Watch Out Netflix, Amazon Streaming Video to Prime Users

ageoffri writes "Amazon has announced that they will include streaming with a subscription to Amazon Prime. The free 2 day shipping on a huge selection of products either sold directly by Amazon or fulfilled by Amazon is already worth the Prime cost. Now add in streaming that works out to just under $7/month and it gets better. Sure the selection isn't that great yet but this has the ability to really change the streaming market!"

Comments

We're Amazon!

[WrongSizeGlass]

We're Amazon and we want to be everything to everybody!

Re:We're Amazon!

[Anonymous Coward]

If they can do it well and do it cheap, then I'm all for it.

Re:We're Amazon!

[thetoadwarrior]

So far they have done it right. DRM mp3s, fast and cheap books and a decent selection of 3rd parties selling on their site to cater for more rare searches.

My only complaint would be the Kindle. Technically it's perfect but I wish they'd treat books like MP3s and give us DRM free PDFs like O'Reilly.

Re:We're Amazon!

[Vyse of Arcadia]

I'd laugh, but Amazon is actually pretty good at being everything to everybody.

Re:We're Amazon!

[value_added]

If they can do it well and do it cheap, then I'm all for it.

Jeff Bezos was on the Charlie Rose Show (a PBS news/interview program) a year or two ago and mentioned that a large portion of Amazon's sales are from footware. The follow up to his own comment was "Who knew 5 years ago we were going to be selling shoes?"

So, yeah, if they can do videos along with everything else, good for them.

Re:We're Amazon!

[modmans2ndcoming]

PDFs? you can look at a PDF on the kindle but the text is not reflowable so it looks really small and is hard to read.

Re:We're Amazon!

[Sponge Bath]

I wish they would get the Prime 2-day shipping back in order. I used that service a *lot* until last October they switched to Ensenda as the carrier in my area. Suddenly the few 2-day Prime packages that got delivered at all were coming in 1-2 weeks. The story is the same with the other obscure carriers A1, On-Trac, Lasership, etc. After a while I gave up and canceled my Prime membership. Why pay extra for 2-day shipping that comes in 1 to 2 weeks or not at all?

Amazon needs to restore their Prime shipping program to a usable level of service before they start with unrelated freebies like streaming video.

Re:We're Amazon!

[AmberBlackCat]

They always use UPS for my packages. But it seems like every single CD I order arrives with a cracked case. I think it's because they ship them in padded envelopes. They used to use boxes. They do tend to arrive in 2 days or less though. And I see the streaming video actually works. I was watching Les Miserables.

Re:We're Amazon!

[MoonBuggy]

My only complaint would be the Kindle. Technically it's perfect but I wish they'd treat books like MP3s and give us DRM free PDFs like O'Reilly.

PDF is good for retaining formatting, but often at the expense of semantic information - the end result is that while you can be fairly sure that your text will end up 1.7 cm from the edge of the page, the software (text to speech, or reflowing for a different font size, for example) might have trouble distinguishing paragraph order in a multi-column layout. For novels and the like, where it's just text, ePub is unquestionably far superior; for textbooks and other instances where formatting matters more you can make an argument either way.

Re:We're Amazon!

[MoonBuggy]

What was their response on that one? I'm guessing they'd pin the blame (rightly) on the carrier, but from a customer satisfaction point of view it obviously matters that you get your package on time, not whose fault it is if you don't. Some services (Ryanair immediately spring to mind) can survive a reputation for being crap because they're really, really cheap; although that might be applicable to Amazon in general (but probably not, all things considered), it's certainly not applicable to a 'premium' service like Prime - quality (or, in this case, speed) is what you're paying for, so I imagine they'd actually be reasonably concerned if the service is leaving a bad impression.

Re:We're Amazon!

[Sponge Bath]

"What was their response on that one?"

Amazon had a canned response for when a package was overdue a few days: "We are sorry to hear about your shipping problems, please wait 1 week and contact us again if the package has not arrived." One week later: "We are sorry to hear about your shipping problems, we can [send a replacement *or* the item is no longer in stock so we will refund it]. After this repeated over weeks and multiple packages, I decided it was not worth the hassle and canceled my Prime membership. Looking at the Amazon shipper forums, it appears little to no progress has been made since then. Fortunately there are alternative online retailers like Newegg that take shipping seriously.

Re:We're Amazon!

[MoonBuggy]

I'm not surprised you cancelled, in that case, although I am somewhat surprised that Amazon are treating their premium customers like they don't matter. I would've thought they'd be putting in more effort for people willing to prepay $80 on shipping alone.

Re:We're Amazon!

[mattack2]

mentioned that a large portion of Amazon's sales are from footware

Footware? Software for the feet?

BTW, that's probably referring to their sales through Zappos, which they purchased.

Re:We're Amazon!

[d6]

>> it seems like every single CD I order arrives with a cracked case.

Pretty much to be expected using a carrier that is pronounced "OOPS!"

I avoid UPS if at all possible. Usually on time, often damaged and with obscene customs fees on cross border shipments.
Why some businesses insist on inflicting these guys on their customers is beyond me.

Re:We're Amazon!

[pyite]

I used that service a *lot* until last October they switched to Ensenda as the carrier in my area.

They did the same thing with me. Overall, Ensenda was fine for some packages and a disaster for others. Makes sense if you read up on them. Your packages are basically delivered by a "man with a van." Unmarked vehicles show up and drop packages off. So, it's basically hit or miss. Especially if you get a driver who does't know your building (living in an apartment) and decides that not finding the building translates to "delivery attempted." So, whenever Ensenda screwed up, I was very vocal, as I never have a problem with either FedEx or UPS. After about a month of almost exclusively Ensenda, I haven't had it in 3+ months.

Re:We're Amazon!

[PopeRatzo]

I was watching Les Miserables.

Good for you for being brave enough to admit it.

Re:We're Amazon!

[Omestes]

fast and cheap books

More expensive than a paperback isn't my definition of cheap.

Their 3rd parties are a mixed blessing, as well. 90% of the time they aren't cheaper than driving down to a used bookstore and grabbing it, once you factor in the very silly shipping prices. I had a $0.99 book shipped to my house, it had $3.99 shipping. Upon getting it I noticed it shipped from less than five miles away, about a 10 minute drive, and for that I waited a week. Last time I went to the used bookstore I cross-referenced Amazon prices, the used bookstore won every single time once shipping was accounted for.

On rarer books (more uncommon than anything) their prices can get ridiculous. I've found a couple books listed for +$100, for a ten year old trade paperback that most bookstores can still probably order for you.

Their shipping... oh lord. I just ordered some stuff from Amazon after using Newegg for most of my needs, I now realize that I am spoiled. I order some random bit of hardware from Newegg with free to $0.99 shipping and it comes to my door within three days, no matter what. I order the same thing from Amazon (not even a third party), with $4.00 shipping and it comes to my door in a week, if not more (and spends around 4 days in a warehouse for no reason), and generally in a beaten up box 18 sizes too large with nothing but an airbag for protection.

I do use Amazon, I'm even fond of them, but they aren't the greatest thing in the world, and they haven't done everything right. They actually are quite mediocre on several areas. They win because they are big, ubiquitous, and convenient.

Re:We're Amazon!

[bemymonkey]

Firmware update?

That's why I don't use function-specific hardware - pretty much any smartphone or tablet is capable of reflowing PDFs without problems. No need to be stuck with an extremely limited, non-extensible featureset...

Re:We're Amazon!

[jgagnon]

It has nothing to do with firmware. The very nature of PDF's is to preserve page layout, not for reflowing pages to fit a screen. Do not blame ereaders for treating PDFs like they are meant to be treated.

Re:We're Amazon!

[EMCEngineer]

Geez, who wrote this summary? It reads like a corporate shill trying to drum up business.

Re:We're Amazon!

[thetoadwarrior]

AFAIK you can convert PDFs to their format which allows you to have all the other stuff. Why not allow people to download a PDF version from your account when they want to use it on something else or something else? My concern is more that I could end up spending hundreds of pounds if not thousands over the years and then have nothing over night if they bin the Kindle or Amazon goes under or, more likely, they come up with a new and "improved" format.

Sorry students...

[domulys]

... this doesn't apply to your free Prime membership.

Re:Sorry students...

[thetoadwarrior]

Seems fair to me since each view probably costs them more than just bandwidth and they probably have to give up something to the content providers and the content providers may have even specified that free prime accounts can't have it.

Re:Sorry students...

[jonescb]

That sucks. At least I can still bypass the college bookstore and only buy textbooks I need after going to the first or second class by getting them overnighted for $4. It's so much nicer than having to buy books weeks in advance and then finding out you don't even need it.

very objective

[Anonymous Coward]

very objective

Not Free For Long

[Anonymous Coward]

As soon as they start to get a library like Netflix has, they'll have to start charging. Which will cost more than the 79 a year it does now (including prime). It will probably end up costing 79 for prime, plus 3-7 dollars a month when the library is up. Making it anywhere from 110$ for a year (reasonable, competes with netflix if you use amazon a lot) to 149$ a year (only reasonable if you already have prime and ship tons of things, and don't want to watch any DVD's that aren't streaming, as the cost of renting one DVD from Amazon would be the cost of renting 10-12 a month from netflix).

Re:Not Free For Long

[MoonBuggy]

If it goes that way I'd imagine they'd offer separate packages - if it were, say, $70/year for streaming video, $79/year for free shipping, or $120/year for both they'd probably do well. As it stands, making it a 'fringe benefit' increases its perceived value and prevents them from being in direct competition with Netflix, so it's a decent way for them to polish up the product and expand the selection a bit - customers see it as a nice added extra on a separate service, not a poor imitation of the market leader.

Re:Not Free For Long

[Firehed]

I'm quite confident that Amazon has every intention of using the streaming as a loss leader to sell more Prime memberships, which will encourage more shopping for physical goods on their site. And it will probably work. I placed over 50 orders last year on Amazon, plus a half dozen or so this year and we're only seven weeks in. While shipping is definitely an expense for them, obviously their margins are sufficient that it's still worth it (even after affiliate program payouts), and that's before you consider that every one of those orders was on an Amazon Visa so they're either getting a cut of the interchange (in effect, significantly lower processing rates), doing something tricky where they bypass the credit networks entirely and pay nothing, or a combination. Plus interest for those that don't pay their balance in full.

