Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Monday April 28 2014, @04:49AM   Printer-friendly
from the radio-station-to-have-newspaper-column dept.

The Washington Post reports:

Netflix has reached an agreement with three smaller cable companies that, for the first time, will let U.S. subscribers watch the streaming video service's content as though it were an ordinary cable channel. The deal will add Netflix as an app to certain set-top boxes nationwide on RCN, Grande Communications and Atlantic Broadband.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28 2014, @05:14AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28 2014, @05:14AM (#37032)

    Internet: 0 - Cable Monopolies: 10000000000000

    • (Score: 1) by timbim on Monday April 28 2014, @09:45AM

      by timbim (907) on Monday April 28 2014, @09:45AM (#37084)

      I tried emailing 10000000000000 via your link but nothing happened. Those sneaky bastards!

    • (Score: 2) by elf on Monday April 28 2014, @10:36AM

      by elf (64) on Monday April 28 2014, @10:36AM (#37096)

      1) This was for minor cable companies only, the more these smaller companies can compete the less of a monopoly the big few have.

      2) This is great for netflicks, the more they have their apps out there the more chance they can get more subscribers and therefore the less reliance they have on big cable companies.

  • (Score: 2) by edIII on Monday April 28 2014, @05:33AM

    by edIII (791) on Monday April 28 2014, @05:33AM (#37037)

    We are all just waiting for Net Neutrality events right now, but this may be nothing.

    From reading the article Netflix is simply available directly on the set top box and a single remote control acts as the inputs now. Really. They made emphasis that this was different because you had to press less buttons on the remote control and that was a big win for consumers today.

    It's not even for free either. You have to subscribe to the service level that gets the Tivo Box (Platinum acct?) and also subscribe to Netflix. Before you think that's not a big whoop, remember how you don't need to suffer the trauma of electronic panic associated with switching a source and using another remote.

    Remember that before today it was impossible to enjoy Netflix as if it was a cable channel which really just means one remote.

    Netflix is still getting paid, subscriber bandwidth is almost guaranteed for Netflix if you use the set top box and they want their app to actually work and perform. Netflix is now also on more supported devices being directly supported and endorsed by a cable company.

    How is this a bad deal for Netflix? It really sounds like, "We got down our knees real good and kissed Netflix's ass and asked them if we could include their programming on our crappy set top boxes. Thank God. They agreed. Contact the press and spin it."

    Of course I could just be missing something. Please let me know.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday April 28 2014, @05:52AM

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 28 2014, @05:52AM (#37041) Journal

      Of course I could just be missing something. Please let me know.

      Maybe the fact that this it is something resembling an involution: instead of creating or pushing for the creation of a better data network, a digital provider is forced to restrict itself to a level of service no different than an old analogue one.
      Yes, I know it is nothing new (so it is not a new story). However, it is still a story (with a meaning) that, IMHO, worth repeating.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 2) by edIII on Monday April 28 2014, @05:48PM

        by edIII (791) on Monday April 28 2014, @05:48PM (#37305)

        instead of creating or pushing for the creation of a better data network, a digital provider is forced to restrict itself to a level of service no different than an old analogue one.

        That's just it. I don't see either of those two points as being the truth. As a result I just don't find it that interesting and rather banal in nature.

        Netflix is really just being facilitated in this. The push for the creation of a better network is currently Netflix by the numbers. This is precisely why they are in so many fights. Contracts and equipment aside, Netflix is still being consumed. It's not going to be all that much longer before widespread adoption of 4k monitors and screens begins.

        To my knowledge 4k streaming will require approx ~50Mb/s of bandwidth per session. *THAT* is pressure and you can't get around it. Requires upgrading the last mile considerably, and that requires additional capacity all the way up to Tier 1.

        YouTube is just staying silent at the moment too with its 2160p streaming.

        Your second point is also invalidated IMO since according to the article consumers aren't restricted to the cable company either. They can still enjoy it on other devices of their choosing. So all of that pressure for change still exists either way from other devices.

        No where does it mention that the pricing for the consumer would go up IIRC. As such I don't see any of the negatives towards Net Neutrality that we as a group have always predicted. I'm not seeing the consumer being abused any more than normal, and Netflix is not restricted in its conduct on their network either.

        Where's the beef?

        --
        Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
  • (Score: 2) by zafiro17 on Monday April 28 2014, @02:49PM

    by zafiro17 (234) on Monday April 28 2014, @02:49PM (#37184) Homepage

    Crap - most of us are probably on Netflix because we think traditional cable tv companies are all terrible. Netflix provides a huge number of benefits traditional cable doesn't. This sounds to me like an admission by cable companies that they need to up their game. And it probably doesn't cost netflix that much to provide it. It's obtuse though in that Netflix is ultimately prolonging the demise of a system it will otherwise quite naturally replace.

    Die cable, die! I remember when cable TV was commercial free, because you'd already paid for it and they had no need to get advertisers for revenue. How long did that last, like 45 minutes? Now you pay and get commercials anyway. Plus the programs suck.

    Hell, Netflix isn't too many meters away from fail either. They need to expand their catalog fast. All that awesome old stuff they used to have in their disc catalog has vanished, replaced by streaming of a couple hundred blockbuster garbage flicks. Boring!

    --
    Dad always thought laughter was the best medicine, which I guess is why several of us died of tuberculosis - Jack Handey
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28 2014, @09:53PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 28 2014, @09:53PM (#37409)

      I remember when cable TV was commercial free, because you'd already paid for it and they had no need to get advertisers for revenue.

      You remember wrong. Cable simply brought over-the-air stations to people who couldn't get them.

      Also, if you can't get fiber, cable is the only way to go for decent home Internets. DSL is okay if you're next to the DSLAM, otherwise the speed is atrocious if service is even available.

  • (Score: 1) by e_armadillo on Monday April 28 2014, @04:36PM

    by e_armadillo (3695) on Monday April 28 2014, @04:36PM (#37264)

    Will this somehow help them to address their streaming content holes? I doubt it. Most of the series I would want to watch are only partially available on streaming, the same goes for movies. I am still actively filling the DVD queue so that I can watch what I want. I for one would feel no draw to a dedicated channel for another way to access streaming that I feel is inadequate if that alternative doesn't fix what is wrong with it.

    --
    "How are we gonna get out of here?" ... "We'll dig our way out!" ... "No, no, dig UP stupid!"
  • (Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday April 29 2014, @12:17PM

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 29 2014, @12:17PM (#37615)

    Here's a simpler way to think about it.

    For a couple years, if you own your own settop box (a roku, or many others) you can already get the netflix app and some streaming services for a wide variety of channels. So if you own your settop box, having both netflix and "channels" on one box is really old news, like welcome to the late 00s or whatever.

    Now, if you pay a monthly rental to borrow someone else's settop box, that box finally is capable of netflix and "channels".

    Or by furniture analogy, you've always been able to own a couch. The news is the local rental center will now loan you a couch for only, say, 1/6th the cost of the couch per month on a multi-year contract.