# Netflix vs. DirecTV Cinema



## Filibogado (Apr 3, 2010)

I want to switch from Netflix to DirecTV Cinema Pay for View only because, while you get tons more movies on Netflix, I really don't have time to watch that many movies, most of which are mediocre anyway. I just want to watch the latest and greatest quality movies given my limited time.

My problem, though, is that on DirecTV movies must be viewed on the same day that it is broadcast. This is impractical for me because I can never guarantee that I can have a 2 hour block of free time in only 1 day. I'd like the flexibility of saving the movie to my HD DVR for later viewing over a longer time period. I can do this on PPV boxing events like Pacquiao vs. Cotto, so why can't I record the PPV movie in the same manner and watch it anytime at my convenience. This must-view-on-broadcast-day rule is a deal-breaker. Any solution to my dilemma?

Fil


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

ppv time starts after you first view it so you can record it and watch it anytime.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

The monthly cost ($8.99 SD, $10.99 HD) of a Netflix "one-out" subscription was cheaper than buying two DIRECTV Cinema new releases ($4.99 each for SD, $5.99 for HD). It would seem that you could get 10 recent releases from Netflix for less than the price of two from DIRECTV.

Cost can't be the motivation to "rent" from DIRECTV.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

Directv ppv doesnt like OAR.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

gfrang said:


> ppv time starts after you first view it so you can record it and watch it anytime.


Recent release movies come from DIRECTV Cinema and the rules are different there.


DIRECTV Answer Center said:


> Why are my DIRECTV Cinema™ movies being deleted from my DVR?
> 
> The movie studios made an industry-wide policy change in 2008 that applies to all satellite and cable providers. As a result, DIRECTV Cinema™ movies purchased and recorded to DVR receivers must now be automatically deleted after 24 hours.
> 
> ...


As DIRECTV points out, their hands are tied on the duration of the rental. They have control over what they charge and they seem to favor the rather high price point.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

dcowboy7 said:


> Directv ppv doesnt like OAR.


The 2 1080p PPVs I've seen were OAR.


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

The streaming is what brought me back to Netflix,i only do ppv if it is something i been waiting to watch,very rare.


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

harsh said:


> Recent release movies come from DIRECTV Cinema and the rules are different there.As DIRECTV points out, their hands are tied on the duration of the rental. They have control over what they charge and they seem to favor the rather high price point.


Yea i knew DIRECTV Cinema and ppv are different but i wasn't aware of the different rules.


----------



## LarryFlowers (Sep 22, 2006)

Filibogado said:


> I want to switch from Netflix to DirecTV Cinema Pay for View only because, while you get tons more movies on Netflix, I really don't have time to watch that many movies, most of which are mediocre anyway. I just want to watch the latest and greatest quality movies given my limited time.
> 
> My problem, though, is that on DirecTV movies must be viewed on the same day that it is broadcast. This is impractical for me because I can never guarantee that I can have a 2 hour block of free time in only 1 day. I'd like the flexibility of saving the movie to my HD DVR for later viewing over a longer time period. I can do this on PPV boxing events like Pacquiao vs. Cotto, so why can't I record the PPV movie in the same manner and watch it anytime at my convenience. This must-view-on-broadcast-day rule is a deal-breaker. Any solution to my dilemma?
> 
> Fil


You actually are dealing with 2 timing issues here with DirecTV Cinema:

1. With the exception of those PPV movies that DirecTV stores on their portion of your DVR (the ones with the green check marks) a ppV movie that you download has a limited time it will remain on your drive without you viewing it. Maybe someone who actually buys PPV can tell you how long.
2. Once you start watching the movie, you have just 24 hrs. to complete watching the movie.

With Netflix, you do not have these timing issues, but the selection of movies for streaming is limited though steadily improving. However, with Netflix, you can also just select a movie(s) and have them shipped to you and you have no limits on those either.

As Netflix pretty consistently achieves one day turnarounds, even a 1 at a time subscription has the potential to yield more than 6 movies a month.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Netflix may be in for some changes soon though. Netflix is a good service but there are times when friends pop over and we want to watch something new. That's when I check the Cinema. I wouldn't do it every night but once or twice a month is no different than saying I won't buy something at a gas station when a store is cheaper. If I want it then I'll pay the increased price.

I think both service have their places. With some new changes being proposed though we'll see how Netflix adapts.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

LarryFlowers said:


> You actually are dealing with 2 timing issues here with DirecTV Cinema:
> 
> 1. With the exception of those PPV movies that DirecTV stores on their portion of your DVR (the ones with the green check marks) a ppV movie that you download has a limited time it will remain on your drive without you viewing it. Maybe someone who actually buys PPV can tell you how long.
> 2. Once you start watching the movie, you have just 24 hrs. to complete watching the movie.
> ...


Actually, the 24 hour limit starts when you purchase the movie, which is not necessarily when you start to watch it. However, you can record the movie ahead of time and then when you start to watch it you pay for it at that time. That way you can have the recording on your DVR for an extended time before you purchase it. There is an expiration date though for unpurchased movies though, so if you wait too long, the movie will automatically be deleted.

- Merg


----------



## Filibogado (Apr 3, 2010)

The Merg said:


> Actually, the 24 hour limit starts when you purchase the movie, which is not necessarily when you start to watch it. However, you can record the movie ahead of time and then when you start to watch it you pay for it at that time. That way you can have the recording on your DVR for an extended time before you purchase it. There is an expiration date though for unpurchased movies though, so if you wait too long, the movie will automatically be deleted.
> 
> - Merg


Well, I finally jumped in, but ended up doing it in reverse order, because your replies came a tad too late. I first ordered it and paid $5.99 up front. After I paid for it, I saw this "Record to Receiver" tab for the first time. And the price is $4.99, not the $5.99 HD. So is it too lste to record to receiver now that I've already paid? In the future, I will select the record now, pay later option but I want the HD version, not the regular one.

Also, if I paid for it as I just did, and I failed to watch it at all during the 24-hour window, do I forfeit my payment, or could I re-record again without being double-billed or my earlier payment forfeited?


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

harsh said:


> Recent release movies come from DIRECTV Cinema and the rules are different there.As DIRECTV points out, their hands are tied on the duration of the rental. They have control over what they charge and they seem to favor the rather high price point.


You may have found this on the internet but if you checked the DVR itself (can you do that as a Dish customer?), you would find out that today it says, "The program will be deleted if not viewed by Sat 8/28 8pm."

This is what it says for movies recorded in the 100s as well as the downloaded or autorecorded movies.


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

Filibogado said:


> In the future, I will select the record now, pay later option but I want the HD version, not the regular one.


I'm not sure because I don't buy PPV, but I was of the understanding that the HD versions are on different channels than the SD ones. HD in the 124 channel range maybe???


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

Both have their benefits. For me, A/V quality trumps all. Netflix (blu-ray) wins hands down.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Filibogado said:


> Well, I finally jumped in, but ended up doing it in reverse order, because your replies came a tad too late. I first ordered it and paid $5.99 up front. After I paid for it, I saw this "Record to Receiver" tab for the first time. And the price is $4.99, not the $5.99 HD. So is it too lste to record to receiver now that I've already paid? In the future, I will select the record now, pay later option but I want the HD version, not the regular one.
> 
> Also, if I paid for it as I just did, and I failed to watch it at all during the 24-hour window, do I forfeit my payment, or could I re-record again without being double-billed or my earlier payment forfeited?


