize VOIP over HTTP over streaming over bit-torrent without losing common carrier status, so long as the prioritization is equal for all destinations (i.e., Skype and Vonage would be on par with their own VOIP offering).

      IANAL of course - that's just my understanding of the issues. Could be way off, in which case please correct me.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    5. Re:Sue them by Fancia · · Score: 3, Informative

      ISPs are not common carriers, and never have been. It's a common misconception on Slashdot for some reason. Like this article notes, ISPs have historically not wanted to be regulated under the pre-existing common carrier regulations.

      --

      Bít, zabít, jen proto, ze su liska!
  2. Hrm. by pregister · · Score: 4, Informative

    I dunno. I used it tonight and the speeds were fine even when fast fowarding through slow parts of my selected movie.

    I'll try later tonight. The streaming is the only reason I use netflix. I haven't actually returned the one DVD I have in the last few months.

    1. Re:Hrm. by danwesnor · · Score: 4, Funny

      So you're the one hogging "Delta Farce"!!

    2. Re:Hrm. by toleraen · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Streamed several shows last night on a PC without issue.

    3. Re:Hrm. by fermion · · Score: 1
      Same here. On some says, I might watch several hours as I am doing other work. The player has never worked well, with all too frequent refreshes, but overall it works very well.

      I wonder if the key is 'per stream'. Is this user trying to run multiple streams off the same account.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    4. Re:Hrm. by m3talsling3r · · Score: 1

      I agree. I forget when I have a Dvd sitting at home.

      --
      My sig is as boring as you...
    5. Re:Hrm. by coldmexican · · Score: 1

      Same here, speeds are the same as they ever were.
      At the most buffering took 30 seconds.

    6. Re:Hrm. by Jinjuku · · Score: 0

      I have been having problems as of the past day or two. Before that it has been fine...

      I think with Netflix wanting to offer on demand only service tiers, well they need to 'create' some demand.
      As in: You will get the streaming because we demand additional $$.

    7. Re:Hrm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shoot, I am still able to stream high def videos with no problems. I use netflix on the xbox all the time and have seen no decrease in quality. In fact, I watched a movie (dubbed foreign film) on the xbox and then got the DVD the next day, and the streaming version was BETTER than the DVD, as the DVD was pixelated, and the audio encoding they used only worked on one of my DVD players. Shoot, I watched red dwarf on it yesterday, and it looked better than it ever did on my PBS station. Even in prime time, I have had no issues with at&t dsl. I suggest the issue is on their end, or somewhere between them and netflix, as many of us have seen no difference

  3. Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Daswolfen · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Oh well.. I tried to go legit, but time to fire up bittorrent again, I guess. They are just shooting themselves in the foot.

    --
    Don't rush me, Sonny. You rush a miracle man, you get rotten miracles.
    1. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Carnildo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Throttling streaming video is so nonsensical that my personal suspicion is PEBCAK or an ID10T error.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    2. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by joeler · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Oh well.. I tried to go legit, but time to fire up bittorrent again, I guess. They are just shooting themselves in the foot.

      Any time we have trouble it usually is associated with our provider Comcast, not Netflix. However, with some of the streams from Netfilx the audio is out of sync or the picture quality isn't as good as it should be.

      We use the HD Tivo and at times I feel almost guilty for all I get from Netflix, with the 2 at a time unlimited, my actual dvd cost has been about $.95 per dvd (4 dvds a week) and I watch more instant shows than I do from Comcast. I cut back to 1 at a time starting next month, we just can not keep watching 4 rentals a week with the weather getting nicer. Netflix makes it easy to switch between the various plans.

      Netflix cured me of downloading movies, I don't get the latest screeners these days but do get anything Netflix has, and they do carry a large selection of classics that you can't find with bittorrent - the best part is there are no upload ratios and I don't have to worry about getting to 90% and having all the seeders bail out. Some rentals you need to wait in line, but if you keep plenty in your queue, the rentals will arrive on a regular basis.

      I do keep seeding Ubuntu & Kubuntu, bittorent is still great for linux . There will always be people that will want everything for free, but so far Netflix has done more to curb illegal downloading than any other effort. More companies should follow the Netflix lead, rather than play the silly lawsuit game. On the other hand, Rhapsody was not a worthwhile cost for us, in theory it sounded great but, for us the reliability just was not there, after several months we dropped that subscription - they might have improved it since that time.

      --
      >>>please remove "nospam" from email address
    3. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh well.. I tried to go legit, but time to fire up bittorrent again, I guess. They are just shooting themselves in the foot.

      And that justifies downloading the movies? If you're going to do that, then do it, don't act as if netflix committing one sin is justification. I don't like the MPAA or the RIAA, but that's not why we download music or movies without paying for them. We do that because we can and it's cheaper than paying for it. Pointing to things netflix is doing wrong and saying "that's why I'm doing this" is just rationalization.

    4. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This. I stream Netflix vids on both XP and Vista boxes at different times of day, and I almost never see buffering. Maybe once a week if that. Either this guy cheesed off somebody at Netflix and they're picking on him, or there's something wrong with his connection or system config.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    5. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by FauxPasIII · · Score: 4, Interesting

      > We do that because we can and it's cheaper than paying for it.

      The fact that there is a nonzero number of users for Netflix's streaming service proves that's not true. Yeah, I could get everything off Bittorrent, but instead I'm an outspoken enthusiast for Netflix's instant streaming. Why would I, when it's cheaper and easier to just grab the torrent?

      Because not everyone who downloads is the {MP,RI}AA caricature you seem to have bought into. We very much _want_ to "go legit", and we're waiting on the much-vaunted free market to deliver a solution that isn't 3 orders of magnitude more stressful to deal with than the Bittorrent method.

      As a further example; since Amazon started selling non-DRM'd MP3 files that could be accessed from a Linux browser, I haven't gotten a single song that was available from them through any other channel, and every song that I've listened to from my pre-existing collection, I've gone back and purchased from them.

      (Some) people want, very much, to support a legitimate online content delivery mechanism. We're still waiting on the free market to come up with one that isn't awful.

      --
      25% Funny, 25% Insightful, 25% Informative, 25% Troll
    6. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder how long before Comcast throttles Netflix to unusable. My last few days with them it seemed like they were throttling my SSH (just typing into a term would freeze up every few seconds, but other apps worked fine), but at that point I didn't care enough to do tests.

    7. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why I pirate (in order):

      * Easier
      * Will always work on my computer no matter if I upgrade/change OS/breathe too loud
      * Cheaper

      Not gonna lie, the cheaper is a big part of it, but if I could download high-quality, DRM free things using a command-line interface for $5 a movie I'd be tempted.

    8. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I pay seventy euros per month for internet. How does that fit with your theory?

    9. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by xSauronx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      might just be his ISP throttling him if he streams a lot or is a heavy user or if theyre generally craptastic.

      --
      By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth. -- George Carlin
    10. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The complaints here are from paying customers. They have already demonstrated that they don't want to go to Pirate Bay for their movies. Your comments are ignorant at best.

      I buy (Non-RIAA) music on Amazon because it's DRM free.

      I watched BSG on Hulu when it was put up the next day. When they started delaying a week I began using Bittorrent.

      I'm a Netflix customer. Watching their movies online is easier than Pirate Bay.

      I know it's hard to believe, but people generally don't like to jump through arbitrary hoops and will avoid it whenever possible.

    11. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Personally I'm going to lay this down at one of two places. Either ISP issue on their end or an issue with netflix with their peer. Doing a few quick and dirty traces w/reveres I found that everything off rogers upto llwn was fine, however on llwn I was getting a 5-8% packet loss.

      Could be that some areas are seeing more, while others aren't seeing anything at all depending on how things are routed.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    12. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're still waiting on the free market to come up with one that isn't awful.

      I don't think Netflix is awful. I imagine it's difficult for them to get so many movies available online. That deserves some credit.

      However, the anime I've downloaded is vastly superior to what I've seen through Netflix streaming. I prefer subtitles with japanese, over english dubbing because I've seen both done well, but dubbing is never better. (fansubs rule) Netflix doesn't provide any language options.

      Netflix is also missing a certain category of movies, but I don't have a real problem with that. I bet they don't want to blur the line, since that's already the premiere content of online viewing.

    13. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, the convenience store was closed last night so I hotwired a parked car, drove it into the building and got my munchies.

    14. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by jsailor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Agreed.
      I had issues w/Netflix and found them ALL related to Comcast. Adding a ~7 Mbps connection from AT&T solved all of my Netflix issues. Not surprisingly, Comcast would also screw up my T-Mobile UMA (IP based) cell phones and my non-Comcast IP phones at the same time.

    15. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that justifies downloading the movies?

      No, it doesn't justify it. The parent, like many other people, is willing to undergo FOO amount of unpleasantness in order to stay legal here. Justified or otherwise, once the unpleasantness of remaining legal goes over FOO, he's going to return to pirating. Unpleasantness includes things such as cost, throttling, etc. Apparently, the lack of movies is sufficiently unpleasant for the parent to be factored in here, which is why the parent turns to pirating instead of simply stopping.

      In high school, I would only passively take so much name-calling and such until I'd break the bully's jaw. No, my violence was not justified but I'm human and there's only so much bullshit I'm willing to go through. I expect the parent poster is also human.

      This is human nature, and something that media companies - like everyone else - need to consider when making decisions which make using their product less pleasant for the end user. Justification has nothing to do with it.