I wouldn't pay extra for streaming, but I'm already a loyal and vocal customer of theirs. To me it's just a bonus, but I'm sure it will be something else I mention when talking about prime (it may just be a hazard of working at a tech company in silicon valley, but that kind of thing comes up in conversation more often than you'd expect)

"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[eln]

So it's basically Netflix, with the exact same shortcomings of Netflix. I'd gladly pay at least twice what Netflix currently charges for streaming if I could get their entire collection that way. Unfortunately, the content providers haven't yet pulled their heads out of their asses and figured out that digital distribution is the future, so we're still stuck waiting for DVDs in the mail for most reasonably modern and/or highly rated content.

As digital distribution becomes more ubiquitous, more and more people will turn to piracy unless the content providers start allowing more of their stuff to be streamed legally. Hopefully they'll figure that out instead of fighting streaming every step of the way.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[afidel]

Exact same, ha. Of the 460 SciFi TV seasons they have available only 60 are available through prime right now and most of those (42) are from the BBC. Big content really is shooting itself in the foot. As you point out if I want to watch a current tv series it's MUCH easier to go grab it off TPB or some other download site than it is for me to watch it electronically.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[tool462]

Agreed. This is one of the biggest frustrations with the Netflix/Amazon Prime streaming. But as a silver lining, I have found a ton of really good older or obscure indie stuff that I never would have encountered any other way.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[jedidiah]

...except BBC shows represent the most expensive ones out there.

Most American shows are dirt cheap by comparison.

After a couple of Classic Dr Who serials, the Prime pays for itself.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[chowdahhead]

I appreciate the convenience of streaming too, but I think we still need physical media rental. It's important for consumers' rights in general, and especially in lieu of no net neutrality laws in place, and the bandwidth caps and throttling that ISPs are pushing back with.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Anonymous Coward]

Psst! Your ignorance is showing! It's not necessarily the content providers who need their heads pulled out of their asses. I have a movie that was distributed by Sony but they do not own the streaming rights. So Netflix can't stream it. But there's no way that I, as an individual, can get the rights to Netflix. They only accept things like that through distributors (as far as I've been able to tell). I _WANT_ to license it to them for streaming but I can't.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[h4rr4r]

Have you called them?

I would also suggest contacting HULU they seem to be making lots of deals with Web and indie film makers. I watch that stuff on hulu so they get some money.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[modmans2ndcoming]

for me it is a free add on to a service I already pay for.

Prime is a great deal for a lot of people because of the cheap shipping, now that I can get free movies, it is even better.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[need4mospd]

I'd gladly pay at least twice what Netflix currently charges for streaming if I could get their entire collection that way.

Given that my current cable bill is over $50, I'd pay well over twice Netflix's regular rates if I could get their full catalog completely ad free and on demand. And I'd tell the cable company to keep their overpriced ad-supported content.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure you might be glad to pay $16/mo, but something tells me Netflix will charge at least $30/mo for full access streaming.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Anonymous Coward]

Why should the content provider get to choose what formats the work is available in? Copyright was never intended to allow this. Back when it was invented, there was only the one publishing format - a book.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[MoonBuggy]

But there's no way that I, as an individual, can get the rights to Netflix. They only accept things like that through distributors (as far as I've been able to tell). I _WANT_ to license it to them for streaming but I can't.

I'd be interested in seeing a link with some more info on that - nothing personal, but as some random AC on Slashdot your immediate credibility is low.

Assuming that streaming rights really are only being accepted via a distributor, is this likely to be a widespread problem, or something specific to your circumstances? Is is a side effect of archaic distribution contracts, similar to those dated attempts at geographic price discrimination that now just lead to the infuriating "Not available in your region" message (i.e. still the fault of 'big content'), or is there some more logical reason?

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Anonymous Coward]

$30 seems expensive, until you consider that cable companies charge $60 for less.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Eryq]

Exact same shortcomings? No. Reportedly it works in Linux.

And if it does, I'm kissing Netflix goodbye.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[mstockman]

So it's basically Netflix, with the exact same shortcomings of Netflix.

One advantage over Netflix: Amazon streaming plays movies on non-Intel (well, G5) Macs, which Netflix won't do because the required version of Silverlight is Intel-only. It never hurts to have one more system that can stream movies, especially since I was paying for Prime anyway.

Of course, this is somewhat offset by the fact that Amazon can't stream through Wii as Netflix does. Oh well.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[timeOday]

we're still stuck waiting for DVDs in the mail for most reasonably modern and/or highly rated content.

Actually not, just you just have to pay per rental of the newer stuff instead of getting it flat-rate.

I don't have a problem with that in principle, although $4 for the newest releases is more than I would pay except on very rare occasions.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[timeOday]

But Cable Internet service alone (to watch your netflix streaming movies) is about $45 / month anyways.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Seumas]

It's nice that Amazon is offering it with the accounts, even though I'll never use it. Netflix has four times the streaming selection (which is still only about 5% of what it SHOULD be) and it's in higher quality on more devices for only $8/mo.

Of course, Netflix has plenty of downfalls, too. Their selection is only about 20,000 (and for all I know, they count an entire season of a TV show as 26 items or something). Worse, half of their selection is that fucking poor quality Starz stuff (which usually expires and is no longer available by the time you actually get around to watching it).

You could cut a huge portion of people's *ahem* alternative methods for acquiring content if you just made all movies and television shows ever made available via an affordable on-demand service like Netflix on as many platforms and devices as possible with no limited number of hours you could watch in a month. And if you could make even new content available within 24hrs of airing on TV via the same service, you would curtail about 99% of alternative content acquisition methods.

If Netflix streaming was pretty much every TV show ever made plus about 150,000 or 200,000 movies, I'd probably pay $50/mo for it (as long as I wasn't limited to streaming to ONE device at a time -- since you can watch cable on as many televisions in the house as you want, as long as you have the cheap-ish box connected to each television).

I can tell you - when I search for a movie or show that is on Netflix, but only available via DVD (place order, wait for availability, have it mailed to you, check the mail, put it in the player, watch it, put it back in the envelope, mail it back, hope it doesn't get lost or pilfered in the USPS, etc) . . . the last option I'm considering is "yeah, I think I'll just go ahead and get the DVD from netflix". . .

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Anonymous Coward]

no content producer is going to let people stream new release for $7 or $10 bucks a month. Never.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Omestes]

I can tell you - when I search for a movie or show that is on Netflix, but only available via DVD (place order, wait for availability, have it mailed to you, check the mail, put it in the player, watch it, put it back in the envelope, mail it back, hope it doesn't get lost or pilfered in the USPS, etc) . . . the last option I'm considering is "yeah, I think I'll just go ahead and get the DVD from netflix". . .

But it is still many times easier then getting in your car, driving to Blockbuster, wandering around for an hour trying to decipher what "genre" your movie might be filed under, realizing that it didn't win an Oscar in the last 5 years so Blockbuster doesn't stock it, instead finding a movie cashing in on a big movie ("Transmorphers" "Snakes on a Train" "The Thing's Leach"), having to deal with a disinterested high school drop out, paying $6.00 for the priviledge, driving all the way back home, and then 3 days later repeating it under penalty of paying 120% for the movie, and being faced with a $15.00 "restocking fee".

I generally just toss any old movie into my queue when the whim takes me, if its streaming I add it to the instant one, if not I just add it. It comes, it sits on my speakers until I want feel like watching it (i.e. remember its there) or I decide I'll never watch it. Send it back. Then a couple days later I go to my mailbox and its like Christmas, until I open the package and realize that its some obscure French/Japanese/Polish movie about a person sitting in a room for three hours quoting philosophy while cutting to a child running through a field back-lit by the sunrise. Then the cycle repeats. Not a big deal.

We've had one movie lost in the mail. Didn't get charged. Though it might have eventually been found by the post office; no clue.

I do wish that everything was streaming though, it would make life a bit better; though disks aren't nearly as bad as you make them out to be.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Seumas]

Traditional Netflix is more convenient than traditional movie renting, but that's not what they have to compete with. You have to compete with the other options that are currently out there. It's difficult for "Content not found -> Select DVD -> Wait for DVD -> Insert DVD -> Pack DVD back up -> Put DVD in mail -> Wait for DVD to be returned (before you can get another)" to beat "Content not found -> Find on indexer and click link to watch in a few minutes to a few hours (depending on type and popularity of content)."

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[pknoll]

I'd probably pay $50/mo for it as long as I wasn't limited to streaming to ONE device at a time

I agree, I'd pay more for more content. I think most of us would. You can, however, stream to more than one device at a time right now. My wife and I do it all the time, either one Apple TV and a computer, or two Apple TVs.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Bengie]

The $45/month is something you would have paid anyway, the extra $50 you pay on top of that $45 for TV is optional

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[AlienIntelligence]

But it is still many times easier then getting in your car, driving to Blockbuster, wandering around for an hour trying to decipher what "genre" your movie might be filed under, realizing that it didn't win an Oscar in the last 5 years so Blockbuster doesn't stock it

It would be even many times easier than that... Blockbuster doesn't exist here any more.

You're gonna be wandering more than an hr, I'll guarantee =)

-AI

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[tepples]

And I'd tell the cable company to keep their overpriced ad-supported content.

The Netflix model isn't really ideal for live sports. A lot of people like to watch games that aren't shown on the big four networks.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[lrobert98]

It does work in Linux. I clicked on the play button for one of the free movies yesterday expecting to get a "Go away, we don't speak Linux" response. Instead, a flash based player popped up.

(INB4 "flash is the devil". Perhaps, but that's another issue.)

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Anonymous Coward]

". . .gladly pay more. . ." Oh- don't worry, you will.

Read: http://themarketsareopen.blogspot.com/2011/02/netflix-heading-to-abyss-nasdaqnflx.html

Excerpt:

People assume that Netflix’s competition will be from other online video providers such as: Amazon, Hulu and Google. This would be similar to Blockbuster who had competition from other video rental stores. However, Netflix has created a paradigm shift where they are actually competing with the studios rather than traditional competition. Put it this way, the movie studious were not talking about how Blockbuster was ruining their business but they are beginning to do this for Netflix. According to the First Sale Doctrine completed in 1909, a company which purchases a tangible piece of equipment can resell it to whomever it chooses. However these laws do not govern the sale of intangibles and for this reason the studios will forever control the price that Netflix will pay for content.