Once you are watching the showing, you can record it at that point. However, if you are watching it "Live" that means that you did pay for it and thus would still only have 24 hours to watch it. The benefit of recording it without paying for it is that if the movie is removed from DirecTV Cinema, PPV, or DoD, it will remain on your receiver until the expiration date. Also, by recording it ahead of time, you don't need to worry about waiting for the start time to watch it or for some of it to download before watching.

As for recording the HD vs. SD version, just make sure that you are on the HD PPV/DirecTV Cinema channels.

- Merg


----------



## David MacLeod (Jan 29, 2008)

no contest here, netflix its prevalent for a reason.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

I just helped a friend setup his new 46" HDTV and the Netflix queue directly to the TV. The picture quality left a LOT to be desired!


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> You may have found this on the internet but if you checked the DVR itself (can you do that as a Dish customer?), you would find out that today it says, "The program will be deleted if not viewed by Sat 8/28 8pm."
> 
> This is what it says for movies recorded in the 100s as well as the downloaded or autorecorded movies.


Don't you just love when people without first hand knowledge of something try to dispense info? :nono2:

In other news - did you guys hear that Dish DVRs automatically shut themselves down at 8pm every night and don't turn back on until 11pm? And if you press the Channel Up button on them they freeze and require that you reset? *

* No, not really. I don't know how Dish DVRs work because I've never had one. Therefore I don't troll in the Dish forums trying to advise people about them.

To answer the OP - I'd still stick with Netflix.


----------



## braven (Apr 9, 2007)

tcusta00 said:


> Don't you just love when people without first hand knowledge of something try to dispense info? :nono2:
> 
> In other news - did you guys hear that Dish DVRs automatically shut themselves down at 8pm every night and don't turn back on until 11pm? And if you press the Channel Up button on them they freeze and require that you reset? *
> 
> ...


This is the funniest post I've read in quite awhile. :lol: :lol: How true! +1


----------



## Lancelink (Feb 6, 2007)

dennisj00 said:


> I just helped a friend setup his new 46" HDTV and the Netflix queue directly to the TV. The picture quality left a LOT to be desired!


Did you check out his internet and network speed? Netflix checks the available bandwidth before the movie starts and during playback to determine the streaming rate. Without a solid 3.5 Mbps the quality will be automatically lowered so the movie is less likely to stall. So think of it as a pipe. If the pipe isn't big enough the service will automatically reduce the quality to fit in the pipe.

While 3.5Mbps doesn't sound like much in today's world, achieving it is not always so easy. Many wireless networks, despite the _maximum_ throughput advertised, really struggle to get over 3Mbps. So even if you have 20Mbps internet into the home, once you go to wireless getting enough to stream an HD movie can be challenging.

So as not to hijack the thread I will leave it at that. Just consider that the quality is determined by many factors but given enough available bandwidth Netflix picture quality is pretty good. It's not bluray (yet) but IMO it's quite acceptable. If you want to try and increase the bandwidth to the TV try searching here or at AVS. There are a number of how tos to improve things.


----------



## David MacLeod (Jan 29, 2008)

dennisj00 said:


> I just helped a friend setup his new 46" HDTV and the Netflix queue directly to the TV. The picture quality left a LOT to be desired!


so much of that is dependent on broadband connection, if not a very fast one it is noticeable.
but the dvd/bd are nice and NOT dependent in speed


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

I'll also add that speed makes a big difference. I'd go with at least a 6 meg connection to ensure you get that 3-4 solid, or at least hope you do. If the ISP has latency issues that can really effect it as well and Netflix (and Hulu) will "dial down" the quality based on the connection quality.

Also using wireless in the house, even N, can cause quality issues as well. Best way is fully wired using Cat5/6.

I have an HTPC and we stream Netflix quite a bit and the quality while not HD is quite good. Also depends on the source as well, older TV shows and movies for example look like poop no matter what you do. But newer stuff looks quite good. Not HD but certainly good enough (for us anyway). And if I just can't watch it not in HD then I'll just get the Bluray for it from my queue.

Also an option with an HTPC is you can rip your DVD and Bluray collection to local disk storage which makes your entire collection "instant play". This can be nice for those times you have friends over and you just want to watch a movie.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

tonyd79 said:


> You may have found this on the internet but if you checked the DVR itself (can you do that as a Dish customer?), you would find out that today it says, "The program will be deleted if not viewed by Sat 8/28 8pm."


I quoted the DIRECTV website as noted. It seems very explicit.

This thread is specifically about DIRECTV Cinema. To salt it with discussion of non-Cinema channels is off topic.


----------



## islesfan (Oct 18, 2006)

I don't use either. Netflix seems like the better option, but I watch so few movies that I usually just buy the occasional DVD. I used to use PPV until it became a complete ripoff. $6 for a 24 hour viewing window v. $9 - $16 for unlimited viewing (if I buy the DVD) makes little sense. Add to that rhe fact that I can make a few bucks back on the DVD on EBAY if I don't want to keep it, and the other options make little sense for me.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

harsh said:


> I quoted the DIRECTV website as noted. It seems very explicit.
> 
> *This thread is specifically about DIRECTV Cinema. To salt it with discussion of non-Cinema channels is off topic.*


Well, if you had DirecTV you would know that what tonyd79 was saying was in fact regarding DirecTV Cinema.

I checked on mine and a bunch of the prerecorded programs (Sherlock Holmes for example) (which are DirecTV Cinema) do have expirations dates around 8/22. That is until it is deleted. If you buy it though it will be void within 24hrs as it is a 24hr rental.

In looking at the PPVs in the guide, if you click on them and hit Record (not Buy/Watch) there does not seem to be a stated date that they would be automatically deleted. In fact it gives you options like keep until I delete.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Grentz said:


> Well, if you had DirecTV you would know that what tonyd79 was saying was in fact regarding DirecTV Cinema.


Hearsay and conjecture is always better than firsthand experience.


----------



## Tecmo SB Guy (Sep 28, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> Netflix may be in for some changes soon though.
> 
> <rest of post deleted>
> 
> With some new changes being proposed though we'll see how Netflix adapts.


Just curious here. What changes for Netflix are you talking about?

Personally I think Netflix blows away Direct and Dish PPV. As far as new is concerned, if I haven't seen it before it's "new" to me.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

In reference to the Netflix download quality, his DSL (6MB) checked out around 5.3 download and the TV was directly wired to the Linksys router 10' away. In addition to the poor picture quality, the screen was cropped on all 4 sides. 

It was the movie Wall-E and I had just looked at the DirecTV version on one of my DVRs - full width and no gradient shading (not sure if that's the right description of some of the solid screens) - almost a macroblocking on the Netflix download.

Maybe the TV / instant download downgrades it since there's no buffering?

But it looks good on the iPad!!


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

harsh said:


> I quoted the DIRECTV website as noted. It seems very explicit.
> 
> This thread is specifically about DIRECTV Cinema. To salt it with discussion of non-Cinema channels is off topic.


Goody for you.

But if you go to the RECEIVER (you know, one of those things you don't have) it says completely different. Hmm, which one is more legally binding, the notice when you make the purchase or a web page that you may never go to.

And if you could actually READ what I wrote, the notice is the SAME for all types of PPV movies. They do not differentiate.

But nice of you to try to help on SOMETHING YOU HAVE NO EXPERIENCE WITH.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

dennisj00 said:


> In reference to the Netflix download quality, his DSL (6MB) checked out around 5.3 download and the TV was directly wired to the Linksys router 10' away. In addition to the poor picture quality, the screen was cropped on all 4 sides.
> 
> It was the movie Wall-E and I had just looked at the DirecTV version on one of my DVRs - full width and no gradient shading (not sure if that's the right description of some of the solid screens) - almost a macroblocking on the Netflix download.
> 
> ...


So you're saying this is a built in app in the TV? If so it's very possible that it is very, very basic and doesn't support the high quality streams and doesn't allow for proper aspect ratio and stuff. Would probably be much better if he streamed Netflix thru just about anything from a PC to a Roku box or a PS3/Xbox/Wii. Even most Bluray players now come with Netflix streaming built in.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

Yes, it's a 46 Sony Ex700 (I think) LCD / LED backlight . . .once we connected a network cable, it showed 20 or so 'apps' for Netflix, Amazon, Livestrong, etc. and more to come. . .

While the TV looked great even on his TWC cable. . .(not as good as D. . . ) the instant download left a lot to be desired. a LOT!


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

dennisj00 said:


> Yes, it's a 46 Sony Ex700 (I think) LCD / LED backlight . . .once we connected a network cable, it showed 20 or so 'apps' for Netflix, Amazon, Livestrong, etc. and more to come. . .
> 
> While the TV looked great even on his TWC cable. . .(not as good as D. . . ) the instant download left a lot to be desired. a LOT!


Wall-E isn't a HD stream. Try an HD show/movie. I streamed Seasons 1-5 of Lost...they were damn near perfect.


----------



## DogLover (Mar 19, 2007)

dennisj00 said:


> Yes, it's a 46 Sony Ex700 (I think) LCD / LED backlight . . .once we connected a network cable, it showed 20 or so 'apps' for Netflix, Amazon, Livestrong, etc. and more to come. . .
> 
> While the TV looked great even on his TWC cable. . .(not as good as D. . . ) the instant download left a lot to be desired. a LOT!


It's either the app on the Sony or as others have mentioned the bandwidth. I just bought a new Vizio that has similar apps. The Netflix streaming looks amazing.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

And HD streaming isn't available other then on Roku (and maybe the game systems). Even a PC can't stream HD as Netflix blocks HD streaming to the PC.

But yea, it's the TV. Did a quick search and the CNET review complains about how poor the pictute quality is of the built in Netflix app. http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-...ex700/4505-6482_7-33949890.html?tag=mncol;lst

From the review:


> Netflix is the main draw on the EX700, but according to our tests, it's video qualty fell significantly behind the quality we've seen from other Netflix devices...





> It was as if the Sony was streaming Netflix video at a lower bit-rate, although we couldn't confirm that since, unlike most Netflix devices, the Sony interface gives no indication of what streaming quality you can expect.


Like I suggested, try using a PC, Roku, Bluray player or game console and you'll get much better results. And if you want to stream HD then make sure you get a device that will actually do it.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

bonscott87 said:


> *And HD streaming isn't available other then on Roku (and maybe the game systems). Even a PC can't stream HD as Netflix blocks HD streaming to the PC.*
> 
> ...


Just want to add...some Bluray players stream HD, too.


----------



## David MacLeod (Jan 29, 2008)

sigma1914 said:


> Just want to add...some Bluray players stream HD, too.


correct


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 28, 2005)

I went for the Roku HD ($99) and I've been extremely happy with it. I have wireless G but my broadband is so good that I always get 4 dots and get HD when it's available.

Developers are doing a lot with the Roku and their Channel Store. You can get things like Amazon VOD, Pandora, twit.tv, MediaFly, etc. One developer has created a channel where you can get maybe 150 RSS video feeds, things like CBS Evening News, many of the Fox News programs, tons of PBS/NPR programs, etc. All of that is free.


----------



## ThePrisoner (Jul 11, 2009)

I rented from Directv Cinema today. I didn't want to wait for Netflix to receive Sherlock Holmes on Blu-ray so I decided to spend $6 for 1080p presentation. A few days ago I received a $4 coupon from Directv. I threw it in the trash. Do you think I could call them and get $4 off Sherlock Holmes PPV?


----------



## jimisham (Jun 24, 2003)

Tecmo SB Guy said:


> Just curious here. What changes for Netflix are you talking about?
> 
> Personally I think Netflix blows away Direct and Dish PPV. As far as new is concerned, if I haven't seen it before it's "new" to me.


One change would be the proposed change to 5 day a week mail delivery.
If the deleted day is Saturday, that could add up to quite a few 3 day weekends each year with no mail.


----------



## Kapeman (Dec 22, 2003)

The Netflix streaming to a PS3 is excellent, even over wireless.

There are the occasional issues, but I attribute that more to the original print than to the streaming aspect.


----------



## EVAC41 (Jun 27, 2006)

What I found out with streaming Netflex is that it takes up a lot of bandwidth and a lot more if the movie is HD.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

DD 5.1 is coming to Netflix streaming this year.


----------



## David MacLeod (Jan 29, 2008)

the 28 day rule is probably the mentioned change.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Lancelink said:


> Did you check out his internet and network speed? Netflix checks the available bandwidth before the movie starts and during playback to determine the streaming rate. Without a solid 3.5 Mbps the quality will be automatically lowered so the movie is less likely to stall. So think of it as a pipe. If the pipe isn't big enough the service will automatically reduce the quality to fit in the pipe.
> 
> While 3.5Mbps doesn't sound like much in today's world, achieving it is not always so easy. Many wireless networks, despite the _maximum_ throughput advertised, really struggle to get over 3Mbps. So even if you have 20Mbps internet into the home, once you go to wireless getting enough to stream an HD movie can be challenging.
> 
> So as not to hijack the thread I will leave it at that. Just consider that the quality is determined by many factors but given enough available bandwidth Netflix picture quality is pretty good. It's not bluray (yet) but IMO it's quite acceptable. If you want to try and increase the bandwidth to the TV try searching here or at AVS. There are a number of how tos to improve things.


I think I get a better 720p picture using my Roku box to stream NetFlix than I get from D*. I have a good Panny plasma 50" 720p in the master bedroom and the PQ from the Roku box is really good. Maybe it's just my imagination, but I really think it's better than what D* pumps out.

My speeds right now are 30.5 down and 5.13 up. And I use an Ethernet cable for the Roku box.

Rich


----------



## Skyboss (Jan 22, 2004)

dennisj00 said:



> I just helped a friend setup his new 46" HDTV and the Netflix queue directly to the TV. The picture quality left a LOT to be desired!


Yeah, I gave it a test ride for about a month. Got sick of the PQ and lack of anything new available. There must be a better way!!!!


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> Wall-E isn't a HD stream. Try an HD show/movie. I streamed Seasons 1-5 of Lost...they were damn near perfect.


I just watched all the _Heroes_ on my Roku box, each season I mean, just to catch up before I watched the last season and the PQ on the Roku box was great. Not BD great, but for 750p, really good.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

DogLover said:


> It's either the app on the Sony or as others have mentioned the bandwidth. I just bought a new Vizio that has similar apps. The Netflix streaming looks amazing.