    16. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by mkcmkc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't like the MPAA or the RIAA, but that's not why we download music or movies without paying for them. We do that because we can and it's cheaper than paying for it.

      I don't download (because of the current legal exposure, and because much of MPAA/RIAA content isn't worth my time), but back when I did, it was never about it being cheaper. I would gladly pay significant sums of money for good content offered the way I want to view it. The *AA companies simply don't offer this, are not interested in offering this, and are more interested in suing their customers than figuring out how to offer it.

      --
      "Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
    17. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We very much _want_ to 'go legit'".

      What a whiny entitlement bitch.

    18. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by morari · · Score: 1

      You tried to "go legit" with NetFlix? The entire reason I have a subscription is to burn all of the films and send them back the very same day they arrive!

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    19. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by howardd21 · · Score: 1

      I agree with your approach in general. When I found out my daughter was downloading MP3s via limewire, I went and bought all of the CDs (about $200 worth) she effectively should have bought and handed them to her. That ended that approach right there. There was no Amazon or iTunes then. Do you also buy the DVDs of the movies you download? It seems like our approach should be to pick them up when we are on our next Best Buy trip.

      --
      no comment
    20. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by kLaNk · · Score: 0, Troll

      Some people like to have a high horse to ride in on so as to make them appear better in line with their "outspoken enthusiast" ideologies.

      Sometimes it is a Prius, sometimes it is a certain wardrobe or vinyl collection. In your case it appears to be Netflix's streaming service.

      Simply because you found it to be a good plank in your soap box platform doesn't change the fact that the original post was spot on with regards to folks rationalization regarding their reasons for pirating content.

      The fact that there is a nonzero number of users for Netflix's streaming service proves that's not true.

      All that proves is that some people don't value their money as much as others or rather maybe they feel that the righteous entitlement that they are purchasing by remaining within the legal boundaries is worth the money.

    21. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by kLaNk · · Score: 1

      I would gladly pay significant sums of money for good content offered the way I want to view it.

      And specifically what was your unique and interesting method of viewing which was impossible to achieve even with significant sums of money?

    22. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by nametaken · · Score: 1

      Not trolling... why is throttling streaming video nonsensical?

    23. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by intx13 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Agreed. My personal strategy is to get the Netflix DVDs (4 a week) and rip them immediately for watching later on the weekends. I am unsure of the legality of this (since it's useful, it's probably illegal) but I am much more comfortable with the ethics than downloading directly.

      For me, Netflix makes it as easy or maybe easier to consume media than piracy does, and the price is low enough that it's worth it. This is the perfect example of "the way forward" for media cartels - you will not beat piracy unless you can provide media that is of better quality, cheaper, or easier to consume than piracy can. At the very least you need to hit one of those three! In my mind, Netflix hits two (ease of use and price - while not free, it's well within what I'm willing to pay).

      Now if they'd only get rid of that stupid DRM... I currently run (pirated!) Windows virtualized so I can watch streaming Netflix media. What with several big players getting rid of DRM for music, I can only hope that movies are next; when Netflix grows the backbone (and buys the lawyers) to shove DRM-free streams down the throats of the media providers, I'll be recommending Netflix to everyone.

      As to the actual "article"... your connection to Netflix's servers is slow.. it happens. Could be your ISP, could be Netflix. Probably not throttling. This is the kind of thing you call your buddy about and say "hey is your Netflix slow too?", not post to Slashdot.

    24. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Panaflex · · Score: 1

      What wretched idealistic bull... Is "righteous entitlement" nihilistic speak for "paying fair money for a product?"

      Some people don't value their money? Remaining within the legal boundaries?

      Not everybody is a drug running hitman? Must be exciting!

      --
      I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.
    25. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Binkleyz · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Because I pay X dollars a month for Y speed (and am possibly subject to a monthly bandwith cap of W).

      Nothing in that equation allows them to vary X or Y because the content (Z) is one they do not approve of.

      End of story.

    26. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      You'd be paying that anyway, as you have to have a connection for netflix streaming, so bittorrent would still be cheaper.

    27. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by peipas · · Score: 1

      It diminishes quality to the point it is unusable, so it might as well be turned off.

    28. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Verdatum · · Score: 1

      I love this. "Waaah, I can't download good!" I hate to be trollish, but I can stream Netflix flawlessly, and so can dozens of other commenters. So, um, sucks to be you, OP.

    29. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by orclevegam · · Score: 1

      I can't speak for the OP, but in my case it was to evaluate a movie before paying to go see it (usually 10 minutes watching a shaky low quality cam shot was enough to tell me if it was worth it or not and I wouldn't bother watching the rest), or to watch TV series that weren't available in my country yet. Most of the TV shows I downloaded I later went back and purchased once they became available (approximately 2 years after I originally downloaded them).

      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    30. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      In high school, I would only passively take so much name-calling and such until I'd break the bully's jaw. No, my violence was not justified but I'm human and there's only so much bullshit I'm willing to go through. I expect the parent poster is also human.

      When I was in high school I weighed like 60 pounds first going in... 90 the next year, then 120, and 140. Some guy that weighed 250 and was over 6 feet thought it'd be cool to slam me into doors and walls one day... I flop around like nothing, and just absorb the impact, so I laughed at him and he looked dumb as shit. He later was having fun throwing me over his head repeatedly so I grabbed him by the head and took him straight off balance, and kept him on his back.

      I'm sure I can take a lot of hammering, but eventually I get bored of it. Media companies, if you buy a DVD for $90 and buy as many DVDs as you do at $15, will continue to charge stores $85 premiums. It's justified for you to hurt them at this point, if nothing else than simply by entertaining yourself with public TV or indie music or video games or college girls. Stealing is not necessary, but something is.

    31. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, right. If I just wanted to go where the fence is cheapest, I probably wouldn't use netflix. I'd spend 10 euros in internet that's good enough for IRC and slashdot and another 10 in renting DVD's.

    32. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by kLaNk · · Score: 1

      What wretched idealistic bull... Is "righteous entitlement" nihilistic speak for "paying fair money for a product?"

      I wouldn't have described my post as idealistic nor would I have classified it as nihilistic. My intentions were to point out the (IMO flawed) idealism of the post I was replying to.

      Some people don't value their money? Remaining within the legal boundaries?

      Not everybody is a drug running hitman? Must be exciting!

      I'm unsure how you were able to make the connection that I was suggesting that people should defy the law. Also, I'm pretty surprised that you would suggest I was implying that drug runners could somehow find the time in their busy schedules to also collect on contracts.

    33. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by kLaNk · · Score: 1

      Those are certainly areas that are painful given how today's media is distributed.

      I guess the real point that I was hoping to make was that comments like being willing to "gladly pay significant sums of money" is normally some manner of rationalization at best (as I thought was the case with the post I was replying to).

    34. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by mkcmkc · · Score: 1

      Not sure what I would be rationalizing--I've already stipulated that I don't illegally download stuff. I guess I could be rationalizing why I don't send the MPAA roses every week.

      --
      "Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
    35. Re:Time to cancel Netflix if true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did she have to pay for those CDs you bought for her, or was it a one-time incentive to download more from limewire?

  4. Clearwire by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 2, Funny

    It seems that Netflix is significantly throttling Watch Instantly users down to an unusable cap â" in my case, 48 kbps

    That's about the cumulative bandwidth Clearwire gives me on some days.

    (on the PC)

    They must have partnered with Apple.

  5. Makes sense to me. by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 5, Funny

    Netflix. Silverlight. And a series of tubes.

    Ten movies streaming across that, that Internet, and what happens to your own personal Internet? I just the other day got...an Internet was sent by my staff at 10 o'clock in the morning on Friday. I got it yesterday [Tuesday]. Why? Because it got tangled up with all these things going on the Internet commercially.

    They want to deliver vast amounts of information over the Internet. And again, the Internet is not something that you just dump something on. It's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes. And if you don't understand, those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material.

    1. Re:Makes sense to me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what the f are you talking about?!?

    2. Re:Makes sense to me. by b4upoo · · Score: 1

      It is the carrier's job to provide more tubes, larger tubes, better tubes etc.. If they don't do a good job they need to get out of the industry.

    3. Re:Makes sense to me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      all i have to say is drop.io
      bypasses the tubes

    4. Re:Makes sense to me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Netflix. Silverlight. And a series of tubes.

      Ten movies streaming across that, that Internet, and what happens to your own personal Internet? I just the other day got...an Internet was sent by my staff at 10 o'clock in the morning on Friday. I got it yesterday [Tuesday]. Why? Because it got tangled up with all these things going on the Internet commercially.

      They want to deliver vast amounts of information over the Internet. And again, the Internet is not something that you just dump something on. It's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes. And if you don't understand, those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it's going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material.

      english isn't your first language is it?

      tubes? thanks man, I blew chicken nugget out of my nose on that one!

  6. Happened to me as well. by Filbertish · · Score: 2, Funny

    I had streaming issues through Xbox Live tonight. I thought it was just me.

  7. maybe they only have so much bandwidth? by yincrash · · Score: 2, Insightful

    demand might be spiking more than they are used to and cannot keep up
    were you watching during a high peak time? maybe they need to invest in more bandwidth.