The major studios all understand economics and they control the ability for Netflix to grow. Netflix believes that it can grow everyone's pie. But this is hard to believe since most cable companies charge $70 a month and these companies pay fees to the studios for their content. Meaning Netflix will need to make up the difference of lost revenue from these companies in order to replace them. If Netflix cuts into their margins they can pull the plug on the company by not selling them content. Just as Netflix hopes that people will pull the plug on cable television the studios can pull the plug on selling them content.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[elrous0]

Seriously, how many people are still using a PowerPC Mac in 2011? Hell, even *Apple* doesn't support those anymore.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Omestes]

Traditional Netflix is more convenient than traditional movie renting, but that's not what they have to compete with. You have to compete with the other options that are currently out there

What else is there? Amazon's new and tiny selection stuck into an unrelated account type offering no actual, physical, rentals to make up the content difference? Redbox, which pretty much only stocks new movies and "mega-hits"? The aforementioned Blockbuster and chains like Hollywood? Apple's nasty, expensive and DRM ridden, rentals? Various On-Demand schemes from cable companies?

Torrent and piracy is a different thing altogether. Some people will go for free all the time, no matter how good the legitimate option is. If Netflix lowered their costs to $2/mo, and streaming everything that ever existed straight to your brain; people would still pirate. I'm willing to pay for Netflix for the convenience, even over piracy. A lot of movies I want to watch are popular or new enough to exist in the realm of torrents (which are almost completely about popularity and novelty by nature). I don't like having to deal with torrent sites, shifting media back and forth between my computers, praying for a decent quality rip, sound that actually syncs, etc... That and I'm okay with paying to avoid potential MPAA bombs and ridiculously over-scale legal and financial issues. That and there hasn't been a move made that I had to watch "right now, this very moment, or else". Who cares if I need to wait a couple days? If it was that big of a deal I would have seen it in the theater.

I have occasionally pirated movies, I'm not trying to sound like some sterling exemplar of moral perfectitude, or such. I often grab TV shows, I sometimes grab movies that don't really exist in any legitimate catalog (mostly foreign films). Also, there is a bit of a flaw here, of all the people I know who watch movies, very few of them pirate them. I know a couple "source" people, who spread pirated movies and shows among friends, but for the most part normal, non-nerd or college age, people don't. My father and mother both come to mind, they love Netflix (though think it is too complicated, meaning torrents would blow their minds), they aren't going to switch to bittorrent any time soon.

Right now Netflix has the largest selection of streaming movies and shows. Right now, if something isn't streaming, I can get a physical disk in the mail with basically no added effort ("oh no, I have to check my mail, as if I didn't do it daily already").

If a service goes 100% streaming, and somehow manages to get the totality of Netflix's catalog to stream, and costs fairly, then they will win. Right now I'd say Netflix is the best contender for this eventuality, since they are big, recognized, and have pre-existing deals with publishers/distributors. Amazon might be able to pull it off, but they have a fair amount of catching up to do. Ideally we'll end up with 3-4+ competitors offering comparable services with comparable selections, so I'd rather no one wins.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, the content providers haven't yet [...] figured out that digital distribution is the future[.]

Of course they've figured it out. They're just not yet sure how to control distribution in the same manner they're controlling it now. To this end, they're purchasing additional legislation from the former "Hollywood is the root of all evil gang."

To treat "content providers" as ultimately stupid is itself stupid ... not withstanding all the stupid moves they've made to date.

Re:"Sure, the selection isn't great yet..."

[Mana Mana]

If yopu have been paying attention Netflix's quality has gone down, substantially! Case in point. Six months ago I returned from a three year Netflix hiatus. Getting back to banging out the rest of the UFO (TV series) I saw that netflix did not have the series anymore! Fuck! Shit wears, print runs come and go, but, fuck! *right*

So I go to bang out Magnum PI, first season, you know Tom Berenger, Big Chill. Ah fuck you. ;-) No season one. FUCK!!

So I order some current Italian foreign film, not here yet, but I can watch it, like streaming. Fuck you, that's for you lemmings. Three months later I am still waiting for it to go from Saved to Queue. FUCK!!!

So I order some Korean film, some Apatow sheisse, some D.W. some Torchwood and some some shit I can't remember and I get discs that are like visibly used, you know, like laser-side noticeably used. That's the kind of shiz I get from the library, but like I'm paying hard greenbacks. I gotta break out the alcohol or find a clean spot on my T-shirt! FUCK!!!! "I see a pattern here! No!"

I am in NY and I'm charged $16.99 PLUS TAX; when in the past 3 years did that shit happen?! FUCK!!!!!!

Then Blockbuster goes buster, 7, 11 or thirteen. FUCK? YEAH FUCK!!!!!!! Price goes up after that (~18%), in the past two months.

I am not happy with Amazon either, I just learned after purchasing that they are carrying water, collecting for NY tax too. 8.85% tax is not trivial. They should be based in UT or ND as far as I'm concerned, I was about to sign up for Prime shipping and order all my shit online, and I* mean everything or nearly so. Big TV, snow chains, toothpaste, books, music, books, clothing, zappos, whatever. And I remember the RMS-one-click-Bezos boycott, but it's time. It was. And I'm not into having my sheisse shipped to NJ for pick up when I bang my gf. I, for one, welcome another streaming-media-competitor overlord.

works in linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only works in Linux, but it works *well* in Linux.

Netflix can eat it.

Re:works in linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes! I have both Netflix and Prime, and it has been a continuing source of irritation that I couldn't take advantage of the Netflix streaming. Amazon moves to the head of the pack yet again.

Re:works in linux

[s0litaire]

I was pleasantly surprised it works on my Linux laptop ^_^

Re:works in linux

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? Cool.. I'm going to get a subscription to Amazon Prime *because* it works on Linux.

Re:works in linux

[deathguppie]

Use chrome with an nvidia 9000 series or better card and you get some nice vdpau exceleration as well.

Re:works in linux

[MMInterface]

That's great that it works well on Linux, but it seems like a trade-off. I prefer watching Netflix on Xbox. Also, I have never been a fan navigating through Amazon's clusterfuck of content. For example, I prefer Kindle apps for ebooks, but I dread going to their site to purchase ebooks. They have a habit of cramming too much content on a page and trying to tie in every section of their business that they possibly can: something I don't have to deal with when I order dvds or update my Netflix que. I think the real bonus here is if it does well, Netflix might provide even better services to compete. I welcome the competition, but I think the service has even more flaws than Netflix.

Re:works in linux

[Hatta]

How do you get Netflix on an Xbox?

Re:works in linux

[Rudolf]

How do you get Netflix on an Xbox?
Sign up for the XBOX Live "Gold" membership, and NetFlix is one of the "Video Marketplace" entries.

 

Re:works in linux

[Hatta]

You haven't been able to get Xbox live on an Xbox for nearly a year.

Re:works in linux

[Anonymous Coward]

What are they using? HTML5? Flash?

Re:works in linux

[whoop]

How is it with keyboard shortcuts for actions? Will this be able to be integrated into a MythTV box's remote control? Hulu's app, though limited, does at least operate OK with a remote.

Re:works in linux

[lrobert98]

You're correct about the haphazard (lack of) organization. If you know the title you're looking for then you're golden. Otherwise good luck.

Also, as far as I can tell you can't add any of the free movies to your personal library like you can with rented or purchased titles. This makes it impossible to search for movies on the web and then watch them on a set-top box like the Roku player. And searching with the remote on the Roku player is awkward at best.

But hey, as a Prime customer already, this is all gravy to me. I think the main benefit will be to give Netflix some heat so they keep improving their service.

Re:works in linux

[Puzzles]

Indeed. I have been waiting for one of the current Linux supporting players (Amazon and Hulu) to step into the ring and challenge Netflix. I quit my Netflix subscription at one point and vowed not to return until Linux was supported.

However, it seems like Hulu is content with occupying it's own semi-current tv streaming market while Netflix controls the movie streaming market for the most part.

Oddly, I've had the impression that Amazon was happy trying to be the Blockbuster of the internet, only using the comparably overpriced rental service as a bonus to purchasing through Amazon in general. It still seems like just a way to keep the physical item purchasing through Amazon relevant with shipping bonuses. But, this service is more comparable and competitive and definitely has the ability to be a decent competitor.

Why Amazon Prime?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why bundle this with Amazon Prime? Why not just make it a separate subscription service? It feels like the equivalent of bundling a haircut with a tech support service subscription for a Linux distro.

Re:Why Amazon Prime?

[WrongSizeGlass]

Why bundle this with Amazon Prime? Why not just make it a separate subscription service? It feels like the equivalent of bundling a haircut with a tech support service subscription for a Linux distro.

While the library is small they give it away. Once they get a respectable library of titles they'll have a bunch of people who are using it to start charging while they claim "We never said it would be free for ever. You can't complain about something you were getting for free." Base on the amount of users they'll be able to measure what their monthly fee will be (the more popular it is the more they'll charge - up to the amount Nerflix charges - with a discount to Prime users).

Re:Why Amazon Prime?

[Anonymous Coward]

broader appeal maybe?

Re:Why Amazon Prime?

[mattack2]

Wait, I can get haircuts with my Linux distro? Which one?

heh heh..

I think it's a reasonable bundling, even if slightly weird as you say. I had no intention of getting Amazon Prime after the free month I used for some late Christmas gifts.. But even as a longtime netflix user (mostly DVDs, though I've been using streaming a bit), I could see using this along with netflix and lowering cable usage.

Their streaming catalog isn't a proper subset of Netflix's. In my brief skim, they had the recent Ken Burns "Tenth Inning" follow on to "Baseball" and some old Doctor Who that Netflix had "only" on DVD. (I say "only" because I often prefer DVDs, especially if they contain any extras... but even just for things like documentaries, I like the DVD so I can turn on subtitles and play them on my DVD player that can play faster than realtime.)

Re:Why Amazon Prime?

[LetterRip]

Why bundle this with Amazon Prime? Why not just make it a separate subscription service?

To leverage their monopoly in online book sales and delivery into the video streaming market. If they

Re:Why Amazon Prime?

