Slashdot Mirror
How Netflix Eats the Internet
pacopico writes "Every night, Netflix accounts for about one-third of the downstream Internet traffic in North America, dwarfing all of its major rivals combined. Bloomberg Businessweek has a story detailing the computer science behind the streaming site. It digs into Netflix's heavy use of AWS and its open-source tools like Chaos Kong and Asgard, which the Obama administration apparently used during the campaign. Story seems to suggest that the TV networks will have an awful time mimicking what Netflix has done."
I just heard another news story that said it's 3% of all internet traffic in the US at night. That's a pretty big discrepancy. Given all other services like youtube and Hulu and all peer to peer, I seriously doubt it's 1/3. It probably is 3%.
ISPs only have so much capacity to sell though.
And Netflix is buying what ISPs are selling. And more importantly, Netflix's customers are buying their connections.
I hear this every so often since I used to work at an ISP. Basically the ISPs are longing for the days where they could sell a grandma a 10 meg connection for $100 a month and watch her use 100kb of bandwidth a day when she checks her email and looks up recipies.
Granted, we do have a problem with network saturation, where ISPs sell product they do not own, but that's their own fault, not Netflix nor their customers.
I would be more than happy to be able to actually download movies from Netflix during non peak times to watch at some other time. This would allow spreading out the bandwidth over the course of a day instead of everyone streaming at peak times such as 7PM EST,CST,PST
Streaming services will continue to degrade our bandwidth unless we are given the ability to download movies\shows during off hours to watch later.
Actually Netflix is trying to get past transit ISPs as much as possible via peering. Provide free peering and caching appliances to ISPs, they get their content closer to the customer, and cut down their transit costs.
I don't know everything.
$8 is less than the cost of a matinee movie, and that's too much to pay monthly for potentially thousands of hours of video?
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying. - Woody Allen
If they used modern H.264 and AAC encoders rather than whatever outdated VC.1 and WMA encoders they're using, they could cut that bandwidth use by a third, reducing their costs and improving the customer experience tremendously. Does anybody know why they haven't already done this?
You underestimate the power of Netflix and the demand that customers have for it.
Many do...it was a wakeup call for the cable/satellite operators when Disney signed with them. Disney is one of the kings of content...and they see something more valuable in Netflix than their current (soon to be previous) contract with the Starz cable channel. Netflix charges 8 dollars a month for offering more content than many people who pay 100 dollars a month get from their cable subscription.
I'll readily grant that Netflix, just like pretty much every other service ever created, is not necessarily for everyone. Particularly if you're into sports or want to watch stuff as it comes out, Netflix is probably not for you. But for those of us who prefer to wait until a show is a few seasons in or entirely completed before we even pick it up, Netflix is the best thing since P2P.
In contrast to cable plan I cut even before I started with Netflix, I now have:
1) Orders of magnitude more things to watch right now, and more of it in 1080p.
2) A subscription that costs 25% of what I used to pay ($8 vs. $30).
3) An ability to watch video while away from home.
4) No need to purchase/rent a separate device to timeshift or store content.
5) The ability to watch shows a season at a time without having to store that content or plan doing so in advance.
6) Recommendations that are actually really good for stuff I haven't seen yet.
7) No more commercial breaks or wasting time watching intros/credits on TV series.
8) No hidden fees, great customer service, and no contract.
Again, it's not for everyone, and for many people the best it can be is a supplementary service that may allow them to reduce the amount they spend elsewhere or else add some extra content that they couldn't get otherwise, but for many people, it can add a LOT of value over what cable has to offer while still being significantly cheaper.
I think it's high time to classify ISP's as a utility and be done with it.
Completely agree
I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
Maybe, but I've never seen a buffet discourage its customers from eating more food. Sometimes they have a sign asking you not to take more than you can eat, or even promising to bill you extra if you do, but large ISPs don't ask you not to waste their product, they simply discourage it across the board.
I think the buffet comparison is particularly apt. Whenever my customers ask me about transfer caps, I simply ask that they enjoy the bandwidth and do not waste it. I leave it up to them what constitutes judicious use of the resource.
I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen