Netflix Blog

Worth mentioning that Netflix has a similar effort: http://blog.netflix.com/2014/01/new-isp-performance-data-for-december.… http://ispspeedindex.netflix.com/

from their blog post http://blog.netflix.com/2011/09/netflix-launches-in-latin-america.html Read the 1st comment http://yfrog.com/18s1ep "Fantastic. Does that mean if I have a US account I can use it when I visit these countries?" Answer: "yes you can, but you will be able to see only the content available in country you are visiting"

I disagree. I had 3 roommates at one point, and all 4 of us were subscribe to Netflix. It was VERY easy for us to hit the cap with everyone watching Netflix alone, let alone playing games or streaming music in the common areas. After I moved out and got married, my wife and kid routinely have Netflix playing in the background as they sit at home during the day while I'm at work. When I go home, I usually have work to do at home as well, which only adds to the usage. Using numbers found in the article, if you use Netflix on a daily basis for 3 hours a day watching HD content purely, it would park you at about 210GB of the 250GB cap according to Netflix themselves: http://blog.netflix.com/2011/03/netflix-lowers-data-usage-by-23-for.ht… So yes, using Netflix and Pandora can easily put you over the cap. EDIT (for clarity): This article talks about the quality settings in the account settings area, but if you adjust the settings to allow for highest resolution, it would still apply.

Netflix requires 20mbit http://blog.netflix.com/2014/05/netflix-now-streaming-in-ultra-hd-4k.h…

Netflix has actually addressed this in one of their blog posts: http://blog.netflix.com/2014/03/internet-tolls-and-case-for-strong-net… > But when we ask them if we too would qualify for no-fee interconnect if we changed our service to upload as much data as we download -- thus filling their upstream networks and nearly doubling our total traffic -- there is an uncomfortable silence. That's because the ISP argument isn't sensible. Big ISPs aren't paying money to services like online backup that generate more upstream than downstream traffic. Data direction, in other words, has nothing to do with costs. > in other words, moving to peer-to-peer content delivery

Yes. http://blog.netflix.com/2014/03/internet-tolls-and-case-for-strong-net…

Not quite, this blog post from Netflix highlights a couple key differences in their case: http://blog.netflix.com/2014/04/the-case-against-isp-tolls.html > Transit networks like Level3, XO, Cogent and Tata perform two important services: (1) they carry traffic over long distances and (2) they provide access to every network on the global Internet. When Netflix connects directly to the Comcast network, Comcast is not providing either of the services typically provided by transit networks.

I don't know if we can trust that graphic but it seems like they already does. http://blog.netflix.com/2014/04/the-case-against-isp-tolls.html

Netflix's blog post lays out the argument here: http://blog.netflix.com/2014/04/the-case-against-isp-tolls.html (The relevant quote is: "(1) [Transit Networks (e.g. Cogent)] carry traffic over long distances and (2) they provide access to every network on the global Internet. When Netflix connects directly to the Comcast network, Comcast is not providing either of the services typically provided by transit networks.") Netflix is questioning the premise of your question by suggesting that Cogent and Comcast are _not_ providing the same service. I find the argument fairly compelling, though I'd be willing to hear counter-arguments.

If you recall, they had a huge problem streaming to them. http://blog.netflix.com/2010/11/netflix-on-android.html Netflix delayed their offering, and then restricted it to a few devices for quite some time, and now makes heavy use of the Android DRM framework. This doesn't exist on desktop Linux, and I doubt it could even be incorporated (however pragmatic) given the knee-jerk reaction to anything DRM.

And the related blog post: http://blog.netflix.com/2014/01/new-isp-performance-data-for-december.…

Seems kind of similar to Max, from Netflix themselves: http://blog.netflix.com/2013/06/let-max-be-your-netflix-guide-on-ps3.h… Although I really only watch on my TV and not my computer, I like the concept and it seems well implemented. Cracking the nut of figuring out what to watch is a tough one, that's for sure. Good luck!

Non-mobile version: http://blog.netflix.com/2013/03/introducing-netflix-social.html

I googled it, they dumped the friends feature in 2010. Given that it took a year and a half for me to notice, it's hard to fault them too much. http://blog.netflix.com/2010/03/friends-update.html

Here's the accompanying Netflix blog post: http://blog.netflix.com/2012/06/announcing-netflix-open-connect-networ…

There was more outcry than just the petition. Lots of people emailed in, tweeted, whatever. The official "OK, we're not killing profiles" message does not address the petition directly: http://blog.netflix.com/2008/06/profiles-feature-not-going-away.html

The tone on this one is quite a bit different: http://blog.netflix.com/2011/10/dvds-will-be-staying-at-netflixcom.htm… The email that came a few weeks ago actually had me stop what I was doing and read it (I was walking in to grab coffee, and I stopped outside to finish the email). That message was full of excitement, and started with a proper "Dear Customers: I screwed up". Why haven't I gotten an email this morning saying something similar? This time you really did screw up. This time, I cancalled my service (And there is about 0 chance that I'm re-instating it)

Reed Hastings articulated it pretty well recently - "Companies rarely die from moving too fast, and they frequently die from moving too slowly." http://blog.netflix.com/2011/09/explanation-and-some-reflections.html

Netflix does listen to user feedback. Back in 08, the profiles feature almost got the ax before vocal user feedback convinced them to keep it. I'm sure they're listening, regardless of what the final outcome is. June 19, 2008 - Removing Profiles - http://blog.netflix.com/2008/06/profiles-feature-going-away.html June 30, 2008 - Nevermind - http://blog.netflix.com/2008/06/profiles-feature-not-going-away.html (Work has any URL with "netflix.com" blocked, so I'm guessing these are right blog posts.)

