HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
If you ask me, this is what Netflix should have been doing all along. Let their customers know who is screwing them instead of caving in and paying more money to companies like Comcast.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If you ask me, this is what Netflix should have been doing all along. Let their customers know who is screwing them instead of caving in and paying more money to companies like Comcast.
Yes, when Comcast & Verizon start losing customers over Netflix performance problems that'll get their attention! Netflix doesn't need to pay out more cash--that's futile. Also, I hope we're all on the same page about this being about *wired* connectivity--*wireless* probably will never be fast enough, at least in relation to wired Internet performance.
Also Netflix should buy Oolka. If they made SpeedTest work using Netflix videos it would help show more realistic speeds through these cable companies and make SpeedTest a useful tool and not just e-peen.
They could care less. If you don't have an alternative then you are screwed and they know it.
It's time to:
1. Turn telecoms into utilities.
2. Telecoms have to share lines with other providers. (ie: Verizon could pay lease time to Comcast to use their cable. Customer would get charged maintenance fees of lease line from Comcast. But data fees to Verizon)
Yes, when Comcast & Verizon start losing customers over Netflix performance problems that'll get their attention! Netflix doesn't need to pay out more cash--that's futile. Also, I hope we're all on the same page about this being about *wired* connectivity--*wireless* probably will never be fast enough, at least in relation to wired Internet performance.
They could care less. If you don't have an alternative then you are screwed and they know it.
It's time to:
1. Turn telecoms into utilities.
2. Telecoms have to share lines with other providers. (ie: Verizon could pay lease time to Comcast to use their cable. Customer would get charged maintenance fees of lease line from Comcast. But data fees to Verizon)
On Cox here.
Found out last week that my Amazon Prime membership includes streaming video for many tv shows and movies (movie selection is a bit weak for free ones). Watched some tv episodes I had missed and it worked great, was in HD.
Anyone who uses netflix, had a chance to compare it to amazon streaming?
Lose customers? How would that happen when the customers usually have nowhere else to go for internet service in most parts of the country?
Usually it's the choice between one cable provider and sometimes a slow DSL alternative. These companies know you'll take what they give you, complain all you like, they got you by the balls.
Yes, but they should do this for EVERY provider, not just Verizon and Comcast. Unknowing consumers need to be educated. Even the small/local ISPs are overselling their service/bandwidth in order to maximize profits.
The reason why I oppose that is pretty simply to understand: look how absolutely awful the regulated Telecom/land-line telephone system has become in its status as a common carrier. To get better service than that with the government controls you *have to* move up to an IP voice system--there's no other alternative, because it isn't affected by common-carrier POTs rules. The only thing that turning the ISPs into mini-AT&T land-lines would get us is that we'd all get the same lousy, bottom of the barrel service. And you don't like it and want to pay for something better? Forget it--Congress will have outlawed something better. I absolutely do not want *five people* on the FCC dictating what 300M Americans can get in the way of available services.
Customer backlash will work, most definitely. Microsoft turned many a 180 last year and every bit of it was caused by customer backlash. If people have the attitude that complaining won't help so why complain, well, that guarantees that nothing will get done.
Common-carrier designation works like this: you don't get guaranteed the best--you get guaranteed the bare minimum--translated: the worst. It is not a panacea, it is, imo, a cure worse than the disease.
After CNET's story was published, a Verizon spokesman told CNET in an e-mailed statement that the Netflix move "is a PR stunt," adding that his company is "investigating this claim, but it seems misleading and could confuse people."
Yes, when Comcast & Verizon start losing customers over Netflix performance problems that'll get their attention! Netflix doesn't need to pay out more cash--that's futile. Also, I hope we're all on the same page about this being about *wired* connectivity--*wireless* probably will never be fast enough, at least in relation to wired Internet performance.
The reason why I oppose that is pretty simply to understand: look how absolutely awful the regulated Telecom/land-line telephone system has become in its status as a common carrier. To get better service than that with the government controls you *have to* move up to an IP voice system--there's no other alternative, because it isn't affected by common-carrier POTs rules. The only thing that turning the ISPs into mini-AT&T land-lines would get us is that we'd all get the same lousy, bottom of the barrel service. And you don't like it and want to pay for something better? Forget it--Congress will have outlawed something better. I absolutely do not want *five people* on the FCC dictating what 300M Americans can get in the way of available services.
Customer backlash will work, most definitely. Microsoft turned many a 180 last year and every bit of it was caused by customer backlash. If people have the attitude that complaining won't help so why complain, well, that guarantees that nothing will get done.
Common-carrier designation works like this: you don't get guaranteed the best--you get guaranteed the bare minimum--translated: the worst. It is not a panacea, it is, imo, a cure worse than the disease.
Yup, I'm paying out the ass for ATT uverse and can't use my own modem so have to rent their crap... unfortunately, the only alternative is Comcast that I actually tried to get first but they kept screwing my order up so bad that I had to cancel the install service.Yep, I'm going to jump right on threatening to move my business to the other ISP in my area....oh wait..There isn't another option for me or most anyone else in the country. Well..fuck, I wonder how that happened?
On Cox here.
Found out last week that my Amazon Prime membership includes streaming video for many tv shows and movies (movie selection is a bit weak for free ones). Watched some tv episodes I had missed and it worked great, was in HD.
Anyone who uses netflix, had a chance to compare it to amazon streaming?
you would figure with as much money as they ding people every 30 days, we would all have 50Mbit pipes.
I got hit for $120 month for a single cell line, 450min/unlimited text/10GB of LTE.... i never used but maybe 10% of the entire package but they got their money every month. So basically they got almost 3000 dollars from me... and the actual cost to them was maybe...what? 50 bucks?
I will be very happy to sit back and watch them burn, along with any other company that thinks they can bully others into paying more and getting less.
Oolka consistently shows me averaging about 50Mb/ps in both directions these days, which seems about right. People on Netflix who haven't seen Netflix in its SuperHD mode (which also supports 5.1 dolby/DTS) have no idea how much better it is than standard Netflix HD. Night & day. Doesn't cost a penny extra from Netflix, but you can only get it through the right network and if you have the ISP bandwidth. (I get it through the Sony entertainment Network via my online Blu-Ray player.) Netflix will never seem the same--I deem it 98% as good as viewing a local BluRay disk in the drive.
That is because, so far as well know, Amazon streaming has not been affected as of yet. Netflix has the vast majority of streaming traffic so they are being singled out right now by providers. Rest assured though, if this activity is allowed to continue, Amazon will be subject to it at some point too.
The reason why I oppose that is pretty simply to understand: look how absolutely awful the regulated Telecom/land-line telephone system has become in its status as a common carrier. To get better service than that with the government controls you *have to* move up to an IP voice system--there's no other alternative, because it isn't affected by common-carrier POTs rules. The only thing that turning the ISPs into mini-AT&T land-lines would get us is that we'd all get the same lousy, bottom of the barrel service. And you don't like it and want to pay for something better? Forget it--Congress will have outlawed something better. I absolutely do not want *five people* on the FCC dictating what 300M Americans can get in the way of available services.
Customer backlash will work, most definitely. Microsoft turned many a 180 last year and every bit of it was caused by customer backlash. If people have the attitude that complaining won't help so why complain, well, that guarantees that nothing will get done.
Common-carrier designation works like this: you don't get guaranteed the best--you get guaranteed the bare minimum--translated: the worst. It is not a panacea, it is, imo, a cure worse than the disease.