[BBTaeKwonDo]

Amazon is going to have a problem on their hands if they stop offering this service to Prime customers a few months from now. I can't believe that Amazon would entice people with a service, have them fork over cash, then say, "we have altered the deal..." Yet it appears that's exactly what Amazon is considering. I just read the Prime Terms and Conditions, which include this gem, "We may remove access to Prime instant videos as a Prime benefit at any time." Somehow, this little tidbit didn't make it to the letter from Bezos on the Amazon home page. The letter mentions how this service is a reason to sign up for Prime.

If I were a class action lawyer, I'd start working on the paperwork for the lawsuit now, so that it will be ready if/when Amazon decides to pull the plug. I'd sign up for a Prime Membership so that I could be the lead plaintiff in the suit instead of wasting time trying to find somebody else.

Re:Why Amazon Prime?

[uncmathguy]

From the Terms and Conditions: "However, if we remove access to Prime instant videos as a Prime benefit and you cancel your Prime membership before you or your invitees have made any eligible purchases, we will give you a prorated refund of your membership fee (even if you have accessed a Prime instant video)."

Re:Why Amazon Prime?

[timeOday]

They would be dumb to discontinue it suddenly (angering people) when they could accomplish the same thing over time simply by adding fewer and fewer new items to the free service (like solving the national debt through inflation).

So I think that escape clause is to avoid giving content providers more leverage over them - "pay whatever we demand, since you're contractually obliged to deliver it! Ha ha ha!" or something like that. Now they have the option of the "nuclear option" - simply discontinuing content distribution for a few days until negotiations are settled, as happens with cable companies from time to time.

Re:Why Amazon Prime?

[lrobert98]

Exactly. For now it's a loss leader. Combined with the free second day delivery, it will drive some people to Prime and therefore to buy more from Amazon. And for those of us that are already Prime customers, we'll give their VOD service more attention. I've owned a Roku player for over two years but never paid the Amazon VOD channel any mind. Last night, because of this announcement, I linked it to my Amazon account and gave it a try.

In the future if it takes off Amazon may try to create a separate Netflix-alike flat rate streaming service. But I'm guessing they will keep the free service, even if it's small, to draw attention to Prime and VOD.

Re:Why Amazon Prime?

[silverglade00]

Wait, I can get haircuts with my Linux distro? Which one?

Linux From Scratch. But to be fair, it's more like ripping your hair out in frustration than a conventional haircut.

Re:Why Amazon Prime?

[silverglade00]

If they

Ya don't say!

No PS3 support :(

[CrackerJackz]

Without PS3 or AppleTV support I doubt I'll be making much use of this service (speaking as both an existing Prime member and a Netflix member)

Re:No PS3 support :(

[93 Escort Wagon]

Without PS3 or AppleTV support I doubt I'll be making much use of this service (speaking as both an existing Prime member and a Netflix member)

Amazon does offer streaming to us Tivo owners. However, since I'm already a Netflix member, I can't see myself taking advantage of this given the relative size of their library to Netflix's. Ten bucks a month for Netflix versus seven for Amazon isn't a big enough differentiator for me--since I tend to select the free shipping option anyway, and therefore don't really care about getting my Amazon purchases in two days versus a week.

Re:No PS3 support :(

[h4rr4r]

The PS3 has a flash player, when I get home I will see if it can stream these.

Re:No PS3 support :(

[Anonymous Coward]

I paid $95 for my AppleTV and it just works. I am not sad.

Re:No PS3 support :(

[h4rr4r]

What an odd definition of just works, seems like you mean just works if they decide to support it.

Re:No PS3 support :(

[Nerdfest]

I think he means "It just works ... just barely".

Re:No PS3 support :(

[mattack2]

No, Amazon offers *downloads* to Tivo owners, not streaming. (BTW, I consider downloading often preferable... but if streaming gets more content, then that's fine.. though as I said in another reply, I continue to use more DVDs than either.)

Works in the UK Just fine...

[s0litaire]

I've a US Amazon.com Prime account. (currently a free trial!)

Just finished watching the "Millennium trilogy" (Girl with..) series of movies
Now starting on Farscape Series...

Think I'd pay the fee for unlimited streaming (Works out at just over £4 a month...) ^_^

Re:Works in the UK Just fine...

[commodore6502]

>>>"Millennium trilogy" (Girl with..) series of movies

The what?
Never heard of that.

Re:Works in the UK Just fine...

[commodore6502]

Never mind. Found it (below). Hard to believe that actress is in her 30s! So is the BBC Office better than the NBC Office???

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
The Girl Who Played With Fire
The Girl Who Kicked The Hornet's Nest

Re:Works in the UK Just fine...

[Mojofreem]

Based on the books by Steig Larsen (http://www.amazon.com/Girl-Dragon-Tattoo-Millennium-Trilogy/dp/0307473473/ref=tmm_mmp_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1298415990&sr=8-4/).

• Girl with the Dragon Tatoo
• The girl who played with fire
• The girl who kicked the hornets nest

It's actually a rather good set of movies (haven't finished the third one yet), though it does have some disturbing content. It's in Swedish, with English subtitles. All three are currently available on Netflix streaming.

I heard that they're planning an Americanized Hollywood adaptation. I can only expect it to end up as awful and vile as "Point of No Return" was compared to "La Femme Nikita".

Re:Works in the UK Just fine...

[s0litaire]

Amazon have all 3 in either subtitled or dubbed versions ^_^

Re:Works in the UK Just fine...

[Tumbleweed]

I heard that they're planning an Americanized Hollywood adaptation. I can only expect it to end up as awful and vile as "Point of No Return" was compared to "La Femme Nikita".

Perhaps a bad assumption, considering who's making it - David Fincher (Social Network, Fight Club, Se73n, etc.), and who's in it: Daniel Craig, Robin Wright, Stellan Skaarsgard, Christopher Plummer, Joely Richardson, Goran Visnjic, Julian Sands. I wish he'd gone with Ellen Page for Lisbeth, but you can't have everything.

It looks like he's intending to do a more faithful version of the book, rather than just doing a remake of the movies.

Re:Works in the UK Just fine...

[elrous0]

Netflix has all three available for streaming too (at least in the U.S.).

I'm happy.

[commodore6502]

Not sure why others are not? I have hulu.com and syfy.com to watch my favorite shows, but never had a good source for cheap movies - except bittorrent.

Now I can rent them for $7 a month PLUS get free shipping/priority shipping on all my books and games. Good deal. Makes me wonder how amazon can afford it?

Re:I'm happy.

[JonySuede]

Makes me wonder how amazon can afford it?

I am pretty sure it goes something like this : we are the largest dvd seller, do us a price or we will jack the price of your product

Re:I'm happy.

[bsane]

As a recent Prime customer I can tell you it goes like this:

I need to buy X. Usual brick and mortar vs online argument, except now I don't have to pay for fast shipping. Even paying 3.99 for overnight shipping you end up way ahead. In about a month I've switched to buying anything of consequence from amazon instead of from a store. I even bought computer equipment from amazon instead of from newegg for similar reasons. Basically my amazon spending increased 10x. Presumably they're not losing money by eating the shipping, so its a win for both of us.

Not on Tivo yet

[adenied]

It's not available on the Tivo yet, so for right now Netflix trumps it. Also the lack of DVDs being sent to me until all this crap about digital rights get figured out. Though the price is right for me, and I've already got Prime, so I can't complain too much. Hopefully this is just a taste of things to come.

Limited market

[PARENA]

but this has the ability to really change the streaming market!

...in the USA (and perhaps Canada?) There still isn't anything close to Netflix or this new Amazon service in Europe. Or at least not that I know of. There wasn't anything like it in Holland a few years back and there isn't now over here in Finland. :/

Re:Limited market

[h4rr4r]

I hear tell of some torrent of bits that can be used over the series of tubes we call the internet when content creators fuck up like that.

Re:Limited market

[s0litaire]

it IS gonna change the Streaming market internationally!

Since it does not check to see what country you are in when viewing the content, Just that you have a US Amazon account...

You'll find more people like me (in the UK) signing up for the US service to get good/cheap streaming movies!!

Re:Limited market

[PARENA]

You sure about that? I'm trying a preview and it says:

"We have detected that you are not located within the US. Due to licensing restrictions Amazon Instant Video customers must be located in the United States when viewing videos online. (What’s This?)"

So, not sure how that works in the UK then, but it won't over here. :/

Re:Limited market

[s7uar7]

Amazon recently bought Lovefilm, the UK's equivalent of Netflix, and they have (very limited) streaming. With a bit of luck amazon.co.uk at least will introduce it.

Re:Limited market

[s0litaire]

opps! i forgot i had the "Modify Headers" plugin on firefox turned on... (with a US IP address)
That seems to keep the site happy ^_^

Re:Limited market

[Dogtanian]

I hear tell of some torrent of bits that can be used over the series of tubes we call the internet when content creators fuck up like that.

Perhaps, but that isn't "streaming" since you don't normally(?) get to see it until you have the lot.

Re:Limited market

[GameboyRMH]

That was my first though when I saw the title..."Lemme guess, US only?"

Re:Limited market

[vonux]

You're not counting Voddler? It's available in Finland (and Sweden, Norway, Denmark.) Voddler's catalogue is very limited, though, so I guess in that sense it's not anything close to Netflix or Amazon...

Re:Limited market

[PARENA]

Ah, I didn't know that one. Might be worth looking at, thanks. Too bad it doesn't come with a Linux client (wonder if it'll be fine in virtualbox) or access through consoles like Netflix introduced (last year I think?).

Re:Limited market

[Anonymous Coward]

For now. Enjoy while it lasts.

Signed,
the Amazon Streaming Team.

Re:Limited market

[PARENA]

Seems voddler is in violation of the GPL, using ffmpeg and xbmc code, but not providing sources. (according to a quick wikipedia lookup, so who knows how up to date that information is).

Works on Linux!

[h4rr4r]

As a prime member this is great news. If they expand the available titles I plan on canceling netflix. I will make sure I tell them too. I also just streamed a show on my android phone.

PRIORITIES

[Anonymous Coward]

Get some PRIORITIES, man...

Probably thousands of people and dying in Libya, and you post crap about Amazon Streaming Video... some of it weeks old?

Put the CRACK down!

Re:PRIORITIES

[halivar]

Why are you even on Slashdot, then? Where are YOUR priorities?

Compared to Netflix?