I tried a Sony BD player that streamed NetFlix and I thought the Roku box was simpler to use and gave better PQ.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Hoosier205 said:


> DD 5.1 is coming to Netflix streaming this year.


I hope when they do that they improve the selection of HD movies and TV programs. Pretty slim pickings on the 720p content now.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

DogLover said:


> It's either the app on the Sony or as others have mentioned the bandwidth. I just bought a new Vizio that has similar apps. The Netflix streaming looks amazing.


That E700 only has the Bravia Two engine (whatever that means). The Sonys with the really good pictures have the Bravia Three engines (whatever that means). I've seen side by side comparisons and the the Bravia Three engine blows the E700s away. And the 60" E700 costs about $2800. Don't know what the 46" cost, but for a couple hundred dollars more, he could have gotten the one with the Bravia Three engine and got a much better picture.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

jimisham said:


> One change would be the proposed change to 5 day a week mail delivery.
> If the deleted day is Saturday, that could add up to quite a few 3 day weekends each year with no mail.


I get the five DVD package and that seems to last all thru the weekends if I space them out correctly. With the change that the Postal Service is talking about, I might jack it up to six DVDs. I think eight DVDs is the maximum. If you do that, you really don't need D* or Dish or cable.

Rich


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

rich584 said:


> I think I get a better 720p picture using my Roku box to stream NetFlix than I get from D*. I have a good Panny plasma 50" 720p in the master bedroom and the PQ from the Roku box is really good. Maybe it's just my imagination, but I really think it's better than what D* pumps out.
> 
> My speeds right now are 30.5 down and 5.13 up. And I use an Ethernet cable for the Roku box.
> 
> Rich


You mean better than ANY 720p from DirecTV? I have DirecTV and Roku and somehow I seriously doubt that. I can tell the difference even though Roku is quite acceptable and I have no download speed issues whatsoever.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> You mean better than ANY 720p from DirecTV? I have DirecTV and Roku and somehow I seriously doubt that. I can tell the difference even though Roku is quite acceptable and I have no download speed issues whatsoever.


Yeah, any 720p from D*. Not live, I rarely watch live TV. But when I was watching _Heroes_ I hit the Info button on my TV to see what resolution it was receiving. I thought it was getting 1080i, but the TV said 720p. But I didn't have two TVs side by side and maybe it was just my imagination. I do think that the Roku is more than quite acceptable, but again, that's a subjective opinion.

I've never had a download speed issue either. I do have problems with downloading PPV movies from D*. I have a room that doesn't have an Ethernet connection in it and I use the WGA 600N game adapter. Doesn't work well. Works fine with my BD player for updates, but the last time we downloaded a PPV movie it played OK for half the movie and then was choppy the rest of the way. After that, I had to reset the 600N. Gave up on wireless in that room.

Rich


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

Hmm, given that DirecTV downloads are not streaming, not sure why the connection quality would affect it.

Why are you getting 720p on NBC? Does your local channel do 720P (NBC is typically 1080i) or do you have something setup wrong?

As for Heroes, the issue could be your local station. But you are in New Jersey so that is either Philly or New York, so I am confused. I seriously doubt the bitrates are higher on Roku than on broadcast TV. 

BTW, I have watched some of Heroes via Roku. It was among the best I have seen on Roku but I could still tell it was not my local NBC.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> Hmm, given that DirecTV downloads are not streaming, not sure why the connection quality would affect it.


I don't understand.

All I know is that every time I try to use the 600N on one of my HRs it doesn't work correctly. I can't even get MRV with it. I get messages such as "not getting packets" and freezeups and, well, it's just not worth trying anymore. Every HR that I have an Ethernet wire on does MRV as it should.



> Why are you getting 720p on NBC? Does your local channel do 720P (NBC is typically 1080i) or do you have something setup wrong?


No, I meant I was getting 720p on the NetFlix streaming content. But it looked so good, I thought it was in 1080i.



> As for Heroes, the issue could be your local station. But you are in New Jersey so that is either Philly or New York, so I am confused. I seriously doubt the bitrates are higher on Roku than on broadcast TV.


To be honest, I didn't even know what channel _Heroes _was on.  Once I set an SL, I rarely notice the channels except when I watch a lot of recorded programs on a channel such as NBC and then switch to a 720p channel. Then I see a difference.

We were discussing this on another thread and one of the members said it could be because the 720p is really something like 768p and the Roku might be picking up more than just 720p. Does that make sense? Made sense the way he explained it. :lol:

Rich


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

rich584 said:


> I don't understand.
> 
> All I know is that every time I try to use the 600N on one of my HRs it doesn't work correctly. I can't even get MRV with it. I get messages such as "not getting packets" and freezeups and, well, it's just not worth trying anymore. Every HR that I have an Ethernet wire on does MRV as it should.


Oh. I thought you said it downloaded but was choppy. That shouldn't happen. Not downloading would be a different issue.



rich584 said:


> No, I meant I was getting 720p on the NetFlix streaming content. But it looked so good, I thought it was in 1080i.


Ah, I misread.

To be honest, I didn't even know what channel _Heroes _was on.  Once I set an SL, I rarely notice the channels except when I watch a lot of recorded programs on a channel such as NBC and then switch to a 720p channel. Then I see a difference.



rich584 said:


> We were discussing this on another thread and one of the members said it could be because the 720p is really something like 768p and the Roku might be picking up more than just 720p. Does that make sense? Made sense the way he explained it. :lol:


No, because bitrate affects PQ far more than 720p versus 768 or 1080i/p anything else and I don't think the Roku is using the full bit rate that DirecTV would be doing, especially on a local channel unless your local channel reeks.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

rich584 said:


> That E700 only has the Bravia Two engine (whatever that means). The Sonys with the really good pictures have the Bravia Three engines (whatever that means). I've seen side by side comparisons and the the Bravia Three engine blows the E700s away. And the 60" E700 costs about $2800. Don't know what the 46" cost, but for a couple hundred dollars more, he could have gotten the one with the Bravia Three engine and got a much better picture.
> 
> Rich


No, he has the Bravia 3 engine and the PQ even on his digital TWC is great, Blue-Ray is awesome. That's why I was so surprised by the poor Netflix quality.

I'm trying to get him to convert to Direct. . . he's already filled his SA dvr . . . the GUI is even letterboxed!


----------



## xmguy (Mar 27, 2008)

I have Netflix. I get mostly DVDs (all SD). But if I stream something I use my pc connected to my 32" Vizio via DVI to HDMI and 1080p.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

dennisj00 said:


> No, he has the Bravia 3 engine and the PQ even on his digital TWC is great, Blue-Ray is awesome. That's why I was so surprised by the poor Netflix quality.


As I noted above so are the reviewers. This TV has bad PQ for Netflix as a "bug" if you will. So there isn't anything that can be done unless Sony releases a firmware update that fixes the problem.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

In both of our opinions, (the owners and mine), the Netflix quality is incidental, just surprising for the comparison.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dennisj00 said:


> No, he has the Bravia 3 engine and the PQ even on his digital TWC is great, Blue-Ray is awesome. That's why I was so surprised by the poor Netflix quality.
> 
> I'm trying to get him to convert to Direct. . . he's already filled his SA dvr . . . the GUI is even letterboxed!