Netflix employee here. I've been reading all the comments here and at Reed's blog to understand what everyone has to say about the split. Internally, we've known about the split for some time now. Why do you think this is a terrible move? Your comment has a lot of unflattering comparisons, but doesn't explain why the move is stupid. Also, you're probably right that DVD as a service will not last forever, and Reed understands that too (he mentions this in the post as well - http://blog.netflix.com/2011/09/explanation-and-some-reflections.html)… DVD service may not last very long, but right now, it is a growing business.

Hastings replied to that question in the Netflix blog post's comments: [1] Question: "If a film I search for on Netflix is not available for streaming, will the website still tell me if the DVD is available? Or must I search twice?" Reply: "ouch. You'd have to search the second place if we didn't have it in the first place." [1] http://blog.netflix.com/2011/09/explanation-and-some-reflections.html

It is not indicated via techcrunch, but in the original announcement it was explicitly stated there will be no integration and separate accounts: "A negative of the renaming and separation is that the Qwikster.com and Netflix.com websites will not be integrated." http://blog.netflix.com/2011/09/explanation-and-some-reflections.html

NetFlix has been trying to implement captions[1], it's actually a lot more challenging then you'd think (with a library as large as NetFlix's). They've been rolling it out slowly the past few months, but I'll at least give them credit for trying. I had never noticed the lack of closed captioning on online video until I dated a deaf girl a few years ago, and then you sort of notice how much content exists that is suboptimal when you can't hear. [1] http://blog.netflix.com/2011/02/30-of-netflix-streaming-content-has.ht…

Thanks, I wasn't aware that their HD bandwidth requirements were as modest as 2.6-3.8 Mb/s, from both a more effective codec and limiting fidelity to 720p30 stereo. http://blog.netflix.com/2008/11/encoding-for-streaming.html

Somewhat OT. What does a Netflix streamed movie consume, these days? I recall looking some months ago on their site, but I couldn't find any hard numbers (leaving the impression on me that this was on purpose). I guess next time I watch one, I can fire up a monitor. -- EDIT: Answering myself, partially. My Google-fu is apparently a bit better, today. This is a bit dated, but provides some figures (bless dslreports): http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r22164481-Netflix-bandwidth-Is-1GBhr-a… It also cites this link: http://blog.netflix.com/2008/11/encoding-for-streaming.html There's probably better information, but this seems to provide enough of a ballpark for my current interest, the one caveat being any changes in the year or two since.

Perhaps this explains one of the most ridiculous posts I've seen from a corporate blog in a long time? http://blog.netflix.com/2009/06/closed-captions-and-subtitles.html Essentially them complaining it will take a year to implement closed-captioning because silverlight can't process SAMI files automatically (basically glorified text bolding/syncing) After I read that I guessed there was something wholly wrong with their corporate culture and management.

I suspect that this is to cover privacy issues. They don't want a repeat of what happened with the Netflix Prize. The Netflix Prize 2 was canceled because of the privacy issues involved with the data set (http://blog.netflix.com/2010/03/this-is-neil-hunt-chief-product-office… The FAQ states that participants will be randomly audited to ensure that they are satisfying data privacy standards.

Netflix streams some content in 720p, and most compression issues are related to bandwidth and the preference for continuity of play rather than quality of play. If I'm rate-limiting anything I download, though, I don't have problems even with HD. http://blog.netflix.com/2010/05/now-streaming-in-hd-on-pc-and-mac_14.h…

There's been some fascinating developments in this area in just the past few days. MySpace is now releasing similar data commercially through Infochimps: http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/myspace_bulk_data.php NetFlix get slammed by the FTC: http://blog.netflix.com/2010/03/this-is-neil-hunt-chief-product-office… and Arvind & co summarize the latest research on why anonymization is (mostly) broken as a security measure: http://33bits.org/2010/03/15/open-letter-to-netflix/ Big Data is getting bigger...

It's true that much of the streaming content is not HD, but Netflix goes to interesting lengths to get the original sources and re-encode them for a better streaming experience. http://blog.netflix.com/2008/11/encoding-for-streaming.html has the details. They're not just taking the original SD broadcast signal and digitizing it. So even though it wasn't made in HD, in many cases it looks better than it ever did when it was first broadcast, or even than seen on DVD.