    1. Re:maybe they only have so much bandwidth? by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I went through all of the motions in TFA (downloading this plugin and then using its option to save the target of this link and got a very high speed download (it read 1.3M/sec), but what surprised me more is that I was actually able to download the .wmv file at all! (note, I don't use NetFlix) Of course it wouldn't play because of the DRM and the fact that my lazy-man's searches for cracking have led to dead-ends.

      Oh well, back to TPB!

    2. Re:maybe they only have so much bandwidth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tunebite will get rid of that nasty drm

    3. Re:maybe they only have so much bandwidth? by isnoop · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Downtime perhaps?
      1.6MBps here. That's better than most other Comcast downloads these days (even though I'm paying for 16MBit).

    4. Re:maybe they only have so much bandwidth? by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1, Informative

      No luck. Just tried and it was unable to disentangle the Netflix DRM (prompt for username and pass) from the wmv.

      Note: Tunebite looks a little too, ahem, legit for that anyway ;)

    5. Re:maybe they only have so much bandwidth? by khellendros1984 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      1.6 megabytes per second is 12.8 megabits per second, which is 80% of the speed of your pipe. Sounds pretty respectable to me.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    6. Re:maybe they only have so much bandwidth? by fat_mike · · Score: 1

      I just tried it for giggles and hit 1.88M/sec. Its nice having the neighborhood cable box in your back yard.

      Then again, things like this always make me shake my head and smile. In 1983ish-85ish I had a Tandy 1000 EX (CoCo II before that) with a 300 baud modem that had a push button (I'd really wanted an acoustic coupler) to activate the connection. I remember looking at files on our local BBS's that were 100k and thinking, "Dad's going to kill me if I tie up the phone line that long."

      Remember getting up at 1:00am to start a 100kb download so you're parents wouldn't pickup the phone and hear dsa;lh;wre;ljasdf?

    7. Re:maybe they only have so much bandwidth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No luck. Just tried and it was unable to disentangle the Netflix DRM (prompt for username and pass) from the wmv.

      what the hell are you babbling about? Stop trying to impress people with your computer illiteracy; it might work with the locals, but here it's just embarrassing.

    8. Re:maybe they only have so much bandwidth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      silly fucker, learn the difference between megabit and megabyte... :(

    9. Re:maybe they only have so much bandwidth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      isnoop i liek you're fael, you come to penisplay with with me? i bring with butter for your sensual amusedment, we pack a nus ornamental gift.

      Pleased to?

  8. Not Netflix fault. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Slashdot should actually do a little fact checking before posting stories such as this. I have the Netflix service and it works perfectly, the problem here is the user's internet connection or internal network. The testing he utilized tripped of a DDOS on the Limelight network content delivery service.

    Netflix doesn't even deliver the streams to individual users, so if this were an actual problem Limelight would be the one to go after, not netflix. Again, there is nothing wrong with netflix, the problem is behind the keyboard.

    1. Re:Not Netflix fault. by thatskinnyguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Where are my mod points when I need them? I streamed 3 movies tonight using my POS local cable provider and it was perfectly fine. I think I ought to quit bitching about my cable provider now. This guy showed me things could be worse.

      --
      The game.
    2. Re:Not Netflix fault. by frapas · · Score: 3, Informative

      Hi agree. I used netflix whith a domestic ADSL from Italy. Netflix block instant watch outside USA, so I used a simple virtual server whith squid http proxy located in USA. Netflix worked fine nevertless the longest path !

    3. Re:Not Netflix fault. by delvsional · · Score: 1

      I did quite a bit of netflix streaming last night too. It was mostly fine, but at one point, it did stop and the "quality bar" dropped off a bit and it re-buffered. The quality sucked and when the movie ended 20 min later, I got up and did something else for awhile. There was a problem, but it wasn't with my provider, or my setup.

      --
      Oh Crap, I'm an optimist.....
    4. Re:Not Netflix fault. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posted by kdawson on Sunday March 15, @02:53AM

    5. Re:Not Netflix fault. by jimbudncl · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is correct. Diagnosing bandwidth issues between two points on the internet is extremely non-trivial. If you don't have access to every device between you and someone else, the best you can do is make educated guesses. Now, if he looked in the debugging info and saw:

      "Throttling this luser's stream to 48Kbps, mwuahahahaha!"

      THEN, that'd be something worth reporting ;)

      On a side note, my data center's main bandwidth is provided by Limelight Networks. Some offsite backups are sent to a separate office building using Time Warner's commercial cable. Eight months ago, our throughput dropped from a steady 10Mbps to 30Kbps... for a month straight. Many hours of phone calls resulted in everyone finger pointing at everyone else. In the mean time, I setup a VPN between the two sites using IPSec, and was able to initiate a transfer through it at 10Mbps. The same transfer, outside the VPN, resulted in 30Kbps throughput. IPSec hides even the Transport layer data, so only source and destination IPs are visible (no TCP/UDP port numbers can been peeked at by prying eyes). Once they couldn't classify the service (SSH, HTTP, etc), whoever was throttling just let it pass.

      Interestingly, once I harped on this enough to higher level managers, the problem disappeared :)

      Don't trust anyone.

    6. Re:Not Netflix fault. by orkybash · · Score: 2, Funny

      Slashdot? Fact checking? You must be new here.

    7. Re:Not Netflix fault. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The story was posted by kdawson, the only fact checking you should expect from him is that the story sounds inflammatory enough.

    8. Re:Not Netflix fault. by spire3661 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I watched 4 hours of Netflix last night without a hitch. Granted it was really late at night, but it was just like watching normal TV.

      --
      Good-bye
    9. Re:Not Netflix fault. by caladine · · Score: 1

      Posted by kdawson on Sunday March 15, @12:53AM from the bandwidth-available-but-not-to-you dept.

      The bolded portion should tell you why this "article" is complete crap. Check kdawson's article history. It's filled with unsubstantiated or deliberately misleading stuff like this.

    10. Re:Not Netflix fault. by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      so petition to have him removed from the editor list.

  9. Faulty reasoning? by the_enigma_1983 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From tfa

    Now we have confirmed that Netflix is throttling instant streaming PC-users to a rediculous 50 or 60 KB/sec cap

    That's an interesting argument. He showed that each thread was throttled to 50 or 60 KB/sec, but he never had any evidence to support his argument atht it's netflix at fault, not his ISP or some other internet issue.

    1. Re:Faulty reasoning? by JWSmythe · · Score: 5, Interesting

          I saw this, and was curious. According to the article, he found another user on the same ISP as him, who complained about the same problem.

          My guess would be, the users provider (not Netflix or their streaming provider) has noted substantial traffic on a particular port, from particular IP's, and since that was a substantial load on their network, they've throttled the per-connection rate down.

          Since other users have noted that they are not having the same problem, I would conclude that it is the users provider that is the problem.

          It's still something to complain about, they just need to direct the complaint to the correct party.

          Years ago, when I was a RoadRunner (now BrightHouse) customer, I had speeds in excess of 3Mb/s. At the time, they were using the same Tier1 provider as my office AND had a peering very very close by (same city). They started throttling various things, including port 80. I complained, and they said they could only provide 768Kb/s (again, this is years ago).

          One day, I set up a PPP over SSH tunnel between my home computer, and my desktop at work. Transferring large binary files from my office network to my home computer was much closer to the original 3Mb/s speeds. Shutting down the link and acting like a normal user, my speeds were at 768Kb/s. They wouldn't admit to the throtting of port 80 from my office network, but I had conclusively proved it.

          I set up my home firewall (Linux PC, my own rules) to route all of my traffic over the PPP over SSH tunnel, so I was happy. It theoretically incurred a little extra network traffic on my office line, but we were billed on 95th percentile (as most Tier 1 providers do), and when I was at home was our slow time, and a T3, so my 3Mb/s peak was nothing in the grand scheme of things. More importantly, most of my large transfers were from home to work and back.

          Providers can set up for just about anything they'd like. They shouldn't. They get a lot of people screaming when they do too much, but for the most part it's just something you live with. Maybe they're throttling everything going to/from the Netflix servers. Maybe they're only throttling port 80 traffic. Maybe, maybe, maybe. There are lots of things they could be doing.

          All other things being equal, if you scp a file, or request it by HTTP, it should get very close to the same speeds.

          As I've found, it's usually the residential/small business providers who do this kind of throttling. I've never seen this kind of thing with Tier 1 providers. Unfortunately, none of us can afford a fast link with a Tier 1 provider at home, so we have to bend to the will of our residential providers. I was lucky once a long time ago, in another city, at another office. I was close enough (1/2 mile) and had a clear line of sight to work. I set up a wireless bridge between the office and my house. I had 11Mb/s (years ago also, and standard for the time) link from the office to my house. They had just a T1 loop to our datacenter. After hours, when no one was working (like, after 5pm) I had my own T1 to use. I could do great transfers to the office, and was pleased with my anonymity. I was rather removed from where the line seemed to terminate (the datacenter). It wasn't completely anonymous though. We had documented internally what IP's were assigned to my house (1 for my NAT), so if there ever was any funny business, it would have landed with me. But, what if a subpoena was served on the provider to find the user of the IP? It could have been at the datacenter. It could have been at the office. It could have been off of that funny little antenna sitting in the window of a coworker (with the best line of sight to my house).