Just checked the Sony site and you're right, it does list the E700s as having the Bravia Three engine (whatever that means).

Rich


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

I think it's actually an EX700 (not an E700 that I originally posted) but it does have the BR3 engine. . . It seems everyone is building more models as the prices continue to fall to the point that $50 or $100 seperates the models.

Very confusing to the consumer . . . particularly the consumer that gets it home and continues to watch SD programming - with no HD source!!

I wonder if Sony 'crippled' the Netflix app to get the TV out or keep BluRays looking better!


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dennisj00 said:


> I think it's actually an EX700 (not an E700 that I originally posted) but it does have the BR3 engine. . . It seems everyone is building more models as the prices continue to fall to the point that $50 or $100 seperates the models.


Just checked that model and it does have the Bravia 3 engine (what is that?) The 60" is going for about $2700 and that's the one I want, but I really don't want to pay that much and look up a few months from now and find out it's going for half that amount. And with all these 3D sets coming out, that will probably happen quickly. A friend of mine bought a 40" Sony LCD a couple of years ago for $2500 and that price went down to around $500 fairly quickly.



> Very confusing to the consumer . . . particularly the consumer that gets it home and continues to watch SD programming - with no HD source!!


Every thing is confusing. Enough to drive a man to drink. Too much technology too quickly.



> I wonder if Sony 'crippled' the Netflix app to get the TV out or keep BluRays looking better!


I bought one of the Sony BD players that streams NetFlix and took it back very quickly. I like my Roku much better. Sony will get better, they always do, but it will probably take a bit of time.

Rich


----------



## Barmat (Aug 27, 2006)

islesfan said:


> I don't use either. Netflix seems like the better option, but I watch so few movies that I usually just buy the occasional DVD. I used to use PPV until it became a complete ripoff. $6 for a 24 hour viewing window v. $9 - $16 for unlimited viewing (if I buy the DVD) makes little sense. Add to that rhe fact that I can make a few bucks back on the DVD on EBAY if I don't want to keep it, and the other options make little sense for me.


This is exactly what the movie companies want you to do. This 24hr viewing rule compels the consumer to purchase the DVD/BLU. I have not ordered a PPV since the rule took effect. I did order 2-4 a month.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

rich584 said:


> Every thing is confusing. Enough to drive a man to drink. Too much technology too quickly.


You got that right. A friend at work wanted to replace her mother's DVD player and thought she would buy herself a Blu Ray and give her mother her pretty new upconverting DVD (they both got HDTVs in the last year). But when she got to the store, she couldn't figure out why players that had very similiar features varied so much in price so she played it safe and bought an inexpensive upconverting DVD instead. The crazy pricing and feature sets drove away a sale from a reasonably savvy consumer.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> You got that right. A friend at work wanted to replace her mother's DVD player and thought she would buy herself a Blu Ray and give her mother her pretty new upconverting DVD (they both got HDTVs in the last year). But when she got to the store, she couldn't figure out why players that had very similiar features varied so much in price so she played it safe and bought an inexpensive upconverting DVD instead. The crazy pricing and feature sets drove away a sale from a reasonably savvy consumer.


That's the main reason I shop at Costco. Yeah, the selections are limited, but at least you can bring stuff back if you buy something that isn't what you really wanted.

BD players are very confusing, but sticking with one brand really helps. I have had several different BD players, Sonys, Panasonics, Samsungs, etc. The best of the bunch seems to be the Sonys, much as it was with VCRs. While lots of folk swear by the Pannys, the manual is unreadable, even called Panny tech support and they tried to follow along in the manual and finally told me to take it back and try another one. I did, I tried a Sony and have had three or four different models before settling on one.

The worst upscalers and BD players I have tried have been the Toshibas. I've never bought a Toshiba product I was satisfied with and have given up completely on them, just as I did with their VCRs.

Rich


----------



## mikeny (Aug 21, 2006)

The Merg said:


> Actually, the 24 hour limit starts when you purchase the movie, which is not necessarily when you start to watch it. However, you can record the movie ahead of time and then when you start to watch it you pay for it at that time. That way you can have the recording on your DVR for an extended time before you purchase it. There is an expiration date though for unpurchased movies though, so if you wait too long, the movie will automatically be deleted.
> 
> - Merg


Sorry to resurrect this old thread but I got my anniversary present from DirecTV yesterday and it was for a free DirecTV Cinema movie which they said would be credited automatically to my account. Thank you DirecTV.

Hopefully they will cover HD $5.99 in full.

So I went and recorded "Inception" in 1080P and saw that I had a 1/13/11 expiration date which I didn't find too crazy. I then saw that I still didn't have any "Purchases" information which I found odd (as a DirecTV Cinema newbie) so I started playing it. Almost immediately it gave me "Buy Now" prompt so I clicked "Buy Now". I stopped it and then was shocked to see the expiration date of tomorrow: 12/13/10!! Whoa! This is crazy. When we get a disk from NetFlix they don't care when we return it. What is the logic that DirecTV is using here to impose these ridiculous viewing windows?

This is why we would never make this purchase. We like being able to watch a certain amount of the movie and being able to resume it at our convenience. I understand they don't want you to be able to have it permanently but the viewing window is TOO extreme!


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

mikeny said:


> Sorry to resurrect this old thread but I got my anniversary present from DirecTV yesterday and it was for a free DirecTV Cinema movie which they said would be credited automatically to my account. Thank you DirecTV.
> 
> Hopefully they will cover HD $5.99 in full.
> 
> ...


Just the way it is and it's not D*'s fault. The fault lies with a third party that mandates that the movie must be watched within 24 hours of purchasing. I usually just ignore those "free" offers.

Rich


----------



## mikeny (Aug 21, 2006)

rich584 said:


> Just the way it is and it's not D*'s fault. The fault lies with a third party that mandates that the movie must be watched within 24 hours of purchasing. I usually just ignore those "free" offers.
> 
> Rich


Rich, which third party is this and why does it only effect DirecTV Cinema? Do FiOS, Cablevision, etc. subs have the same restrictions?


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

mikeny said:


> Rich, which third party is this and why does it only effect DirecTV Cinema? Do FiOS, Cablevision, etc. subs have the same restrictions?


I believe it's the movie studios. Other providers have the same 24 hours.


----------



## mikeny (Aug 21, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> I believe it's the movie studios. Other providers have the same 24 hours.


Wow. I guess they want to you rent from NetFlix instead. I don't get the inflexibility. They would get more PPV purchases if they lightened up. It would be better for everyone.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

harsh said:


> The monthly cost ($8.99 SD, $10.99 HD) of a Netflix "one-out" subscription was cheaper than buying two DIRECTV Cinema new releases ($4.99 each for SD, $5.99 for HD). It would seem that you could get 10 recent releases from Netflix for less than the price of two from DIRECTV.
> 
> Cost can't be the motivation to "rent" from DIRECTV.


The problem is, Netflix on-line streaming literally stinks. There are not even than many movies a month worth watching, and new releases (released to DVD) are not even available for month to years on Netflix on-line. Netflix on-line is the biggest waste of money of any paid movie/tv service.