[hawguy]

I've checked Amazon for a few of the TV shows I'd like to get streamed on Netflix and Amazon doesn't have them for streaming either -- is there any reason to believe that Amazon will have a better streaming selection?

Re:Compared to Netflix?

[Darth_brooks]

Probably not, since they're at the whims of the content providers. Given that exclusivity == $$$, even when the content is shite, don't expect the current situation to improve any time soon. Same situation as music. If an artist, label, or studip doesn't want digital downloads, checking different endpoint providers won't change the selection.

Re:Compared to Netflix?

[Anonymous Coward]

Same situation as music. If an artist, label, or studip doesn't want digital downloads, checking different endpoint providers won't change the selection.

Wrong. Often times a new popular Top 40 song will be on Napster a week or more before it's on Rhapsody, or vice versa, or it will be on iTunes before the others, etc. Not sure why, but more than once I've noticed this happening. Besides new music, the subscription music services all have different catalogs. You'll find different songs/artists/albums available. So while there's a large overlap, there are differences between what's available for subscription unlimited streaming from Napster, Rhapsody, and MOG.

Prime users?

[Anonymous Coward]

OK so where do I go on Amazon to find out my account number? I can quickly tell that my slashdot UID isn't prime, its divisible by 13...

Netflix and Android

[Trubacca]

I couldn't say whether or not Amazon will be able to crack the DRM obstacle that is holding up Netflix on Android, but I CAN say that the first company that manages to stream movies to my phone will win my subscription dollars. I have a feeling that many Android users feel the same way, and considering we are the largest smart-phone market segment I am surprised we are not served already!

Re:Netflix and Android

[h4rr4r]

It already works on android. Amazon streaming uses flash. I just streamed some top gear on my Droid(overclocked, only to 800mhz). There was a little bit of stuttering but it was watchable. Go try it!

I will also probably test it at 1.2Ghz to see if that gets rid of stuttering.

Re:Netflix and Android

[Anonymous Coward]

I tried it on my @xoom. #fail. Then I tried it on my @droid2. 20 minutes later, my previously full battery was completely drained.

#flashkilledmybattery

Re:Netflix and Android

[h4rr4r]

I watched for 5-10 minutes, battery still at 90%.

Content is the most important piece

[ExileOnHoth]

"Sure the selection isn't that great yet but this has the ability to really change the streaming market"

Really? That sentence right there sums up why engineering types consistently fail to take on the big players in this market.

I think you have it backwards: the "selection" is EVERYTHING. Until a company shows it can make the kind of content deals Apple can with the big content creators, it will fail to gain market share.

The content is critical.

Re:Content is the most important piece

[h4rr4r]

Apple still does not have subscription based streaming, so what are you talking about?
$0.99 is fine if I want to own it, but to stream a tv show should be subscription or maybe $0.25 per episode.

Re:Content is the most important piece

[ExileOnHoth]

I'm talking about paid digital video as a whole, not just "subscriptions" which would be an arbitrary line to draw.

The point I'm making is these kinds of services only succeed in the marketplace when they have content deals in place with the big content providers. The story says: "this has the ability to really change the streaming market" -- I would argue that the market will go wherever the content deals are.

Amazon knows this. I bet Amazon CAN put some big content deals in place. When that happens, THEN we can talk about them changing the market.

Re:Content is the most important piece

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't really purchase prime for their streaming, but I'll take the freebie. It feels more like a promotion to get more presence on the video market. However, I am certainly not discounting your statement. You are absolutely correct and as a streaming only package it certainly doesn't have as much attraction as netflix.

On a bit of an aside, I do miss the 1.99 overnight shipping, but I tend to abuse it at the 3.99 price. In so far, only one package has never been delivered on time, but I did receive a refund after complaining.

Re:Content is the most important piece

[tylernt]

I think you have it backwards: the "selection" is EVERYTHING

Well, almost everything. Netflix does cool things like refunding part of my monthly fee when they have problems mailing out discs on time. They also send me an 'extra' disc from my queue when the disc I want is coming from a more distant distribution center.

Little things like that have made me rather loyal to Netflix, so even if Amazon or somebody else beats them on price and/or selection, I'm very likely to stick with Netflix anyway.

But you're right, selection is VERY important!

Re:Content is the most important piece

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know about you except I have purchased access to a few movies on Amazon Video on Demand service and it was great. I also have purchased streaming access to movies from http://www.eztakes.com/. Most of what Netflix has is available elsewhere for free. They haven't offered a significant amount of content that isn't already available. Yet Netflix has more content then Amazon. That doesn't mean Netflix is offering a better selection. Hulu's selection has also greatly improved since Plus services was originally introduced. While originally the service was mostly what the free service had been the newer stuff is equivalent to what you will find on Netflix. Netflix really does have some competition despite what you seem to think. Check out the services again because the one was shabby at first yet not so much now. It has only been in the past week that I noticed a ton of new movies that were awesome. Unlike before where the line up was mostly very old and not so good movies. That isn't to say everything was garbage and not worth watching. The thing with some films is they just aren't huge money makers yet are still excellent films. I watched a bunch of films that were good to great if you like genre that I had never seen before. Some of the newer stuff is award winning and direct from holly wood.

Re:Content is the most important piece

[Anonymous Coward]

Selection is important, of course, but it's not "EVERYTHING". Video stores have fairly large and current selections, yet they're losing market share like mad.

Re:Content is the most important piece

[mounthood]

So, Content is King? Not with the long tail. There are lots of people who'll pay for Netflix selections and forgo a cable bill.

Sorry students, Family Members *AND* "Amazon Moms"

[evw]

Nor to anyone who currently get free Amazon shipping via a family member who is a member of Amazon Prime. The free video only applies to the single Amazon Prime member account:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=200572880

"Prime instant videos require an Amazon Prime membership and are not included with the free shipping benefits provided by Amazon Mom, Amazon Student, or if you are a guest of an Amazon Prime member. To watch Prime instant videos, sign up for a $79 Amazon Prime membership at http://www.amazon.com/primevideos. If you are a member of Amazon Mom and sign up for a $79 Amazon Prime membership, you will lose any additional months of Amazon Prime shipping benefits you may have earned."

Amazon video on demand:
http://www.amazon.com/Video-On-Demand/b/ref=&node=16261631

Subset of "Prime Eligible" movies that Amazon will stream free to Prime members today (2153 results):
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=s9_al_bw_srch?rh=n%3A16261631%2Cp_85%3A1&page=1&rw_html_to_wsrp=1&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-3&pf_rd_r=1G4XGFTBQHGKXW5S6ZP3&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1288998822&pf_rd_i=16261631

Competes more directly with iTMS

[Azureflare]

It appears that Amazon has a collection of movies/tv shows that are free to stream, and a much larger collection that you must pay $3 to rent or $10 to buy (much like iTMS).

The selection for free instant play seems rather small. In all honesty, this seems to be more a competitor for iTMS than Netflix. I don't pay anything extra to get dvds or stream from Netflix.

Paid prime members only

[Anonymous Coward]

I just tried it, and it only works if you're a paying prime member. Those of us who have a free prime account (student membership or otherwise) can't join in unless we pay the full $79 a year.

Amazon prepares for war

[joh]

They just need to get an Android tablet out. Amazon is preparing an own App Store for Android, now they offer streaming... They're selling music anyway. The users are there, too. Amazon is in a perfect position to go into the mobile content/apps market and then it can deliver real goods, too. Actually both Google and Apple are *not* in a better position.

I wonder...

[Junta]

Many have commented how similar it is to Netflix selection. Did amazon happen to negotiate some deal or is amazon including some sort of rebranding agreement as a subset of their selection?

I was thinking since Netflix uses Amazon as a hosting provider if some sort of agreement was struck..

The Amazon Prime myth

[dbc]

Amazon's distribution center in Reno can hit 90% of the population of Northern California overnight with *regular* UPS shipping. If you order for regular 5-7 day delivery, they pick, pack and label your parcel, and then let it age on a warehouse shelf for a few days. If you pay for overnight or Prime, they don't age it. Amazon Prime is a racket, a profit center, not free shipping.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[h4rr4r]

So what you are saying is they are willing to ship it to you faster if you pay more?
Which is exactly what they say.

Note that it is UPS that normally "ages" these packages. You can tell by checking its tracking information and seeing that UPS holds the package in one place for days.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[WrongMonkey]

That can't be right. When I lived in Reno, I would always order using the 5-7 day delivery and the only time it didn't arrive overnight was when the order was shipped from a different warehouse.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[farnsworth]

Amazon's distribution center in Reno can hit 90% of the population of Northern California overnight with *regular* UPS shipping. If you order for regular 5-7 day delivery, they pick, pack and label your parcel, and then let it age on a warehouse shelf for a few days. If you pay for overnight or Prime, they don't age it. Amazon Prime is a racket, a profit center, not free shipping.

It's not like there is a continuous flow of infinite-capacity trucks rolling by the warehouse 24/7. Both Amazon and the shipping company have to maximize shipment density and at the same time minimize delivery time. One way to do this is to create artificial segments of shipping via pricing. The customers who pay less get a less certain delivery window. The customers who pay more get priority on that night's truck (or however they work it). It's not like the trucks drive faster if you pay more. You are paying more for priority in the logistics chain, which is well worth it for some people.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[Anonymous Coward]

So amazon spends an exhorbitant amount of money on extra warehouse space so that they can play games with shipping your package in the hope you'll sign up for expedited service?

I doubt it.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[markass530]

Yea, just like the chip companies who disable cores/features for different chips to have a full range of product. You CAN think of it that way, you're just wrong when doing so.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[ClickOnThis]

Amazon's distribution center in Reno can hit 90% of the population of Northern California overnight with *regular* UPS shipping. If you order for regular 5-7 day delivery, they pick, pack and label your parcel, and then let it age on a warehouse shelf for a few days. If you pay for overnight or Prime, they don't age it. Amazon Prime is a racket, a profit center, not free shipping.

I'm not in the least surprised by this. Many manufacturers "blemish" parts of their product line on purpose so that they can justify charging more for the premium ones.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[Anonymous Coward]

"Amazon's distribution center in Reno can hit 90% of the population of Northern California overnight with *regular* UPS shipping."

Not everyone lives in NoCal or near a distribution center that carries near everything.