          Oh, the good ol' days. I wish I had my own private T1 still. It was so much nicer than any of the residential lines I've had, even though they advertise faster speeds.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    2. Re:Faulty reasoning? by geekgirlandrea · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, it is nice. I've had a T1 line at home ever since I got fed up with a previous ISP blocking outgoing port 22 (!), and decided I'd rather pay for business-class service than put up with stuff like that any longer. I'll take my 1.5Mbps that I actually get consistently and with a 99.99% availability SLA and my own /27 over some cable company offering 8Mbps oversubscribed by a factor of fifty with weird blocks and caps and throttling any day.

    3. Re:Faulty reasoning? by boaworm · · Score: 1

      Huh? :-)

      A "T1" connection is quite slow by todays standards, capping out at around 1.5Mbps.

      So first of all you never had any 11 Mbps through it, and secondly you never would want one today.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Signal_1

      --
      Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
      Aristotele
    4. Re:Faulty reasoning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sorry - you are confused and reading comprehension isn't very good- you've obviously never had more than your dsl line or cable modem have you....

      i've had everything in business class service upto a ds3.

      THERE IS NO COMPARISON.

      Oh and his 11 Mbps - was in reference to his wireless connection between his office.

    5. Re:Faulty reasoning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I had 11Mb/s (years ago also, and standard for
      > the time) link from the office to my house. They
      > had just a T1 loop to our datacenter.

      GP makes it quite clear it was only 11Mbps from office to house and "just" T1 after that.

      Thanks for trying though - we, er, value your input.

    6. Re:Faulty reasoning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      lol, I love reading about USians and their Internet connections like they were stuck in the '90s.

    7. Re:Faulty reasoning? by sjames · · Score: 1

      He didn't claim to have 11Mbps through a T1, he claimed (quite believably) to have an 11Mbps wireless connection to his office which, in turn, had a T1 connection to the rest of the net.

      While a T1 is 1.5Mbps maximum, he is saying that since that's a fully committed rate (not oversubscribed) and doesn't come with dirty tricks like forged RST packets and such like the residential providers employ, he gets more real performance from the actual 1.5Mbps of a T1 than from the marketing 6Mbps offered by a residential ISP.

    8. Re:Faulty reasoning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why I believe there is a huge market for VPN termination points on the internet. If it were a big enough issue and saved me money, Amazon EC3 might be an interesting way to portal your internet traffic to a different point and hide the details from your ISP. Of course, traffic shaping exists that can detect various VPN technologies and throttle them...

    9. Re:Faulty reasoning? by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          They were blocking WHAT? {sigh}

          I had always moved SSH to another port anyways, just to make it that much harder on the script kiddies, but still, what were they thinking?

          I'm lucky now. I'm on a 20Mb/20Mb Business FIOS line, so no complaints there. I ran through everything with them before we agreed to it. "Look, we're migrating a small server farm, I have to have no blocked ports, no throttling, reverse DNS, and at least a /25 block". And that's what we got. They had insisted we had to use their stupid router, but before I brought the first machine up, I took it out and put my own Cisco gear up instead. :) Ya, real stuff, not consumer grade Linksys cobranded as Cisco.

          This line has been nice. Pricey, but nice. It's a whole lot cheaper than having a cabinet at Level3.

          They had tried to sell us on a 20Mb up, 50Mb down line, but I had to explain to them that 10% of the traffic is down, 90% is up (normal for server farms), so there's no need to have the faster down pipe. Since we're not serving adult stuff, the speeds are perfect for their application, and the customers are happy. The only "problem" is getting reverse DNS done. They won't delegate it to us, so we have to spend an hour on the phone to get the right person to get it done. Our response time to the datacenter is so much better, and we have lots of spare parts in the garage, so if there is a server problem, we get it fixed amazingly fast. :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    10. Re:Faulty reasoning? by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          First off, this was years ago.

          Second, I had 11Mb/s to the office, which was over my wireless link. Two high gain antennas pointed at each other from 1/2 mile. Our theoretically range with those antennas and the hardware backing it up was about 30 miles. Since they were a rather narrow beam, I couldn't even hear the signal from ground level, so there were no snoopy people problems.

          My speed to the datacenter was 1.544Mb/s, but most of my large transfers were from home to the office and back. If I had something so huge that the T1 wasn't fast enough to transfer it, I'd put it on CD, and drive it to the datacenter. With LA traffic, that really took a lot for me to say "this is too slow". Daytime travel time was between 1 to 2 hours. Night time travel time (like 4am) was about 15 minutes.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    11. Re:Faulty reasoning? by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          I don't know about using Amazon's network.

          I do agree, VPN's can help things. It's more trouble than most people are willing to put up with. And ya, providers can traffic shape on anything they'd like. If they see encrypted traffic, regardless of the port, it could be throttled, to allow higher priority to "good" traffic like web.

          Some providers do traffic shaping right, but my opinion of right won't always agree with theirs. I've logged into servers over SSH, and found the speed to be terrible (type a line, wait 10 seconds for it to show), but YouTube would be fast. Nope, not good for me, but it makes the other ~99.9% of their customers happy. What does the average home user care about SSH traffic? Nothing. What do I care about YouTube? Nothing. :)

          I'd rather see my SSH traffic have priority, but some users would like to see their BitTorrent traffic have priority. :) Then again, I don't use P2P networks.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    12. Re:Faulty reasoning? by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Tell me what country you live in AC, and I will explain how our VAST landmass is actually harder, more expensive to wire. The biggest factor in U.S. broadband adoption and policy is geography, period

      --
      Good-bye
    13. Re:Faulty reasoning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you keep using that argument, when it's the perfect candidate for "faulty reasoning"? Again, like many many people have countered with when faced with that statement: then, how come I can't get my 100 Mbit both ways for a reasonable price in one of your many big cities? Say, New York or San Fransisco? Surely you can't expect, and use as argument, that Internet access needs to be the same for the whole country? Of course it's more expensive to get fiber to Utah or whatever and no one is blaiming you for not doing it (as I'm sure, it's not worth the money), but really, why can't I get 100/100 Mbit (and that's actually being nice nowadays, more like 1000/1000 is started to become the norm) for, say, $20-$30/month? Heck, can I even get it for $100? Can I get it *at all*?

      As for my country, I live in the biggest city here, a couple of million people. On the country side, ADSL is the norm, 24/1 Mbit I believe for ~$30/month. I wouldn't expect someone there to have fiber, like I wouldn't with *your* country side, but here in the city I have several providers to choose from, which one you pick is more a matter of taste or preference. 100/100 Mbit, $15/month. We treat it as hot water or electricity, it's something expected, not a luxuary. Will be getting 1000/1000 this autumn, price will remain the same. Sure, I don't need it, but progress is nice and of course digital providers use the capacity to offer high-bandwidth services.

      Accept the fact that you are 10 years behind at least and stop using your country's size as an excuse and start doing something about it. The post I answered to originally said he/she had a T1 = 1,5 mbit. Sure, it probably has a nice SLA (but probably cost half a fortune), but come one, 1,5 mbit? I had that in '98, or rather, 2.5 Mbit as that was my first ADSL connection. No SLA, but that Internet is down rarely if ever happens, probably with the same frequence as electricity (= when something has really hit the fan = national news). Slow downs? I suppose it sometimes drops down to 50-60 Mbit effectively, but really, does it matter?

    14. Re:Faulty reasoning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you *actually* used ADSL? You won't get anywhere *near* 24Mbps down on a good day. A guaranteed 1.5Mbps is great compared to ADSL.

    15. Re:Faulty reasoning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can only speak from experience, and my country, but it so happens that my parents live where 24/1 Mbit is the best available option. A younger brother lives there as well, and is in that age where you download constantly. I have set him up with Usenet access (Newshosting, highly recommended) and he says the speeds rarely if ever drops below 3 Mb/s, which is pretty much as close to the maximum speed you can get. Note that this speaks highly of both our provider and Newshosting. I didn't believe him at first, thinking he perhaps mixed up bits and bytes, but he also told me uses the 30/60 min rule when downloading movies. They have a big nice HDTV, so he downloads those Bluray rips that are available in x264/mkv. They either come in 1 or 2 DVD size (e.g. ~4,5 GB or 9 GB) depending on length and resolution, and depending on which, it's either a 30 or 60-min wait. If you do the math, it works out to quite close to that speed.

      Yes, I suppose this depends on the provider, but as far as I'm aware of, having "just" ADSL is not such a bad deal around here. Somewhat pricy thought, I believe my parents are pushing closer to $40/month. Upload sucks as well, just 1 Mbit/s. But if your provider isn't providing its deal of the bargain, there are usually *at least* two other to choose from. A given area usually has at least 3 providers, sometimes pushing 5. It's a highly competitive market and I wouldn't want to be in it, but I can't complain about the result.

    16. Re:Faulty reasoning? by fm6 · · Score: 1

      I had always moved SSH to another port anyways, just to make it that much harder on the script kiddies, but still, what were they thinking?

      They were thinking, "We're being proactive".

      As always, security is more theater than actually securing stuff.

    17. Re:Faulty reasoning? by cichlid · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it is nice. I've had a T1 line at home ... I'll take my 1.5Mbps.

      What do you pay?

    18. Re:Faulty reasoning? by sabt-pestnu · · Score: 1

      Compare that to Russia, where they can connect up EVERY computer to high speed internet.

      All three of them.

    19. Re:Faulty reasoning? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      How much is that T1 costing you?

  10. If true ... by genmax · · Score: 1

    ... this doesn't make any sense. Its not like Netflix has a number of online offerings, and wants to prevent abuse from streaming movies - streaming movies IS the only (online) service they provide, and at 48kbps, their watch instantly feature is, as the poster said, completely unusable.