I used their free preview and quickly realized that I would never in a million years pay $9/month (I wouldn't even pay $0.50/month) to watch what they have to offer via on-line streaming


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

DodgerKing said:


> The problem is, Netflix on-line streaming literally stinks. There are not even than many movies a month worth watching, and new releases (released to DVD) are not even available for month to years on Netflix on-line. Netflix on-line is the biggest waste of money of any paid movie/tv service.
> 
> I used their free preview and quickly realized that I would never in a million years pay $9/month (I wouldn't even pay $0.50/month) to watch what they have to offer via on-line streaming


But there's more to it than streaming. The discs make it worth it.


----------



## mikeny (Aug 21, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> But there's more to it than streaming. The discs make it worth it.


I agree. Even for the new $11.99 ($1 increase): the 1-at-a time is the same price that Blockbuster had. The streaming is just a bonus. Blockbuster streaming was extra so I switched to NetFlix.


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)

sigma1914 said:


> But there's more to it than streaming. The discs make it worth it.


The least expensive package does not include disc. Plus the OP was comparing Netflix streaming to DirecTV streaming.


----------



## scott0702 (Nov 25, 2006)

In my opinion, Netflix was worth it in previous years but no longer the case. You used to be able to add a movie to the queue and you would have the newest releases and as many as you can keep up with. Now with the 30 day wait and extra charge for blue ray and higher plan pricing it's not worth it. I would rather just get a HD movie on Directv Cinema here and there when I feel like watching. It is just more convenient and that is what you pay for. Use the on demand service rather than pay per view.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Yea, it's not just DirecTV. It's all the providers with the same 24 hour rule mandated by Hollywood.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

scott0702 said:


> In my opinion, Netflix was worth it in previous years but no longer the case. You used to be able to add a movie to the queue and you would have the newest releases and as many as you can keep up with. Now with the 30 day wait and extra charge for blue ray and higher plan pricing it's not worth it. I would rather just get a HD movie on Directv Cinema here and there when I feel like watching. It is just more convenient and that is what you pay for. Use the on demand service rather than pay per view.


Others share that view with ya.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

scott0702 said:


> In my opinion, Netflix was worth it in previous years but no longer the case. You used to be able to add a movie to the queue and you would have the newest releases and as many as you can keep up with. Now with the 30 day wait and extra charge for blue ray and higher plan pricing it's not worth it. I would rather just get a HD movie on Directv Cinema here and there when I feel like watching. It is just more convenient and that is what you pay for. Use the on demand service rather than pay per view.


There is nothing convenient about the 24 hour rule. I'll deal with the extra charge since, within two movies with D*'s Cinema I'll exceed the cost with Netflix.


----------



## nednarb (Nov 11, 2010)

Time warner allows 48 hours on some movies, but not all by any means. 24 hours is normal and expected. For me six bucks is tolerable for a new release. It's way cheaper than the theatre in every way. We average maybe one a month.

I personally don't buy dvds. For me the price per view makes the most sense.


----------



## MikeS. (Dec 4, 2010)

harsh said:


> Recent release movies come from DIRECTV Cinema and the rules are different there.As DIRECTV points out, their hands are tied on the duration of the rental. They have control over what they charge and they seem to favor the rather high price point.


And this is why I RARELY use DTV Cinema. I can get it from Netflix and keep it for however long I want.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> I believe it's the movie studios. Other providers have the same 24 hours.


I couldn't remember the exact name of the body that sets that mandate, that's why I was so vague in my previous post. I know it's got something to do with the movie studios, but do they all get together on this? Or do they all have a third party that they use for this sort of thing? Somebody must have the specifics on this.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

mikeny said:


> Wow. I guess they want to you rent from NetFlix instead. I don't get the inflexibility. They would get more PPV purchases if they lightened up. It would be better for everyone.


Again, it depends on who is setting that mandate. I agree that a lot more folks would download PPV if the 24 hour limit wasn't imposed and I'd think that the movie studios would get some monetary benefits from increased PPV usage, but do they really care that much about us getting PPV in a more usable form? Seems as if they don't.

Meanwhile, D* takes the blame for the _24 hour from purchasing_ model and it's not their fault.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

DodgerKing said:


> The problem is, Netflix on-line streaming literally stinks. There are not even than many movies a month worth watching, and new releases (released to DVD) are not even available for month to years on Netflix on-line. Netflix on-line is the biggest waste of money of any paid movie/tv service.


That's not a fair statement. We have a bunch of streaming devices in our home and we watch NetFlix streaming content quite a bit. Some of our devices have a Search function built into them (Rokus and Sammy BD players, to name two) and NetFlix is always adding content. Combine the streaming content with DVDs and BD discs and you have more content than the Premium package ($114 a month, now that's a real waste of money!). And you get the new releases faster than the Premium package does.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

DodgerKing said:


> The problem is, Netflix on-line streaming literally stinks. There are not even than many movies a month worth watching, and new releases (released to DVD) are not even available for month to years on Netflix on-line. Netflix on-line is the biggest waste of money of any paid movie/tv service.
> 
> I used their free preview and quickly realized that I would never in a million years pay $9/month (I wouldn't even pay $0.50/month) to watch what they have to offer via on-line streaming





rich584 said:


> That's not a fair statement. We have a bunch of streaming devices in our home and we watch NetFlix streaming content quite a bit. Some of our devices have a Search function built into them (Rokus and Sammy BD players, to name two) and NetFlix is always adding content. Combine the streaming content with DVDs and BD discs and you have more content than the Premium package ($114 a month, now that's a real waste of money!). And you get the new releases faster than the Premium package does.
> 
> Rich


I guess I see some validity to both sides of that coin.

I think Netflix has some serious flaws at this time - which may/may not be corrected over time. There's also no denying its adoption is at least to the point where they are a legitimate player in the delivery channel game.

Having used streaming, CinemaNow, PPV, and Blu Ray as primary channels for watching HD content that is not live....I prefer Blu Ray, followed by the others in equal amounts. They all seem to have a place.

The reality is that over time, they will not all survive, at least not in their present form or at their current pricing models. One could make a reasonable case that content selection of quality material has diminished over the past 2 years, which even my local DVD rental store manage says he can confirm multiple ways.

Choices are a good thing - we'll see how the streaming services do as Internet service prices change and bandwidth cap limits evolve.


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

MikeS. said:


> And this is why I RARELY use DTV Cinema. I can get it from Netflix and keep it for however long I want.


+1

Watched a Netflix movie last night in "real blu-ray quality".  I think I'll watch the movie one or two more times this week before returning it. All at no additional cost. 

(UFC is the only thing I'll get on PPV.)


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

Hutchinshouse said:


> +1
> 
> Watched a Netflix movie last night in "real blu-ray quality".  I think I'll watch the movie one or two more times this week before returning it. All at no additional cost.
> 
> (UFC is the only thing I'll get on PPV.)


I got so busy with other things, I kept my last NetFlix blu-ray for *two months* before viewing it. I returned it, and received a new blu-ray (1st in my queue) in two days, and watched it a day later. No reminders, no notes, no threats, no charges for keeping a blu-ray for two months before watching it.

As far as 30 days goes (wait), I couldn't care less. (obviously if I left a blu-ray sitting for two months before viewing it.