I order a LOT from Amazon. A lot of my stuff seems to come from Kansas, despite I'm in Pennsylvania. PA seems to have a games distribution and some distro one near Harrisburg, but again, a lot of my orders travel from well outside PA.

Most people are also aware or suspect what you suggest anyways, and they still pay for it, since it's more a club fee. The no lower limit shipping in itself is well worth it instead of racking up stuff to get the $25 free ship limit. This is really useful for games on Lightning deals alone and on groceries.

When I got Prime, it was for my stuff to arrive consistently fast and for cheap. Amazon's prices have increased since then, but I still subscribe to Prime, since overall, it's faster than nearly any other online retailer. Stuff I ordered on ebay, I get from Amazon now, for cheaper and faster than go through a buy-it-now. And with the cost of gas these days, I'd rather order from Amazon than call and drive over only to find out some local stores really isn't carrying what they said they had.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[porges]

It depends on some raw facts that we don't quite have. If Amazon's non-Prime is "whenever we can get to it, but guaranteed within two weeks" or some such thing, that's one thing. But if the entire non-Prime model is, as the GP claims, "store it all for a week, then ship it as usual", that's another. You could catch up with a a boost and then everyone could be getting their Prime-like delivery for cheaper...

unless the cost structure to Amazon is such that no, they couldn't, because if nobody was paying for Prime, they couldn't run at their current capacity at all. And again, we'd need some raw facts to know how it really is.

But yeah, it's annoying just watching the packages amble from one place to another with occasional days off.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[Anonymous Coward]

Because everyone lives in Northern California right?

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know why you're blaming this on Amazon. If they gave your package to UPS the same day then it would just be aging in UPS's warehouse instead. That's just how shipping works; the more you pay, the more priority it gets. UPS doesn't have infinite capacity; you want on the truck sooner, you gotta pay more than the other guy. I'm not sure if I order enough stuff each year to make Prime worth it for me, but now that it's on my mind I'm definitely going to look into it.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[mmaniaci]

No, but those of us that do should expect 1-2 day shipping -- much like Newegg .Their baseline 3-5 days (or whatever) shipping hits me in San Luis Obispo the next day every time.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[bill_mcgonigle]

Amazon's distribution center in Reno can hit 90% of the population of Northern California overnight with *regular* UPS shipping. If you order for regular 5-7 day delivery, they pick, pack and label your parcel, and then let it age on a warehouse shelf for a few days.

Prime has been mostly switched over to USPS, from what I've read. No more 2-day shipping, except to the lucky few. USPS won't even deliver within 5 miles of my house, so it's a total non-starter for me. UPS does a great job.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know where you got your information, but I'm a resident of Sacramento, and I usually receive Super Saver shipments by the third business day after ordering.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[Anonymous Coward]

As someone who had a lawnmower shipped to him in nowhere, WI, via 2nd day air free of charge, I dispute your claim that Prime is a racket. Heck, the 60" plasma I ordered shipped for free as well and when I didn't get the white glove service I was promised, they refunded the $200 it would have cost me to ship it had I not been a Prime member.

Re:The Amazon Prime myth

[Anonymous Coward]

No, dbc is right. I live in downtown Chicago and we are fed by the massive UPS facility in Hodgkins. Where a lot of Amazon product just originates from. In the old days, before prime, if you ordered ground they would ship it as soon as they could and you would get over night or 2 day delivery times. Then they figured out how to control that part of the system. Now I can see the order request sit there for 36 hours on the UPS site, then on the day I am suppose to get the package, the UPS site ships it out that morning to local site, then out for delivery. All this happens between 2am and 6am, because it is only 18 miles to my place.

Downside to Prime

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

There are a couple of non-obvious downsides to paying for Amazon Prime.

The first is that it can be a false economy - the expedited shipping is not free, you pay for it up front a year at a time. But since the extra cost is not accounted for in the price of each transaction it makes it harder to comparison shop - it becomes mentally easier to pay a higher price for an item at Amazon rather than purchase it elsewhere because the "total cost" appears to be lower.

The second downside is more insidious - since you've paid up front, Amazon can hold your money hostage. I saw one case a few years ago where Amazon had a dispute with a bunch of fatwallet types - Amazon shipped out 20-30 different products to a couple of hundred customers at a very low price and then changed their mind about the price after the orders were delivered. They told the buyers that they could either return the products for a refund or pay the difference in a second charge to their credit cards. Amazon even went so far as to process those second charges without getting permission.

The people who disputed the charge with their credit cards got the charges cancelled as they were never authorised in the first place. BUT Amazon then "froze" their accounts on their website. The people who had paid for Prime were SOL - sure they had the privilege of expedited shipping on any order for another ~10 months, they just couldn't place any orders. As far as I know, none of those people ever saw a penny of that Prime fee refunded.

While I wasn't financially affected by the incident, seeing how Amazon handled it, I was convinced to never pay Amazon for their Prime service. It isn't a stretch to see Amazon pulling the same stunt with the video streaming - you can stream any video you pay for, but they won't actually let you pay for anything.

FWIW, it also made me think twice about "deals" at Amazon - if they won't stand behind their own system's pricing info, how am I supposed to tell the difference between a promotional discount and a computer error?

Re:Downside to Prime

[h4rr4r]

You do pay for the shipping up front, but you are paying for 2 day shipping. Tjhat is normally more expensive so you need to compare to that. I paid $3 more for a monitor because I have amazon prime. For me the $3 and the $1 portion of amazon prime (I make at least 80 orders a year, office mates share my prime and pay me for it) was worth it and cheaper than the $7 three day shipping at the other vendor.

Re:Downside to Prime

[Anonymous Coward]

I've paid for Amazon Prime and I've gotten it for free. Even paying for it, it has been worth every penny. Amazon went from 2-3 orders a year from me to probably closer to 80. At the latter number, I've paid about $1 per order for 2nd day shipping. And that's on anything; I've taken advantage of Prime on shipping a single Bic pen (which I'd never order by itself except with free shipping) and also on large applicances (which normally cost an arm and a leg to ship.)

It's a great business model for them. They're usually price-competitive anyway, and the fast free shipping _always_ makes me check them first.

Re:Downside to Prime

[Anonymous Coward]

I've seen these complaints before, and as infrequent as they are, they still bother me.

If you have to work multiple angles to get a deal on fatwallet and such, you're probably gaming a system.

If the deal is "too good to be true", you're probably gaming a system.

This goes with the territory on those 'thrifty' sites. I know, I use them, and you can always tell when something is an error or shady dealing on the buyers end. For all the complaining we do about big evil companies, it's also true that some small segment of consumers will always try to worm, cheat and game businesses right back.

Sometimes that bites us on the ass, sometimes we get away with it, but I don't fault Amazon for refusing to honor an exploited glitch or scam someone worked out... regardless of whether a few people think it should be honored.

Re:Downside to Prime

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never heard of anything like this. If you want to shop around and give your credit card to a bunch of different unknown websites then you can comparison shop, but Amazon's price is competitive with national brands.

Re:Downside to Prime

[kramerd]

Your post is full of lies.

Any /.er (or anyone who managed to graduate from high school, for that matter) should be able to recognize how much 2 day shipping costs per item, the total cost of prime, and figure out how much they have to buy in a year to make it worthwhile. For me, its 6 items. That is one every two months. That is disgustingly worth it.

As for your second downside, Amazon is a merchant, and as such, would never post a price for an item, charge a credit card, ship an item, and then ask for a second payment. They would have no legal basis for doing so, and furthermore, they would be subject to lawsuit for fraud from anyone (not just someone who purchased from them).

I dont know why you are lying about amazon, but I find it offensive.

Re:Downside to Prime

[user no. 590291]

Do you have a link to this? I'd be interested in seeing what happened. Was it an actual pricing error--not that handling it that way would have been acceptable in any case? Were I to have been so affected, I would have just disputed the charge for the Prime membership as well.

Re:Downside to Prime

[CastrTroy]

I live in Canada, so maybe things work different for Amazon here, but basically it's always been 2 day shipping here. Even if you get the free super saver shipping on orders over $39 it still only takes 2 days for the item to be delivered. It's not guaranteed 2 days, but it's effectively 2 days. Many times it's even 1 day. As long as they have the item in stock, and you live in a major city, you are going to get the item within maximum 3 days, Usually 2 days, and often 1 day. You could pay extra if you really want guaranteed 2 day shipping, but most of the time you are just paying for something you would get anyway.

Re:Downside to Prime

[KingSkippus]

I'd like to see a link to this because it sounds to me like the OP made it up out of his ass. Or maybe it was something that a "friend of a friend" told him about, like that time Bill Gates was giving out $1,000 to everyone who forwarded his e-mail. It's something that sounds barely plausible (like all good urban legends) so I'm not going to outright insist that it's false just now, but I sure as hell am not going to stop buying stuff from Amazon until I see some kind of evidence to back up his second anecdote.

Re:Downside to Prime

[Anthony Mouse]

But since the extra cost is not accounted for in the price of each transaction it makes it harder to comparison shop - it becomes mentally easier to pay a higher price for an item at Amazon rather than purchase it elsewhere because the "total cost" appears to be lower.

That's because you're doing it wrong. If you're already paying for Amazon Prime then the total cost actually is lower. The cost of Prime is a sunk cost. You don't get it back just because you bought less stuff from Amazon, so you don't use it when comparing prices.

What makes it annoying (especially to competitors) is that it allows Amazon to scoop up all the high volume purchasers. If you buy enough stuff that a Prime subscription is cost effective then what Amazon is essentially doing is giving you a (shipping) discount on everything to keep you buying from them, because they know you buy a lot of stuff and they also know that their competitors try to undercut their prices. So as long as competitors are only undercutting the price for plebeians rather than the price-after-shipping for Prime subscribers, Amazon can capture the high volume customers by offering them this stealth discount. It's basically price discrimination in favor of high volume purchasers.

Re:Downside to Prime

[Anonymous Coward]

I dont know why you are lying about amazon, but I find it offensive.

I have a theory that It's always the most self-righteous who are the most likely to be wrong. He writes matter-of-factly, you freak out and hurl accusations. Chances are you are wrong. So I went looking for proof, guess what? I found it.

Recent Amazon Price Error: You'll be charged unless you return!!

Go ahead and backtrack now. You'll probably argue that the buyers were in the wrong and took advantage of Amazon.
He never claimed they didn't - all of what he did claim though is attested to in that thread.