    I suspect that this is a bug - they're probably detecting your internet connection incorrectly and streaming at a much lower speed than can actually be supported.

    If this is deliberate - what did that expect - that nobody'd notice ?

  11. What happened: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    FYI there was a misconfiguration in the Netflix service (I'm a Netflix admin). The throttling was SUPPOSED to be 480 kpbs, which we think should be sufficient. It's already fixed.

    1. Re:What happened: by VGPowerlord · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why not 640kbps? After all, 640K ought to be enough for anybody.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    2. Re:What happened: by zonky · · Score: 1

      Do you always test in production?

    3. Re:What happened: by powerspike · · Score: 3, Funny

      Of course, it saves a heap of time and money on all of that testing and revision crap

    4. Re:What happened: by Anenome · · Score: 1

      Don't throttle me, bruh!

      --
      "I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist"
  12. So.... Cancel? by zonky · · Score: 1

    Tell them why.

  13. BitTorrent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Piracy this. Piracy that. What about the consumers that actually you know.. DON'T PIRATE? They get treated like this.

    The people who pirate are better off. They get higher quality content and don't have to put up with the antics of corporations.

    1. Re:BitTorrent by pieisgood · · Score: 3, Funny

      Arrrrrrrr Life's grand ain't it?

      --
      Eat sleep die
  14. Why do you think it's Netflix? Maybe it's you ISP by navtal · · Score: 1

    Why do you think it's Netflix? Maybe it's you ISP? This problem started for me when Comcast took over my local ISP. At the same time as the switch over there was a rush of people who brought in their computer for repair or upgrade because their internet connection was acting funny. When i finally complained enough they sent out a technition who told me they had installed allot of new software. Is /. trolling?

  15. bad conclusions by Helix150 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I read this article, and it seems to me this guy came to a conclusion before he came to an experiment.

    What he DID prove is that a Netflix server in LA was only handing out 50KB/sec per http socket. Most web type servers will do this when under heavy load- better to give everybody a little bit than a few people a lot and the others nothing. I think this is correct behavior for a heavy-load situation.

    However, when he accuses them of throttling, along with the way this article is titled, STRONGLY implies that they are throttling specific users who use too much. If he wanted to prove this the test is simple- log out of netflix and log in with a friend's account, preferably a friend who doesn't stream much.

    Throttling also implies that Netflix is intentionally reducing the connection quality. I see no logical reason for them to do this to EVERYbody, as that would make the Instant Watch service useless for everybody. Far more likely, as stated above, is that he's on an overloaded server.

    So my take on it is this article is incompletely researched, draws a bad conclusion (which doesn't make much sense) from too little evidence, and doesn't perform the one test needed to actually verify it's claim.

    --
    --IronHelix
    1. Re:bad conclusions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He also fails to appreciate that if a CDN has bandwidth for thousands of simultaneous downloads, his per-stream speed is not going to drop appreciably if he's gone from being 1/4000 connections to 10/4000 as the impact from the additional load is divided amongst them all.

    2. Re:bad conclusions by wdr1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Agreed, I thought the same. The most telling was using low-latency as an indication that he should be seeing high bandwidth. Not necessarily the case.

      -Bill

      --
      SlashSig Karma: Excellent (mostly affected by moderatio
    3. Re:bad conclusions by hedwards · · Score: 1

      And don't forget the fact that they went to unlimited views because only a small number of people were using the feature at all. It would be somewhat understandable if the feature was more widely used and they had a much larger selection available via instant view.

      But that being said, I just started playing a movie and there's no slow down compared to usual. Definitely better than last time, but only by the amount of bandwidth added to my own connection. Definitely not anything to support the idea of a cap.

    4. Re:bad conclusions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not "necessarily the case" that low latency implies high bandwidth, but low latency certainly implies that the network between the relevant hosts is healthy. Under some sane assumptions (such as, you're not being routed through an extremely slow link), that implies that the problem lies in one host or the other.

    5. Re:bad conclusions by altek · · Score: 1

      This is interesting to me, as I also live in the LA area, and have TERRIBLE performance the last few weeks (or months) on Netflix streaming. It used to be great (esp before it went on Xbox Live).

      And I only use it 1-2 times per week at most, as usually it ends in extreme frustration with constant rebuffering at a very low bitrate.

      I'm actually ready to cancel my acct with them, I only kept it as the streaming became so useful to me, and it's not any more.

      --
      THE MAGIC WORDS ARE SQUEAMISH OSSIFRAGE
  16. Been working great for me by belgarath84 · · Score: 1

    I've been using the Watch Instantly feature on a pc, mac, and xbox 360 with an 8 mbps cable connection and I consistently get the top quality on all of them.

  17. Works fine for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just pulled it up, and it works great. Not sure what to tell you on that except I wouldn't think that Netflix is throttling all customers, or mine would have been throttled. Maybe you need to look at your broadband connection for errors or your wireless for issues.

  18. OP needs to get his speed convertion right... by Swift+Kick · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In his blog lambasting Neftlix, he says:

    "Bringing up the Status window I noticed my download performance was a far cry from my 7 mbps speed, but rather a measly 0.48 mbps, about 1/14th the speed of my line"

    In the article summary above, he's now saying 48 kbps.

    0.48mbps is actually 480kbps, so he's off by a factor of 10, which (while still pretty crappy) makes it sound much worse than it actually is. So which one is it, OP?

    --
    "We'll need 2000 crickets, 4 cans of Easy Cheese, and the fluid from 18 glowsticks for this plan to work...." - ph0n1c
    1. Re:OP needs to get his speed convertion right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      48 kbps == 480 kbps

      -Verizon

    2. Re:OP needs to get his speed convertion right... by Pla123 · · Score: 1

      It is 0.48 Mbps - you can see it in the screen image

  19. 48 kbps? by pgn674 · · Score: 2, Informative

    In the blog post, Riyad Kalla says it was going at "0.48 mbps" (should be Mbps BTW), which is 480 kbps, not 48 kbps. Still slow for high quality streaming video, but much faster than dialup.

    1. Re:48 kbps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He states two different amounts. .48 mbps = 480 kbps

      480 kbps / 8 is close to 48 KBps, which firefox states.

      Bits and bytes. Huge difference.

  20. Your ISP is the more likely culprit... by nokiator · · Score: 4, Insightful
    There is simply not enough data to support this conclusion. Reduced amount of streaming bandwidth could be due a sustained congestion at any point in the network between the Netflix server and your client. A lot of ISPs oversubscribe their access network very heavily based on statistical multiplexing assumptions that simply do not work when even a small percentage of customers on a subnet are streaming video.

    If there is any throttling going on, it is more likely that your ISP is responsible for it. Cable companies and DSL providers who are getting into the video on demand business may not like Netflix beating them to market with a more cost effective product...

  21. Hard to say, but I have had the same thing... by KingRobot · · Score: 1

    I'm on a ~10Mbps downlink, and 2 or 3 months ago my wife and I had no problems at all; watch instantly was literally just about that. I'm not sure if it's the new Silverlight player or if they are throttling bandwidth, but there definitely was a noticeable and sudden degradation in download / wait time performance 3-5 weeks ago.

  22. FFS by retech · · Score: 5, Insightful

    KDawson, you're pissed at Blockbuster and now Netflix. Can no one please you?

    Perhaps you should go back to reading books and not use /. as your personal pulpit.

    Yes I do feel 2 posts in 8 hrs is excessive. And yes I fully expect your "friends" to mod me down.

    1. Re:FFS by kklein · · Score: 1

      Could be worse. Could be Cory Doctorow.

    2. Re:FFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could be much worse. Could be a Randroid.

    3. Re:FFS by wampus · · Score: 1

      I turned off kdawson stories for awhile, then I realized how boring slashdot was without the tinfoil hat bullshit and turned them back on. I'm expecting Bat Boy to become an editor soon.

    4. Re:FFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm going to ask this in every kdawson troll article. Is he actually Jon Katz or what?

  23. The lunatics are running the (Slashdot) asylum by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Netflix streaming seems to work just fine to my PC - I just tried it. It works fine to my Tivo as well. On occasion, there are problems - but as a reasonably intelligent adult, my first assumption isn't that Netflix is causing these problems intentionally. And you know what? If I go back and try again later, things usually have sorted themselves out!

    I have to wonder about the average age and/or maturity level of some Slashdot submitters, as well as the editors approving these "stories"...

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:The lunatics are running the (Slashdot) asylum by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I had to scroll up to test a hypothesis. Yep. kdawson again.

  24. Like water pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is like water pressure when taking a shower. When too many people try to watch a movie at the same time the pressure drops. Then there isn't enough force to get it to your TV or computer, and whatever does make it through is so weak that it has trouble pushing photons out the screen. They sort of dribble out and the quality sucks.

    1. Re:Like water pressure by Isotopian · · Score: 0, Troll

      Whoosh!

      --

      It's poetry with a beat behind it! And guns! They're like beatniks with automatic weapons.

    2. Re:Like water pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoosh!

      UR DOIN IT RONG

    3. Re:Like water pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoosh!

      No no, I think you're the one deserving of a Whoosh!

    4. Re:Like water pressure by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      It is like water pressure when taking a shower. When too many people try to watch a movie at the same time the pressure drops. Then there isn't enough force to get it to your TV or computer, and whatever does make it through is so weak that it has trouble pushing photons out the screen. They sort of dribble out and the quality sucks.