NetFlix provides more content than I could possibly watch, and no 24 hour limit, not to mention gross over-pricing. When I want something as "good as it can get", I get a blu-ray, otherwise I happily stream away, not taking much notice of any particular imperfection in quality. As far as streaming goes, it has to be pretty bad for me to object. Anything I'm going to be really picky about, I get blu-ray.

I just don't see Cinema as a reasonable alternative for us, but I do hope the people that use it, like it, and continue to order like crazy, as every buck counts in the P & L.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

hasan said:


> I got so busy with other things, I kept my last NetFlix blu-ray for *two months* before viewing it. I returned it, and received a new blu-ray (1st in my queue) in two days, and watched it a day later. No reminders, no notes, no threats, no charges for keeping a blu-ray for two months before watching it.


Wonder how long they'll sustain their business with that level of quality and inventory control... :shrug:


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Wonder how long they'll sustain their business with that level of quality and inventory control... :shrug:


Based upon this news (http://abcnews.go.com/Business/netflix-added-york-times-dropped-sp-500/story?id=12366404) for a long time. 

Netflix value is on the rise. Now worth $10,200,000,000 (just a tad more than I have in my savings account). :lol:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Hutchinshouse said:


> Based upon this news (http://abcnews.go.com/Business/netflix-added-york-times-dropped-sp-500/story?id=12366404) for a long time.
> 
> Netflix value is on the rise. Now worth $10,200,000,000 (just a tad more than I have in my savings account). :lol:


They said the very same thing 5 years ago about Blockbuster...I'm just sayin'


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> They said the very same thing 5 years ago about Blockbuster...I'm just sayin'


You got me there!


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Wonder how long they'll sustain their business with that level of quality and inventory control... :shrug:


I saw a portion of a _Modern Marvels_ where they showed how NetFlix processes those DVDs and BD discs. They have the whole system automated. I can't begin to describe it. Looked very efficient.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

rich584 said:


> I saw a portion of a _Modern Marvels_ where they showed how NetFlix processes those DVDs and BD discs. They have the whole system automated. I can't begin to describe it. Looked very efficient.
> 
> Rich


I may have seen the same video presentation about a month ago. It was impressive.

It's the followup system that appears to suck. :lol:


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Wonder how long they'll sustain their business with that level of quality and inventory control... :shrug:


That is one of the things they stress with Netflix though. You get to watch the movie on your own terms and can return them whenever at no additional cost. The only issue that comes into play is that you can't get another movie until it is returned.

- Merg


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I may have seen the same video presentation about a month ago. It was impressive.
> 
> It's the followup system that appears to suck. :lol:


They don't care how long you keep it, that is the point. Financially, the less a customer cycles DVDs the more money Netflix makes. Which is why customers were alleging a year or so ago that Netflix throttled their use by being slow to mail the DVDs.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

raott said:


> They don't care how long you keep it, that is the point. Financially, the less a customer cycles DVDs the more money Netflix makes. Which is why customers were alleging a year or so ago that Netflix throttled their use by being slow to mail the DVDs.


Then again....if its a fixed fee, and the Blu Rays are more expensive...the system is still expensive operationally and also broken. :eek2:


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Then again....if its a fixed fee, and the Blu Rays are more expensive...the system is still expensive operationally and also broken. :eek2:


I'm guessing their own financial folks are better suited to determine whether their system is broken or not.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

raott said:


> I'm guessing their own financial folks are better suited to determine whether their system is broken or not.


Of course....that self-policing worked so fabulously at Blockbuster, Hollywood Video, Circuit City, and other "success stories". 

Oh wait...those guys all went bankrupt... 

The real point here is that the success (and survival) of Netflix will depend on its ability to adapt to changes in the market and technology. CinemaNow depends on DirecTV's same nimbleness issues.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> They said the very same thing 5 years ago about Blockbuster...I'm just sayin'


I really hope they do well. I really want to see what happens when NetFlix starts streaming in 1080p.

I never really enjoyed the whole video store concept. Too much running around, too many rules.

I like the NetFlix model, altho it took me a long time to accept it. But, something will come along and blow them out of the water, too. So many changes in so many things so quickly, it's a wonder we adapt so well.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

rich584 said:


> I really hope they do well. I really want to see what happens when NetFlix starts streaming in 1080p.
> 
> I never really enjoyed the whole video store concept. Too much running around, too many rules.
> 
> ...


I'm not wishing ill on them either...just pointing out its a rapidly-changing model with alot of influences. If broadband providers continue trends to raise prices and limit capacity...that will impact Netflix's success, as well as any other streaming-dependent service.


----------



## TBoneit (Jul 27, 2006)

DodgerKing said:


> The problem is, Netflix on-line streaming literally stinks. There are not even than many movies a month worth watching, and new releases (released to DVD) are not even available for month to years on Netflix on-line. Netflix on-line is the biggest waste of money of any paid movie/tv service.
> 
> I used their free preview and quickly realized that I would never in a million years pay $9/month (I wouldn't even pay $0.50/month) to watch what they have to offer via on-line streaming


I've watched much more Netflix streaming than PPV. OTOH anything higher than the Zero PPVs watched in the last 4 or 5 years is more than.

Recently Netflix added Red Dwarf Back to Earth's three episodes. I watched them all in one night. I watch the Netflix streaming when there is nothing DVR'd or live that I'm in the mood for. I have over 160 titles in the streaming Que.

As far as their DVDs, I get them too for the titles that aren't available for streaming. I just watched a 1.5 hour Last of the Summer Wine from 1972 off of one of their DVDs.

Sometimes I'm not in the mood and a DVD will sit there for months before it gets watched. Never heard a complaint form them about it.

For myself Netflix makes sense. I dropped all the Premiums as there was so little content that I would watch. The content problem is what is hurting HBO, Cinemax, Showtime, Stars, etc. IMHO


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I may have seen the same video presentation about a month ago. It was impressive.


I watched that and was absolutely amazed. I thought that it was all done by hand.



> It's the followup system that appears to suck. :lol:


I don't understand the above statement, perhaps I'm missing something? The whole NetFlix thing seems to work very well for us.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

raott said:


> They don't care how long you keep it, that is the point. Financially, the less a customer cycles DVDs the more money Netflix makes. Which is why customers were alleging a year or so ago that Netflix throttled their use by being slow to mail the DVDs.


I had the impression that they thought that quickly returned DVDs were being copied and returned, not viewed and returned.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Then again....if its a fixed fee, and the Blu Rays are more expensive...the system is still expensive operationally and also broken. :eek2:


The BluRays don't cost any more than a standard DVD.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I'm not wishing ill on them either...just pointing out its a rapidly-changing model with alot of influences. If broadband providers continue trends to raise prices and limit capacity...that will impact Netflix's success, as well as any other streaming-dependent service.


True, but they are changing. Early next year they will begin to start streaming BluRay and other HD content in 1080p. That's one of the main reasons that the new Roku boxes were introduced.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

rich584 said:


> True, but they are changing. Early next year *they will begin to start streaming BluRay* and other HD content in 1080p. That's one of the main reasons that the new Roku boxes were introduced.
> 
> Rich


Your gonna need a huge Internet bandwidth for that stuff...unless you have all day to get just one flick, of course.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

TBoneit said:


> I've watched much more Netflix streaming than PPV. OTOH anything higher than the Zero PPVs watched in the last 4 or 5 years is more than.
> 
> Recently Netflix added Red Dwarf Back to Earth's three episodes. I watched them all in one night. I watch the Netflix streaming when there is nothing DVR'd or live that I'm in the mood for. I have over 160 titles in the streaming Que.
> 
> ...