Re:Downside to Prime

[kramerd]

Well, when you put it that badly;

the buyers were in the wrong.

The promotion was for buy one dvd, get one dvd of equal or lesser value free. Fatwallet allowed users to purchase one dvd at 3.97 (the cheapest in the promotion) and receive a free dvd of any price. This was clearly not the correct pricing (unless the 2nd dvd was also priced at 3.97). Since this was a sale of goods, the UCC applies, even for non-merchants, so this action is a counteroffer, which Amazon is not required to accept.

Amazon did not accept, but instead allowed people who improperly took advantage of a flawed checkout system to either return for a full refund (including return shipping) or pay the actual listed price, with a full month in which to do so. The only people who could possibly have been adversely affected by this were international orders (by definition not prime users, but still people who were legally only giving a counteroffer).

People who disputed the charges (rather than sending the product back or paying the difference) had their accounts frozen because they were in breach of contract, as outlined in the terms of service for all amazon users (not just prime accounts). Amazon did not hold money hostage, nor did they deprive Prime users of prime benefits, they simply demanded payment for contracts entered into by purchasers.

Keep in mind that I am not backtracking; amazon never changed their price, amazon had permission to make the charges because purchasers had accepted a contract and then breached (giving anyone who had a unilateral mistake access to a refund), and there is absolutely no basis for claiming that amazon prime isn't worth the money based on anything in gp post.

Re:Downside to Prime

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

I'd like to see a link to this because it sounds to me like the OP made it up out of his ass.

Here you go:
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/store-forum/491638-amazon-pricing-error-anyone-charged-yet-those-sick-attacks-arguing-5.html#112

Re:Downside to Prime

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Keep in mind that I am not backtracking;

AC called it, you are quacking like a duck.

Re:Downside to Prime

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice FUD

Re:Downside to Prime

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you have a link to this?

Right here on slashdot:
http://slashdot.org/story/07/02/15/1356226/Amazon-Adjusts-Prices-After-Sales-Error

Were I to have been so affected, I would have just disputed the charge for the Prime membership as well.

There's a time limit on how long you have to dispute a charge, something like 90 days. So anyone outside that window is SOL.

Re:Downside to Prime

[Anonymous Coward]

Insidious? I just had a 7' x 3' x 4' 350lb Netshelter server cabinet overnighted for $4. Thanks amazon prime!

Re:Downside to Prime

[tepples]

That's because you're doing it wrong. If you're already paying for Amazon Prime then the total cost actually is lower. The cost of Prime is a sunk cost.

The comparison shopping happens in the month before one plunks down the money for Prime. How does one know whether or not he plans to buy enough things online in the next 12 months to make Prime worth it, especially if he routinely orders enough items that Amazon can fulfill to hit the $25 minimum for free Super Saver Shipping?

Re:Downside to Prime

[KingSkippus]

The second downside is more insidious - since you've paid up front, Amazon can hold your money hostage. I saw one case a few years ago where Amazon had a dispute with a bunch of fatwallet types - Amazon shipped out 20-30 different products to a couple of hundred customers at a very low price and then changed their mind about the price after the orders were delivered. They told the buyers that they could either return the products for a refund or pay the difference in a second charge to their credit cards. Amazon even went so far as to process those second charges without getting permission.

The people who disputed the charge with their credit cards got the charges cancelled as they were never authorised in the first place. BUT Amazon then "froze" their accounts on their website. The people who had paid for Prime were SOL - sure they had the privilege of expedited shipping on any order for another ~10 months, they just couldn't place any orders. As far as I know, none of those people ever saw a penny of that Prime fee refunded.

I read the link you provided in your reply and then some. The "deal" the OP is referring to was a "buy one, get one of equal or lesser value free" offer, and was presented as such by Amazon. However, due to a glitch in their order processing system, it gave you credit multiple times for the lesser-priced of the items. The glitch was posted on a forum, and some people thought it would be clever to exploit the glitch. Reading the thread, apparently one guy ordered over $1,600 of DVDs for something like $25.

Amazon didn't "change their mind about the price." The terms were posted on the site, and any reasonable person would have known that the deal did not entail getting $1,600's worth of DVDs for $25 because of a billing glitch. Amazon simply corrected a billing error after giving people who exploited the error a very reasonable time to return the DVDs (with shipping pre-paid) if they didn't want to be charged. Some of the exploiters chose not to, Amazon billed them per the text of the offer, and a bunch of them complained that they weren't able to bilk Amazon out of thousands of dollars.

Those people were effectively trying to steal those DVDs as surely as if you knew a credit card processor at you local Best Buy is on the glitch and you thought you could get a new flat screen television for free. Personally, I'm glad Amazon didn't let them get away with it.

Re:Downside to Prime

[Anthony Mouse]

By attempting to recall whether one bought enough things in the previous 12 months, I would think.

Re:Downside to Prime

[SleazyRidr]

I guess then it comes down to who is responsible for the glitch... I have heard about some hardware companies who have had similar glitches and decided to just eat the loss rather than get any bad publicity. Those type of glitches can be very dangerous when information can propagate as fast as it does these days.

I have absolutely no sympathy for the people who abused the glitch; they knew they were doing something wrong and then whined when they were caught.

Re:Downside to Prime

[h4rr4r]

Mine normally takes 3-5 days, I also order lots of cables and things under $25 which is our super saver shipping limit.

Re:Downside to Prime

[user no. 590291]

Thanks!

Re:Downside to Prime

[user no. 590291]

I'm acquainted with the limit -- had a problem with eBay/Paypal (pre-merger) some time ago and when it became apparent that PayPal's "dispute resolution" process's primary purpose for being seemed to be for running out the Fair Credit Billing Act clock, I went ahead and disputed with my bank and got the refund due me that way. I would have done the same thing with Amazon.

Re:Downside to Prime

[user no. 590291]

Duh moment for me -- you meant that the 90 day clock would have run out on the Prime membership charge. That's true. And I assume there's a choice of law in the Amazon terms that means I couldn't sue them in a local court, but I guarantee I would find some way of either getting a pro rata refund or making them wish they had given me one.

Let's kindle a little controversy

[Anonymous Coward]

Will they this a "delete stream from end-user brain" capability?

Neutrality?

[billsayswow]

I'm so glad we can look to Slashdot for fair, unbiased summaries of news events. And failing that, we can look forward to things like this.

Never Forget

[initialE]

This is the same Amazon that caved to big brother. Why do business with them?

Re:Never Forget

[KingSkippus]

This is the same Amazon that caved to big brother. Why do business with them?

What specifically are you referring to? (With some kind of citation, please. If you present some tinfoil hat kind of story, I'm going to need more than just "some random anonymous web site posted it, so it must be true!" link to believe you.)

Re:Never Forget

[initialE]

Here we are... http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/dec/11/wikileaks-amazon-denial-democracy-lieberman

Re:Never Forget

[KingSkippus]

*rolls eyes...

I doubt it was because of "Big Brother" that Amazon didn't want to be associated with Wikileaks. They probably just didn't want to be associated with a site that many consider treasonous. Not that I consider them treasonous, but I do understand the business decision.

Amazon denied that it had caved in to "a government inquiry" but declared that it had kicked WikiLeaks out because it was not adhering to the company's terms and conditions — which require that "you warrant that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to the content" and "that use of the content you supply... will not cause injury to any person or entity".

"It's clear," pontificated Amazon, "that WikiLeaks doesn't own or otherwise control all the rights to this classified content. Further, it is not credible that the extraordinary volume of 250,000 classified documents that WikiLeaks is publishing could have been carefully redacted in such a way as to ensure that they weren't putting innocent people in jeopardy."

Are you saying that companies shouldn't be allowed to make these kinds of business decisions? If Amazon wanted to fight this battle, I would have cheered for them. If they don't, though, that's their choice, and frankly, given how hot-button and expensive it would have been, I don't blame them for letting someone else fighting it.

Or put another way, just because you have the right to free speech doesn't mean that I have to provide you the forum for it, especially if I feel like it would cost me a lot of money and possibly even damage my reputation for being associated with you. (And like I said, I support Wikileaks.)

No Linux, No Go

[TheABomb]

But Netflix works on my PS3 and Wii. Last I checked, I'd need a Windows PC to use Amazon streaming, and I don't need that kind of torture to watch Baby Mama.

Re:No Linux, No Go

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

But Netflix works on my PS3 and Wii. Last I checked, I'd need a Windows PC to use Amazon streaming, and I don't need that kind of torture to watch Baby Mama.

But... but... but we're supposed to feel sorry for the people who intentionally decided to use a niche OS when they can't use a popular service that's easily accessible a number of other ways.

Re:No Linux, No Go

[AngryDill]

Amazon video streaming works perfectly on my MS-free Kubuntu desktop. Their video download feature requires either a Windows PC or a Tivo, but that's not important to me. Their music downloads (in DRM-free MP3s) work fine in Linux (which is important to me).

-a.d.-

Re:No Linux, No Go

[John Meacham]

Nope, works perfectly on linux, android, and my google tv. Anything with flash.

Re:No Linux, No Go

[TheABomb]

Interesting. I knew about the mp3 part (unless you have a 64-bit version, but that's understandable what with this being 1998 and all), but the last time I tried the video (which was about a year ago when they sent me a coupon), I got stuck at the door.

Still doesn't put them on my television, though.

Competition:

[TheABomb]

I paid $25 annually for Barnes & Noble's "Reader's Advantage" card, which provides free shipping PLUS a discount 10%. That alone has added up to like four Doctor Who DVDs :-)

Re:Sorry students, Family Members *AND* "Amazon Mo

[FredFredrickson]

Well that's pointless. I'm not going to spend an extra $80 for these streaming features when I already have free 2-day shipping as a "guest" prime account on another prime account. It would've been cool to check out but just a quick overview shows that they're not really titles I'd pay to watch. Amazon fail.

It's got tons of MST3K

[Stonesand]

Tons of Mystery Science Theater 3000 episodes are available! I know what I'm watching tonight!

Re:It's got tons of MST3K

[elrous0]

Those are all available on Netflix too. And Netflix is available on numerous stand-alone boxes (including PS3/Xbox/Wii, and about any DVD or Blu-ray player you buy these days).

Re:Sorry students, Family Members *AND* "Amazon Mo

[markass530]

whats with all the brit shows? is that a result of your link?

Citation please

[KingSkippus]

Amazon's distribution center in Reno can hit 90% of the population of Northern California overnight with *regular* UPS shipping. If you order for regular 5-7 day delivery, they pick, pack and label your parcel, and then let it age on a warehouse shelf for a few days. If you pay for overnight or Prime, they don't age it. Amazon Prime is a racket, a profit center, not free shipping.

And you base this on... what exactly? Sounds pretty hokey and anecdotal to me. I've never used Amazon Prime before, and when I order stuff from them, it almost always gets to me within two days, three at the most. I live in Atlanta, Georgia, which is a pretty major delivery hub for the southeast, so typically packages take a day to get from point A to a delivery hub close to point A and sometimes to the Atlanta regional hub, then a day to get either to me on the truck or to my local delivery center to be delivered the next day.

I honestly can't remember the last time a package, sent via any slow-mule-to-China method on either UPS or FedEx and by anyone here in the continental U.S. taking more than three days. I think once it took four, but I might just be mistaken. I can also say with certainty that I have never had a tracked package sit on a shelf at any location for more than a day.

Have you considered the possibility that your local delivery people just don't like you?

Hollywood Hates the Planet

[bill_mcgonigle]

Unfortunately, the content providers haven't yet pulled their heads out of their asses and figured out that digital distribution is the future, so we're still stuck waiting for DVDs in the mail for most reasonably modern and/or highly rated content.

That's because Hollywood hates the planet. Ignoring for a moment the inefficiency of shipping tiny plastic discs all over creation, it costs Netflix almost a dollar to round-trip a DVD vs. 10 cents for digital distribution. That money has to come from somewhere; in the end it's all humans converting mostly-carbon-based energy into useful work.

When Hollywood stops hating the planet, they'll allow digital distribution of their movies. Until then, as far as they're concerned, we can all burn.

No love for Canada

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet another company making it more practical to pirate than to get something through legit channels. Fail in 1, 2, 3....

Re:Sorry students, Family Members *AND* "Amazon Mo

[timeOday]

Amazon fail? I fail to see why they're giving you free shipping in the first place.

Not any Prime account

[Issildur03]

When you pay for a Prime account, you can share the with a few other accounts (2 others, I think). The streaming service is only available to the paying Prime account, so the other two have to spend another $75/year to get the streaming.

Easy answer

[DogDude]

Makes me wonder how amazon can afford it?

Easy answer. They screw their "suppliers". Most of the stuff you see for sale on Amazon isn't being sold by Amazon, but by independent businesses selling via Amazon. Well, Amazon charges 15% of each purchase, including shipping charges (which are going up in real life). There are lots and lots of really short sighted small business owners who are selling a lot of stuff for a loss on Amazon, and Amazon is laughing all of the way to the bank. That's where they get most of their money. They get 15% from every sale for simply allowing businesses to plug into their infrastructure. That's a lot of money for very very minimal cost and zero risk.

Free streaming?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget you can get a free year of prime with any .edu email. If they keep that around there giving an awful lot of people free streaming.

Re:Sorry students, Family Members *AND* "Amazon Mo

[inKubus]

I have an Amazon Student Prime membership. I was excited I could cancel Netflix and save $9.99/month. Then I read your comment.

Seriously, I am starting to wonder what kind of deals these providers have with the movie distributors. Do they pay per view or is it a contracted rate or what? Because it doesn't seem like that big of a deal to stream video anymore. So, how soon before there's affiliate and branded commercial video streaming services available, where essentially you resell Amazon or Netflix services? How much can I get to refer new users? Because once they have the deal, especially if it's a fixed contract, they really pile on profits by getting more subscribers. And of course, do I get paid for each movie they watch after the fact or just the one I referred? Cause I'm picturing like a movie review site (lots do it better than netflix or amazon) that links directly to the movie, and that link is monetized. There is some little transaction being generated somewhere there when you view a movie, it's not just wide open. Maybe they are reselling the customer preferences to the distributors to help them decide better what movies to buy. Hmm, very interesting new developments. I always assumed netflix streaming was a pilot, for both them and the distributors. It's mostly old movies now, but lots of TV DVD's. I assumed that they would eventually release a live streaming service (Netflix Live or something) for big events. But I'm surprised to see Amazon offer it now because it's obvious there's money to be made there for both the classic movie distributors and online "specialists" like Amazon. Of course it's inevitable that either the movie distributors will dry up and blow away leaving amazon to buy movies straight from the studios (hopefully) or they will you know, do their whole copyright thing and continue to fleece us and provide inconvenient service, which of course leads to piracy, which leads to jail, which leads to the new war on drugs, the war on copyright infringement, which of course leads to massive government expansion in the military industrial sector at the benefit of a few shareholders in the movie business.

Cable Internet customers get TV discounts

[tepples]

The $45/month is something you would have paid anyway, the extra $50 you pay on top of that $45 for TV is optional

The cable companies usually give deep discounts on TV service to Internet subscribers so that they don't switch their TV service to satellite. I've seen these discounts approach $20 in a Comcast area.

free?

[Danny Rathjens]

Only in the fairyland world of marketing is something claimed to be "free" when you are actually paying for it. Please don't fall for it. I'm paying $80/year for 2 day shipping on my orders. Adding the word "free" in there is absurd.

Yes. I also round up prices ending in 9. ;)

Re:free?

[Tuan121]

You should floor all prices, that way you are getting instant savings.

Ripping off Amazon

[KingSkippus]

Ah, just found out how the glitch worked. It was supposed to be a buy one get one of equal or lesser value free offer. But what happened is that if there was a price difference between the two items, the price of the lesser item was credited twice, effectively only charging you only the difference between the two.

So, for example, if you put two DVDs in your cart, one that cost $19.99 and one that cost $20.99, you would only be charged $1.00. The guy I referred to above apparently exploited this to get over $1,600 in DVDs for probably less than $100.

So yeah, I think Amazon was definitely in the right here, and I have zero sympathy for the scumbags. They were trying to steal, plain and simple. If they disputed the charges and had them reversed, Amazon was well within their rights to freeze their accounts, effectively refusing to provide service to a known thief. If I owned a business, I'd lock 'em out of the store, too.

Re:Ripping off Amazon

[KingSkippus]

Citation. And if they had Amazon prime, they didn't pay for shipping and handling, only the dollar or two difference in price.

Re:Ripping off Amazon

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

So yeah, I think Amazon was definitely in the right here,

To argue about the morality of the issue is to miss the point - you pay for prime, you give amazon a lever they can use to manipulate you. Wether you like the fact that amazon has tried to use that lever on other people is irrelevant.

Re:Ripping off Amazon

[KingSkippus]

And you missed my point. If someone steals from them, they have the moral right in my opinion to use such levers. The charges that Amazon put through on the people's credit cards was valid, and several of those people disputed or otherwise avoided the charges through fraudulent means. They should count themselves lucky if their Amazon Prime membership was all that they lost. If I were Amazon, I'd be mighty tempted to have sued a bunch of them to get my money back. The only reason they didn't was probably because they're so big and could afford the write-off, and it was easier to avoid the negative PR. Still, yeah, those people acted in extremely bad faith, and I don't blame Amazon for canceling their accounts and not giving them any kind of money back for their Prime accounts.

Would you refund a thief who stole hundreds or thousands of dollars from you? I know I wouldn't.

Re:Ripping off Amazon

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

And you missed my point. If someone steals from them, they have the moral right in my opinion to use such levers.

Lol. I didn't miss your point, I explicitly acknowledged it when I said to argue morality is to miss the point. You think the end justifies the means, fine but irrelevant.

Re:Ripping off Amazon

[KingSkippus]

Lol. I didn't miss your point, I explicitly acknowledged it when I said to argue morality is to miss the point. You think the end justifies the means, fine but irrelevant.

Then you did miss my point. Let me break it down for you. These people owed Amazon either the money or the DVDs. Amazon was well with their right, legally and morally, to cut their losses by keeping the money they had when the people refused to pay or send back the DVDs and recoup what they could.

You try to pitch this as if Amazon was being unreasonable. In my opinion, any store would--and should--do the same. I've been an Amazon customer for years, and I've never had any kind of problem like this with them. I'm not afraid of them using your so-called "levers" on me. Of course, I've also never tried to steal anything from them, either.

Re:Ripping off Amazon

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

You try to pitch this as if Amazon was being unreasonable.

No, that's just a side comment. The main point here is that it is not immediately obvious how paying for Prime changes the relative power balance so I pointed it out with an example.

You don't care because you think Amazon will never make use of the power imbalance to harm you directly because you think you are a good person. Great, but irrelevant.

Not entirely accurate

[mu51c10rd]

The article also mentions about 5000 titles of their 90000 title library will be free in this offer. Seems their entire collection will not be free for Prime customers. It's a shame, the movies I have watched on Amazon On Demand (they give away a lot of 5 dollar credits) were always worth it (quick buffering, no flakiness).

Re:Sorry students, Family Members *AND* "Amazon Mo

[Anonymous Coward]

It really sucks that you're butthurt over not continuing to receive free shit - yeah, this is definitely Amazon's fault. You're a student, by definition, you have very little disposable income, and thus, your opinions don't matter. You get your Prime Student status because Amazon realizes that it's cheap and easy for them to foment goodwill with you early on, and sending out the couple things a month you buy is really simple for them. Besides, you're a student - everyone knows you just steal your content anyway. Sorry to jump on your shit, but i'm tired of "wahhhh i have Amazon Mom and i don't get free video??" Get over it.

Windows Media Center?

[EmagGeek]

I haven't been able to find one, but does anyone know if there is a widget or plugin for Windows Media Center? I'm not talking about an extender, but the actual PC that is running WMC.

Netflix has an application where you can browse titles using the WMC interface. I like the idea of free streaming from Amazon, but if I can't do it with the remote in WMC, it's useless to me.

It seems their site is geared toward streaming to Media Center Extenders and other embedded devices.

BTW, I tried to watch a movie on the PC yesterday using the web interface they want you to use, and the quality was amazing....ly horrible... Unwatchable in full screen mode.

Re:Sorry students, Family Members *AND* "Amazon Mo

[FredFredrickson]

So that you'll be more likely to buy things from amazon you normally don't. Like deoderant.