      It's like water pressure when everyone watching the hockey finals goes to the bathroom during a commercial and they all flush and the pressure drops. But there's so many hockey teams that make it into the playoffs that the season sort of dribbles on and on and the quality sucks. And they've got such big beer guts that later on at night, when it comes time to "perform", they also just sort of dribble out and the quality sucks. Just like we elect more and more people to government, and the average quality drops, and reforms just sort of dribble out and the quality sucks.

      I for one welcome our new dribbling-out-and-the-quality-sucks meme.

    5. Re:Like water pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dood i dont get it can give car analgoy plz?

      also can acidentaly your penis if you like?

  25. Curl from that URL posted maxes out my download! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, I figured it would be best to check out if his story is true, since he was getting just 48 Kb/sec that is what I expected to get when I spawned curl, but instead I got: 1817k Uh, what happened there? How come it worked perfectly fine? It is even maxing out the 20 Mbit connection I pay Cox for monthly!

  26. Is this related to the Blockbuster policy change? by forgottenusername · · Score: 1

    They're both about as ill-informed, uninteresting, and/or blatantly untrue. Actually reading the reasoning behind the theory is like listening to my cousin babble about how he had to reinstall Vista so it would be on the "inner discs" of his hd platter thereby running faster.

    Slow news night?

    Sometimes a static queue isn't such a horrible thing. :P

  27. Look carefully at the web site. by XB-70 · · Score: 1
    It's obvious that what Netflix is advertising something that they are being dishonest about. This is called false advertising.

    A class-action law suit is in order. The key argument here is that they say: "Streamed instantly to your TV... etc."

    Instant streaming implies that you are able to watch. This is NOT the case with throttling. The throttling is deliberate and prejudicial based on the unit used to connect to their service.

    --
    *** Don't be dull.***
    1. Re:Look carefully at the web site. by sparky555 · · Score: 1

      It's obvious that what Netflix is advertising something that they are being dishonest about. This is called false advertising.

      A class-action law suit is in order. The key argument here is that they say: "Streamed instantly to your TV... etc."

      Instant streaming implies that you are able to watch. This is NOT the case with throttling. The throttling is deliberate and prejudicial based on the unit used to connect to their service.

      It's obvious that what Netflix is advertising something that they are being dishonest about. This is called false advertising.

      A class-action law suit is in order. The key argument here is that they say: "Streamed instantly to your TV... etc."

      Instant streaming implies that you are able to watch. This is NOT the case with throttling. The throttling is deliberate and prejudicial based on the unit used to connect to their service.

      Or Netflix isn't actually throttling and kdawson is a moron who just greenlit another "article" with faulty reasoning, bad accusations, and the general stupidity that I've come to expect from him. Seriously, I don't post here much and don't know a ton about how slashdot is set up, but doesn't anyone (cmdrtaco?) care about how much crap he generates? I've pretty much had it with slashdot at this point. It's no longer "News for Nerds," but "false gossip about tech stuff." Blah.

    2. Re:Look carefully at the web site. by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or Netflix isn't actually throttling and kdawson is a moron who just greenlit another "article" with faulty reasoning, bad accusations, and the general stupidity that I've come to expect from him.

      This must be the 20th comment slagging kdawson.

      You know, there's two ways of looking at this ... one way being that the article is posted and the community then gets to either verify or debunk it. If Netflix WERE throttling, instead of individual IPSs, the only way to know would be to get people from all over to post their observations. So, aside from posting the article, can you come up with another mechanism that gets feedback from everyone?

      Not every rumour is true - but this is as good a way as any to weed out the wheat from the chaff - put the problem to the community to either confirm it with multiple data points, or debunk it.

    3. Re:Look carefully at the web site. by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      If something is self-evidently crap from the get-go, there isn't much point in getting everybody's feedback.

      --
      The cake is a pie
  28. Pure FUD by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 5, Informative

    Wow, is Slashdot making a news article out of every morons malware induced performance issues? I watch Netflix Instant View DAILY (love the Kojak, baby) and have NEVER had issues with bandwidth limiting in the last few weeks or ever for that matter. After I read the headline, I fired up Stargate Continuum on my PC (highest quality stream, according to the service menu) and my Xbox 360 (IN HD NO LESS) and it popped up instantly with no quality issues and no delay. Next time, try contacting your crappy ISP before you waste our time with your sky-is-falling BS.

    --
    by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    1. Re:Pure FUD by bill0755 · · Score: 1

      Amen bro.

    2. Re:Pure FUD by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1

      heh, I watch Kojak too, almost every night at work between tech support calls.

      But yeah, this BS 'article' needs to be updated with an apology for being so dumb.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
  29. My current experience by 2.7182 · · Score: 1, Informative

    Is that streaming has been working particularly well for me in the last few weeks. I use a Mac. Maybe it's a zero sum game?

    1. Re:My current experience by DurendalMac · · Score: 2, Informative

      Define "particularly well". I can't watch Netflix streaming on the Mac because of the constant stutters. Every 5-10 seconds or so, the video will stall for about a second, then catch up. It's not a connection issue as it's buffered out fine. It's not a speed issue as I'm on a 2.8ghz Core 2 Duo with 4GB RAM. It's just shitty software.

    2. Re:My current experience by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Roku player is only $100 and I have only had it stutter once when my maximum download speed via DSL was 1.5 Mbps.

      I have upgraded to 7 Mbps service from Qwest and it works like a dream. I have Tomato on my router so can view the bandwidth as a real-time graph and I see pulses of around 5 Mbps down with about a 25-33% duty cycle.

      Obviously you need to pipe the Roku output to something to display it. I pipe it to my TV instead of trying to watch movies on my Mac. But the convenience factor is very nice.

      The Roku player has also just had a firmware upgrade that allows you to tie the player to Amazon as well as to Netflix. They say even more is coming. But it's now possible to rent or buy movies from Amazon to watch on the Roku too. Quality is the same as Netflix movies as best I can tell.

      One thing to watch out for if you want to rent a movie on Amazon and have a Netflix account - make sure it isn't available on Netflix already for streaming viewing. It's interesting that a number of Amazons movies available to rent or buy are also available through Netflix as part of your regular account.

      I use computers for lots of stuff but for me, watching a movie or TV show on a big display in my living room or bedroom is much nicer than sitting at my desk or holding a warm laptop.

  30. A tale of an experiment by leereyno · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One of my neighbors is a netflix subscriber. His work is such that he HAS to have access to the internet all the time. So he has both DSL and Cable through a router that allows him to use both. This router allows him to direct traffic through one ISP or the other. When he directs netflix through the cable connection, the video stream stutters and skips. When he directs it through the DSL connection, the problems disappear. This is despite the fact that the cable connection has a nominal bitrate that is much higher.

    The conclusion that he came to is that his cable provider is messing with netflix because it is competition for their own on-demand service.

    I think something similar may be happening here.

    This makes a lot more sense than the notion that netflix would drive away customers by providing a broken service.

    --
    Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
    1. Re:A tale of an experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your conclusion is wrong here, unfortunately. Cable is shared amongst the community - the stated transfer speeds are generally theoretical maximums. DSL, on the other hand, is generally non-shared, and thus while having lower stated speeds will provide a much more stable service. Of course, YMMV.

    2. Re:A tale of an experiment by ion.simon.c · · Score: 1

      Your conclusion is wrong here, unfortunately.

      There may be a "friend was able to get a $NKBps sustained transfer through the cable connection at the time of the experiment" part that we're missing from the description. Don't be so quick to jump on the "cable is shared so all of your neighbors always affect yer line's performance" bandwagon. Sometimes it really *is* a conspiracy. :)

    3. Re:A tale of an experiment by ColdSam · · Score: 1

      There may be a "friend was able to get a $NKBps sustained transfer through the cable connection at the time of the experiment" part that we're missing from the description.

      That's kind of an important part, isn't it? The conclusion is totally unfounded based on the supplied evidence, so it's pretty worthless (at least to us).

  31. This normal congestion behavior by George_Ou · · Score: 1

    Just because they perceive there to be extra capacity doesn't mean there is. Whenever you use additional TCP connections, you take bandwidth at the expense of everyone else because TCP (Jacobson's algorithm) rations on a per-flow basis and not a per-user basis.
    http://formortals.com/Home/tabid/36/EntryID/170/Default.aspx

  32. And RIAA Stealing from Public Domain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Means they can't use copyright infringement on behalf of users as justification for illegal acts either.

    Doesn't seem to stop them.

  33. Weird. You may have to retract those words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because a Netflix admin posted that they had typed in the limit incorrectly as 48kbps instead of 480kpbs.

    If that's right then YOU have to apologise since the article is correct and kdawson is right. And YOU are wrong. Twice.

    1. Re:Weird. You may have to retract those words by eharvill · · Score: 1

      Yeah, right. Because we all know ACs *always* tell the truth and have nothing to hide. Er, wait...

      --
      At night I drink myself to sleep and pretend I don't care that you're not here with me
    2. Re:Weird. You may have to retract those words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct, we've nothing to hide and are full of truthiness.

  34. That guy is incompetent by mrboyd · · Score: 5, Interesting
    That guy doesn't what he's talking about. I stopped reading when he equated his latency with his bandwidth...

