Discussion in 'other software & services' started by SweX, May 6, 2013.
I'm just going to reply with the same reply I made in regards to Youtube taking over anything: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=2226127&postcount=4.
In a nutshell, won't happen until the companies controlling all of the content (whose number can be counted on one hand, which poses its own problem) stop trying to fight back with insane licensing deals very few streaming companies can afford for more than a couple of years and stop allowing some content to be streamed but not other content. As I said in the linked post, Netflix loses more content than it gains, and the content is half complete. Looking at their list for reasons they'll grow, they sure are hoping a lot.
• The Internet will get faster, more reliable and more available: If it's redesigned, yes it may be more reliable. Care to tell me when someone will go through with that?
• Smart TV sales will increase and eventually every TV will have Wi-Fi and apps: http://readwrite.com/2013/05/03/why-innovation-is-moving-outside-the-tv. To put it bluntly, Smart TV was a phase and it's being forgotten.
• Smart TV adapters (Roku, AppleTV, etc.) will get less expensive and better: Maybe, probably. But that doesn't affect how much Netflix will replace anything.
• Tablet and smartphone viewing will increase: If Flash is replaced as the main streaming method, perhaps. Netflix will be okay here since they are eventually moving to HTML5 and getting rid of the dying Silverlight.
• Tablets and smartphones will be used as touch interfaces for Internet TV: How again does this help Netflix?
• Internet TV apps will rapidly improve through competition and frequent updates: Are you noticing a lot of "Duh" moments in this list?
• Streaming 4K video will happen long before linear TV supports 4K video: This one here, oh this is a gem. In a world of supposed mobile takeover, they expect 4K video to take off? I'll put it short and sweet: Um...no. Bandwidth anyone?
• Internet video advertising will be personalized and relevant: This should actually read "Internet advertising will get creepier and harder to avoid". That's not a blessing for Internet TV, that's a curse.
• TV Everywhere will provide a smooth economic transition for existing networks: Um, what?
• New entrants (like Netflix) are innovating rapidly: What "new entrants"? Aereo? Content companies are doing a Spanish Inquisition on it and will likely succeed eventually. Netflix? They have a "home grown" TV show that's doing well enough, sure, but that's not what people sign up to Netflix for, and it's an answer to the biggest problem they have, content. Hulu? If content companies have their way, Hulu will be dead before Netflix and Hulu is practically worthless to begin with because of incessant advertising and new episodes of shows (if they have the license to stream to begin with) don't show up sometimes for a week or so after they air. You can't follow shows in that manner, it's pointless.
So, their list is basically a list of possibly and sorry, try agains. None of which does a thing to fix the problem that streaming has, content and the medieval licensing that goes with it.
I don't really agree with the push to replace remote controls. A phone can do a lot of things, but for some things I want devices that stay in one place and are mostly dedicated to one function. If I'm talking on the phone, I don't want to have to put the other person on hold so I can switch to the app just to change the channel or adjust the volume.
What I could get behind is a tablet that stays in the living room. You could use it for other stuff, but it wouldn't be too inconvenient when you need a remote function. Something like what Nintendo has in the Wii U controller would be nice if they expand it to control other devices like receivers.
I would like to see more interactivity, especially in sporting events. It would be nice if the graphics weren't baked into the signal and you could remove them if you don't need a constant reminder of the score, who's on base, other scores, etc. I'd also like an audio feed with no broadcasters.
Also see: BitTorrent traffic drops when we move in: Netflix
I like how in that last link they did a 180 and said that 4K streaming wasn't as sure-fire as they claimed it would be in the link posted at the start of the thread. Pirating isn't going to stop no matter where they set up shop and, if they don't provide the content many want, pirates will provide it. The "We have this, but not this" situation with current streaming will continue to hold it back from replacing anything for the masses. Just like content providers are hoping.
What's odd is that BitTorrent have partnered with legit providers of late - perhaps NetFlix doesn't want any competition.
Will keep an eye on this for further developments.
Yeah, BT the company went legit long ago. That's why many pirates looked elsewhere for torrent clients. Still though, content is king, just ask Spotify (which itself suffers from "This but not that" syndrome, but I digress). Netflix and the rest suffer from it and it won't end until, again, content providers get it through their thick heads that streaming is here whether they like it or not, so they might as well relent and give fair licensing deals or continue to deal with rampant piracy. The "old guard" hates the Internet, and they specifically hate "all you can eat" streaming, and would likely still be trying to kill iTunes if it didn't make them a killing. I'm honestly surprised Netflix and Hulu lasted this long (though the future of Hulu is in doubt).
"NetFlix" is a bit silly to condemn the "linear TV experience where channels present programs at particular times".
When programs cease being "presented at particular times"...NetFlix will realize that there isn't enough content to satisfy consumers.
It takes many series almost half-a-year (or more) to produce a season's worth of episodes.
In the NetFlix universe, consumers typically binge on a season's worth of episodes within a month (sometimes even a few days).
You can imagine how quickly people will burn through entire titles & seasons. Then, they will be left with dead-air.
What's going to fill in that "dead air"? Old shows & movies that no one cares about? This will lead to people cancelling their subscriptions, until the next "binge" session comes about.
If NetFlix wants to replace TV, it will have to produce content in a higher quantity than television currently does. It will also have to satisfy the diversity of taste's that different channels currently cater to.
@Paulescobar: Actually, for Netflix subscribers and many other services, it's the older shows that people actively look for. Most already understand that, barring iTunes, they're not going to get their "fix" of current media from these services. The content is either not there at all, large chunks are missing or episodes of TV are released so late to the services that it's near impossible for users to care to bother.
Really, old content is all that Netflix is good for. And, you're right, users go through it very quickly and then they're out of luck until Netflix negotiates with the content providers to hopefully bring in more to see. I've yet to meet anyone who has gone more than a few months with Netflix or Hulu.
My daughter and her boyfriend enrolled with Netflix just for their movies -- even with the unlimited-bandwidth internet it requires, it's cheap enough (about $50 a month here including dry-loop and modem, plus $8 for Netflix itself) that they were able to drop their cable service which cost quite a bit more.
Unfortunately they've found that for movies, the selection from Netflix (streaming, that is, I don't know if their DVD-rental collection is any better) is pretty poor. I typically buy a dozen or so DVDs from Amazon every month, and anything I've lost interest in I'll set aside in case she wants it.
TV broadcasting may well die out entirely in the not so distant future -- between the internet, DVDs, and books, I haven't watched TV in years. But when and if that happens, I defy Netflix to take any credit for it.
I was assuming a world in which NetFlix indeed replaced television - and absorbed all media consumers. Hence, they would have to satisfy more than the current niche viewers you describe.
First world worries
Pretty much, lol. I know some folks on the other side of the globe who wish they just had a computer period, let alone something as insane (to them) as Netflix.
First I mostly agree with your detailed post . And today I found this, a quote by Discoverys CEO wich basically confirms what you said about the content
Not here it won't.
And that would be yet another problem with any streaming service "taking over".
Separate names with a comma.