    With an average of a 50ms response time, Iâ(TM)m going to go ahead and say my 7 mbps Qwest DSL service is working as advertised,

    Most likely his provider blows.

  35. TFA: throttled to 480Kbps(50K/s) NOT 48kbps(5K/s) by kriegsman · · Score: 1
    He WASN'T throttled to 48Kbps -- slower than a 56Kbps dialup modem.
    He WAS throttled to 480Kbps, and was getting download speeds of about 50K (that's kiloBYTES) per second (per connection).

    TFA:"Bringing up the Status window I noticed my download performance was a far cry from my 7 mbps speed, but rather a measly 0.48 mbps...:"

    0.48Mbps = 480Kbps (kiloBITS/sec) = roughly about 48KBps (kiloBYTES/sec)

    So the /. story summary makes things sound an order of magnitude worse than they are. But you know, what's just ONE order of magnitude of error between friends, right?

  36. Change ISPs by indytx · · Score: 1

    This is ridiculous. I know plenty of people, myself included, who have no trouble streaming Netflix. I stream to a Mac connected to our home theater with almost no buffering.

    It's obviously this guy's connection, and the obvious solution is to change ISPs. There doesn't have to be some conspiracy to throttle throughput. It could simply be congestion. Performance where I live is always better at off peak times.

    --
    Make love, not reality television.
  37. iD 10T Error by spymagician · · Score: 1

    or a Layer 8 issue- Your choice.

  38. I would tend to agree. by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

    netflix has been throttling back lately. Especially on my 360, HD content always starts out as HD and then stops because the buffer runs out. My comcast cable is setup to burst the first x number of MB in any download or stream. So, I get 40-60Mbps for the first 20-30MB of the stream or download, and then it's down to 6Mbps. Netflix sees this as my internet connection slowing and turns down the bitrate dramatically. PC streaming was generally lower res than the 360 though.

    I also discovered that the bitrate on my PC was being locked at 500Kbps. They have two different bitrates: The video playing bitrate and the buffering bitrate.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
    1. Re:I would tend to agree. by SpookyFish · · Score: 1

      Unless you have a Docsis 3.0 modem, it is physically impossible for you to get 40-60Mbps. The calculation code is wrong somewhere.

      Docsis 2.0 (North American annex-B) uses a single 6Mhz channel, with the highest available encoding being QAM-256 (8 bits per sample). The standardized sample rate is 5.36Msps, so *=8 gives the true peak throughput of 42.88 Mbps, of which ~38Mbps is usable data.

      I see the same thing when starting a batch download with DownThemAll, which reports 6+ MBps regularly when starting, but it is simply inaccurate.

      (That said, I am very happy with Comcast's "Blast" tier, which regularly gives me 20-30Mbps sustained rates as long as multiple connections are in use, like DownThemAll does. For whatever reason a single stream peaks out around 16Mbps sustained.)

      -------

      Gory details on 42.88 vs ~38Mbps usable, if anyone cares:
      The standard specifies Reed-Solomon FEC (Forward Error Correction), which mean 6 samples per 128 are unavailable (-4.7%). The MPEG-2 transport stream structure further has a 4 byte header per 188 bytes (-2.1%), Ethernet eats another 18/1500 (-1.2%), IP headers and Docsis map traffic account for about -3% more overhead. It all adds up to ~11%, meaning 42.88*0.89, or ~38.16Mbps -- assuming you are the only person on that downstream, because there is other per-node chatter. (EuroDOCSIS annex-A spec, btw, uses an 8-Mhz channel with 6.95Msps and correspondingly higher bandwidth.)

    2. Re:I would tend to agree. by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying that it's accurate, I'm just saying what my system tells me.

      http://www.speedtest.net/result/430414855.png

      I just ran that while replying.

      I should also say that my cable runs over fiber until it gets to the neighborhood.

      I don't have a docsis 3.0 modem and my service isn't docsis 3.0

      comcast's sandvine tactics are fudging the numbers somewhere.

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
  39. Needs Legitimate citations by ethicalBob · · Score: 1

    I use my Netflix in NYC close to every night of the week; and watch HD content (sometimes via my Blu-ray, and sometimes my computer if I'm in a different part of the apartment) and it's impressive - no long load times, only once in a while does it reload at a lower speed (and this is usually from a temporary drop in my connection - if I stop and restart it goes right back to HD quality). In NYC we have a LOT of people sharing a finite amount of data transfer via cable. So this smells like BS (or perhaps the OP just has a bad connection, it happens).

    --
    Politics will sooner or later make fools of everybody... - Dick Armey
  40. I don't think they're necessarily throttling by eggy78 · · Score: 1

    but my experience is pretty terrible. I usually stream Netflix videos with my XBox 360 and have a fast enough connection that it is possible to get "4 bars" from Netflix. However, most of the time I have to watch everything at the lowest quality, presumably due to congestion. I am not using anywhere near my maximum down bandwidth (according to the bandwidth graphs on my router), and my ISP is surprisingly good at being able to provide that full bandwidth. If I actually try to max out the connection, I can usually reach 85-90% before things become more-or-less unusable, but Netflix almost never works right. It worked great a few months ago, but lately I can't take it. So, while I don't agree with the article's methodology, there may be some substance to comments about the experience. I know I spend a lot of time angry with the whole thing.

    1. Re:I don't think they're necessarily throttling by ender- · · Score: 1

      I think some of you folks need to double-check your providers or your internal networking. I've only a few times had my movie not start with four bars to my XBOX360 or subsequently reduce quality.

      Once my backup machine was doing two backups and overloading my poor little wireless router. I set up QOS to give the Netflix connection priority and it never happened again.

      The other few times were because I was using a crappy wireless connection and double NAT [ internet -> router -> wireless-> Media PC w/ICS -> xbox360 wired. ] It's amazing it worked at all. I've since wired the Xbox360 directly to the router and have never failed to get 4 bars and a great picture quality from Netflix or Hulu.

  41. Blockbuster plant by ehicks727 · · Score: 1

    My guess is that this is a plant from Blockbuster to combat people leaving because of their Total Access policy change about swapping movies at the store. I read that story and immediately went to Netflicks to look at their packages... and I'm switching! So, nice try Blockbuster...

    1. Re:Blockbuster plant by strangeattraction · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the aliens. You must have aliens!

  42. I see most poster above agree with my thoughts by rrossman2 · · Score: 0

    I *did* read the article (imagine that!). The writer is way too eager to blame it on Netflix with very little, if any, proof it's their fault. Here's my main arguements, which I posted on his blog: ---------- "âoeThe overall slow down combined with the huge discrepency between the two experiences (Netflix-enabled device and my PC) made me decide to start Googling and see if I could figure out what was going on â" I smelled shenanigansâ¦â What discrepancy? The service is sucking on both. Maybe the client software is written slightly different on each platform? âoeNow we have confirmed that Netflix is throttling instant streaming PC-users to a rediculous 50 or 60 KB/sec capâ¦â Uhh⦠yeah⦠no you didnâ(TM)t. All you proved is thereâ(TM)s an issue somewhere between your computer and the netflix service. Where did you, at any point, prove itâ(TM)s not Qwest putting in an artificial limit? Maybe itâ(TM)s a peering problem somewhere on the route. Traceroute isnâ(TM)t going to show you where the bad link is. Lets say Qwest is filtering the video service, well ping and traceroute wouldnâ(TM)t show a damn difference compared to normal. Personally I think this is a non-story as far as itâ(TM)s written until further, better proof can be obtained. For now, this is someone who knows just enough to do basic network diagnostics and who jumps to conclusions, rather than taking a more âoescientific approachâ to solving the problem. Go around asking other people with Netflix streaming over other ISPâ(TM)s who watch about as many movies a month as the writer if their service has crapped out, then maybe youâ(TM)ll have more of an âoeEducated Guessâ rather than your âoejust pointing a fingerâ answer." ----------- Call me crazy, but it seems more like jumping to conclusions rather than figuring out the common denominator between any other users who may be experiencing slowdowns/poor service themselves.

  43. Wow! Bursts of 20-30MBps?! Really?? by rrossman2 · · Score: 0

    Honestly that's crazy. I know in this area the burst went up to around 12mbps, though they do advertise 16mbps in some cases (not sure if that's not offered here yet or if we're a little too far out/on a semi-loaded up loop). Very rarely does mine last at that speed for 20-30MB, mostly that seems to be with Microsoft's website downloading an app for someone in need. Most of the time it tops at about 6mbps which is the reg rate (as you post). Either your numbers aren't quite right and are exaggerated, Comcast is giving you a nice deal, or you're on a different plan I haven't seen available in this area. I'm not saying either is right, but if it *is* the second option I'm jealous. Most of the files I download sit between 30MB to 50MB and having the 40-60mbps would be sweet!

  44. It's a vast idiot conspiracy. by rindeee · · Score: 1

    The approach is simple: Any time you have a problem watching a Netflix Instant View movie, contrive a grand and complex reason as to how Netflix is secretly (insert devious deed here) your (insert desired activity here). Sprinkle it with important sounding numbers, straw men and kittens and your done.

    1. Re:It's a vast idiot conspiracy. by dzfoo · · Score: 1

      And ponies--don't forget the ponies. Although, as we all know, they are in low abundance around the interwebs.

            -dZ.

      --
      Carol vs. Ghost
      ...Can you save Christmas?
  45. How did this make it on to Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's BS it's his isp or his own network. I wouldn't be surprised if it's his own network considering he doesn't appear very smart. I watched 5 hours of netflix yesterday and it was fine.

  46. On Xbox by jlf278 · · Score: 1

    On my xbox 360, videos buffer in hd resolution in about 5 to 10 seconds. Sometimes they don't look as good as hd-dvds or bluray, but they definitely beat out a standard dvd. Not all instant movies show in hd, but those that don't load even more quickly and still look dvd quality.

    1. Re:On Xbox by elenothar · · Score: 1

      just watched an episode of mythbusters which buffered in 5 seconds and used 18mbps of my 20mbps fios until the buffer was full. as always, the first second and a half are blocky and then it instantly clears up to better than standard dvd quality.

  47. Don't Cancel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they have actually been screwing with his connection he deserves a full refund. Netflix loves to throw around the word "unlimited" however they don't see to love to offer it. It looks like we have to sue just to get what we paid for (again).

  48. immersive suspension of disbelief --lost by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    me too. my mac is fast. I can speed test my connection for both burst and sustained transfers. I can watch Hulu and related without gaps. yet Netflix chokes. Not all the time. Just between 6 and 11 at night.

    When you trace route the connection you find it makes about 5 hops in comcast network than about 5 to 10 hops in the limelight network. limelight is netflix's stream provider.

    There appear to be huge latentcies-- like 500 milliseconds.

    When I talk to the netflix techs they say the latencies are the issue. They cause packet resends.

    I point out to them that if their streaming protocol were designed properly, given there is ample bandwidth, they should be able to work around the latency. Besides which I'd be even happier if I could switch between streaming (for browsing movies) and pre-loading them for viewing (like apple).

    They say that they have no control over the transfer protocol--that's handled by silver light. and they have no control over the ability to buffer or pre-load because that's set by their drm contract's with the movie providers.

    Basically if you want to watch a movie at assuredly good resolution and without gaps then maybe it's worth paying apple a couple bucks to pre-download it. Of course, the drawback is you have to know what you want to watch first.

    Having done it both ways I find that part of the magic of a good movie is the immersive suspension of disbelief it creates when it is uninterrupted. So these interruptions are more than just annoying. They move the experience to a different part of your brain-- the part that likes TV not the part that suspends reality (like a good book can do).

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:immersive suspension of disbelief --lost by goombah99 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      After pondering my own post it dawned on me that maybe the answer to the puzzle here is not that netflix is throttling but that silverlight is cheating a bit.

      silver light and xbox are of course microsoft products. So if silverlight on x-box had say a better buffer or a better streaming protocol that was latency tollerant it could work better.

      So why would this be. Well before leaping to the negative and assuming MS is rigging the game to favor xbox, perhaps it's again a DRM issue.

      maybe silver light can permission from the content providers to do more buffering because it's a nominally locked down platform that can offer other DRM protections that a general purpose PC cannot.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    2. Re:immersive suspension of disbelief --lost by Spaseboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I didn't see a difference between my 360 and my Mac when I was using Netflix Instant play. I cancelled my Netflix subscription 2 months after the trial because I got tired of having to set up the instant play queue on my Mac and then go watch it on my 360. Maybe when they add the ability to at least search on 360 I'll get it back.

      --
      "I don't want more choice, I just want nicer things!"
      -Jennifer Saunders as Edina Monsoon
    3. Re:immersive suspension of disbelief --lost by quickOnTheUptake · · Score: 1

      if it's latency, shouldn't increasing rwin take care of it? Or if you are using vista/w7 or linux shouldn't the OS do it automatically?

      --
      Mod points: Guaranteed to remove your sense of humor.
      Side effects may include gullibility and temporary retardation
    4. Re:immersive suspension of disbelief --lost by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      Only valid if the system uses TCP to stream. Many realtime streaming protocols use a custom/semi-custom transport protocol layered over UDP, such as RTP.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  49. Done that test. by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    I've done that test. Qwest DSL and comcast cable suck equally.

    I discussed what I think is the real issue in this post above.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  50. anticant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think this is related to the conspiracy against PC users who don't get HD streamed like the xbox crowd who does.

  51. Use Watch Instantly daily, no probs w/ Verizon DSL by multimediavt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I use the Watch Instantly all the time as I do not have cable and have no problems. I'd check with my ISP before blaming Netflix.

    OP: Are you doing any P2P stuff with your connection? I think you better check all your activity before you go blaming Netflix.

  52. You can still blame Netflix... by dpu · · Score: 1

    As it happens, the video in this story is being served up by Limelight (a CDN similar to Akamai, but aimed at streaming media), not Netflix itself.

    That said, if Limelight is pulling the original file to its edge servers (Los Angeles, in the case of this story) from a Netflix-controlled origin point instead of a Limelight origin point, then shitty speed on Netflix's server would translate to shitty speed from Limelight for the user.

    Disclaimer: the company I work for (not Netflix!) uses both types of origin points with Limelight, and we do occasionally see serious speed issues on files served from our self-run origin points. Usually only on the really big ones though (like 1GB +). And a phone call to Limelight's client support usually fixes the problem within a few minutes.

    --
    Dammit, I meant to post that anonymously!
  53. NetFLix ...BLu-Ray by Stretchedout · · Score: 1

    I just am on my 2nd month with netflix, .. I only use it for Blu-Ray, I wish they were able to have better quality streams and even Blu-ray streams. ~~ My pc is running amd64x2 DUALCORE 6100 -- 3.2gig /// with 8gig ram only using a geoforce 8400 vid card for now... anyways- I just like renting blu-ray from them,.. i get 3 a time,.. and thats like every 3-4 days for me... saves alllot of money from buying them. only one i own is "FearLess" bought it when i bought my Blu-ray drive at BestBuy.

  54. Call support by moosesocks · · Score: 1

    I'd call/email Netflix. Their customer/technical support has been excellent every time I've used it, which is a shocking rarity these days (especially if you have to deal with Verizon and their ilk on a regular basis).

    Netflix are one of those weird companies that still seem to give a damn about their customers. It's one of the things that keeps me a subscriber.

    --
    -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  55. Sniff Sniff by lukej · · Score: 1

    I smelled shenanigans

    Thank goodness this close to St.Patty's Day somebody is finally smelling them shenanigans!

  56. People, people. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who cares about the throttling?

    The link he posted in the article to the WMV works for anyone!

  57. netflix throttles DVD via post too by winksmith · · Score: 1

    i stopped using their service in protest as they were throttling my DVD delivery service. if you use too many dvd's per secret time period they purposely hold your dvd's longer. it's not surprising that they're doing this too. get away with one bad customer tactic, try another one.

    --
    Mark Smith
  58. Nope its just you by shaitand · · Score: 1

    if you are experiencing those kind of buffering times you must be using the crappy old player. Try upgrading to the new player.

    1. Re:Nope its just you by tengu1sd · · Score: 1

      If you're seeing these download speeds, your're using the new (Silverlight) player. Reimage your PC and use the old WMP.

  59. out of bandwidth? by code4fun · · Score: 1

    Is it possible they are running out of bandwidth due to increase demand of their streaming service?

  60. PC experience = meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still think it is junk that PC streamers do not get HD options as we pilot'd the product and yes I have gotten obsurdly low results before.

  61. Re:Use Watch Instantly daily, no probs w/ Verizon by Lummoxx · · Score: 1

    I was having all sorts of trouble.  Watching my bandwidth meters on my Smoothwall (stand alone firewall on a spare machine), it appears that the data stream on the RED side (connected to the cable modem) was being interrupted somewhere, (7Kbps to 0Kbps for 5 seconds back to 7Kbps) and of course, I blamed the ISP.

    While waiting for the tech to arrive, I dug a bit deeper.  SSH'ed into the firewall, and turns out the RED NIC was going bad.  Collisions and errors like crazy.

    Swapped out the Smoothwall with a spare Linksys and DD-WRT, and the issue is resolved, and have full 10Kbps download again.

    The moral of the story...check your hardware in detail, too.  Working doesn't always mean it's working correctly.

    --

    I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.

  62. It's probably your ISP, not netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I streamed a season or so of the office in HD and my ISP throttled my connection back to the point where I couldn't even watch it in standard definition. I doubt it's netflix and more likely it's your ISP cutting you back because of the heavy usage. Is it just your netflix service or does the rest of your internet get slow too?

  63. fine here too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use the streaming pretty frequently over the 360 and occasionally with the browser player and never had any issues. Not a one. In fact the quality on the 360 is fantastic.

  64. Cable Modem Issues by u653op477p305sdn · · Score: 1

    I had some issues with my Cable Modem, which would just reset when streaming from Netflix. I got another cable modem (since mine was 5 years old) which solved the problem and I consistently get the best quality stream now. I would have your ISP check out your cable network for faults and do further troubleshooting.

  65. 480 != 48 kbps by Pla123 · · Score: 1

    The whole article is a miscalculation.

    His player reported 0.48 Mbps or 480 kbps and not 48 kbps!!!

    From FTA:
    "Bringing up the Status window I noticed my download performance was a far cry from my 7 mbps speed, but rather a measly 0.48 mbps, about 1/14th the speed of my line:"

    Even the screen image shows 1/2 Mbps.
    480 kbps is nothing to complain about.

    Can't believe nobody noticed this... is this ./ ?

  66. And you're surprised? by vanyel · · Score: 1

    Welcome to str..e...a.m.inn.g v.....id..e..o