That $114 a month for the Premier package is a bit much too.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

rich584 said:


> That $114 a month for the Premier package is a bit much too.
> 
> Rich


I know *I'd *never get my money's worth out of that...


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Your gonna need a huge Internet bandwidth for that stuff...unless you have all day to get just one flick, of course.


From what they've told me, they seem to have that figured out. It's coming.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

rich584 said:


> From what they've told me, they seem to have that figured out. It's coming.
> 
> Rich


View-rentals-by-the-hour pricing? !rolling


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I know *I'd *never get my money's worth out of that...


I sure don't, but I can't bring myself to cancel it for some reason. Probably because the wife doesn't complain about it. :lol:

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> View rentals by the hour pricing? !rolling


Well, we'll just have to wait and see.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

rich584 said:


> Well, we'll just have to wait and see.
> 
> Rich


I suspect new compression techniques might be in play...you're right...we'll have to see. There was one company at CES last year that was working on that, and I'll look around again at CES 2011 in 3 1/2 weeks from now...


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I suspect new compression techniques might be in play...you're right...we'll have to see. There was one company at CES last year that was working on that, and I'll look around again at CES 2011 in 3 1/2 weeks from now...


I can say that everyone I've spoken with at NetFlix is excited about the new streaming methods. They gotta have it figured out.

Rich


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

DodgerKing said:


> The problem is, Netflix on-line streaming literally stinks. There are not even than many movies a month worth watching, and new releases (released to DVD) are not even available for month to years on Netflix on-line. Netflix on-line is the biggest waste of money of any paid movie/tv service.
> 
> I used their free preview and quickly realized that I would never in a million years pay $9/month (I wouldn't even pay $0.50/month) to watch what they have to offer via on-line streaming


I get my value out of it. I watch probably an hour to two a day of Netflix streaming. Mostly documentaries and older programs, but some of it I cannot get anywhere else. At least not on my terms.

Right now I am going through a Keeping Up Appearances marathon.

If you are trying to treat Netflix streaming like a premium movie channel, it won't work. Treating it like an alternative to Hulu works pretty well.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

raott said:


> There is nothing convenient about the 24 hour rule.  I'll deal with the extra charge since, within two movies with D*'s Cinema I'll exceed the cost with Netflix.


This.

I am not beyond watching a movie or two using On Demand (I have purchased a few items on Amazon, for example), but I almost never sit down to watch a movie knowing that I will complete it when I first sit down or when I decide it is something I want to watch.

For that, a hard copy that I get to keep as long as I determine I am going to keep it works for me. Streaming with Netflix just made it all worth my money overall.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Wonder how long they'll sustain their business with that level of quality and inventory control... :shrug:


I don't understand your point.

It is not like a video store where you only check out what you want and when you don't want something, you have nothing at home.

For Netflix (from their perspective), if you have a 3 DVD plan, there are always 3 DVDs out. Things can get out of kilter if everyone decides to keep the same movie, but it doesn't appear that happens as almost everything is always available.

Why do you say they have an inventory control problem? They know where every DVD is at all times. That is inventory control. They have the data to manage their supplies.

As for quality...quality is delivering what the customer wants at a cost that makes you money. The longer DVDs stay in the customer's home (the customer decides, so by definition it is what they want), the less cost to Netflix as they don't have the back and forth mailings to pay for. Sounds like quality to me.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

tonyd79 said:


> I don't understand your point.
> 
> It is not like a video store where you only check out what you want and when you don't want something, you have nothing at home.


Inventory still remains important...at least other than in streaming.

They need to know what is "out" and what is in stock - at all times - to be successful.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Inventory still remains important...at least other than in streaming.
> 
> They need to know what is "out" and what is in stock - at all times - to be successful.


They do know what is in stock and out at all times.

Are you a customer? You simply go to the website and look at your account, your que, what you have out and how long they have been out is viewable. Once again, its not they do not know their inventory, they don't care how long you have it out.

The less turnover they have, the more they save.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

raott said:


> They do know what is in stock and out at all times.
> 
> Are you a customer? You simply go to the website and look at your account, your que, what you have out and how long they have been out is viewable. Once again, its not they do not know their inventory, they don't care how long you have it out.
> 
> The less turnover they have, the more they save.


I have been a customer, and have also used streaming.

You're apparently missing the issue here - knowing the information in their systems and actually acting upon extensive rental periods are two different activities. Even if they "don't care"...they should, if they want to run an efficient operation.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Wonder how long they'll sustain their business with that level of quality and inventory control... :shrug:


There's nothing wrong with their quality and inventory control, how they responded to my situation was solidly within their policy. They have no required return date on the DVDs...as long as your account is current, you can keep them as long as you like.

It's kinda the opposite of D* Cinema, in terms of use.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I have been a customer, and have also used streaming.
> 
> You're apparently missing the issue here - knowing the information in their systems and actually acting upon extensive rental periods are two different activities. Even if they "don't care"...they should, if they want to run an efficient operation.


they can only act within their terms of use, and they do not require dated returns, period. When I signed up, they made it very clear that there was no time limit. I never tested it before. This time I did, and they met their terms of service.

It's hardly fair to criticize them for following their own policy, especially when it directly benefits their customers. If it's causing them a problem, it can't be a big one, or they would have noticed it and changed the policy.

As I take your point, I think of the polar opposite of "nit-picking", which usually finds fault with the provider by the consumer. In this case, you appear to be watching out for them (when they apparently don't need it), and throwing us (the customers) under the bus. Please, don't help us any more than you already have.

D*, no matter whether their fault or not, has onerous usage terms and ridiculous prices for Cinema. That is why I don't use their service, and I'm not alone, by a long shot. I'll take NetFlix any time, compared to Cinema.

I do hope your logic does work for people, though, as we need as many people as possible to send their extra bucks to D* to keep the P & L more healthy.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I have been a customer, and have also used streaming.
> 
> You're apparently missing the issue here - knowing the information in their systems and actually acting upon extensive rental periods are two different activities. Even if they "don't care"...they should, if they want to run an efficient operation.


I'm not missing anything. You stated "They need to *know* what is "out" and what is in stock - at all times - to be successful. " I pointed out they do *know*, and it is readily available on the website. Now your saying its "acting" on the information. Again, it is in their best interest (postal cost and handles) to allow as much time between turnover as possible and not "act" on the information. Which again, brings me back to the previous compaints about being throttled.

I don't think you have an understanding about where the bulk of their costs are and their business model.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

hasan said:


> It's hardly fair to criticize them for following their own policy, especially when it directly benefits their customers. If it's causing them a problem, it can't be a big one, or they would have noticed it and changed the policy.


True....then again...those are the same kinds of policies that Blockbuster followed...and we know how that story ended....

The real issue is that slacker enforcement leads to operational weakness, which leads to operational breakdown - not a good thing. That kind of activity has brought other companies to its knees. In the past, they also had quality control problems with returned DVD's that got sent out with nominal inspection....resulting in some mighty unhappy customers who got unplayable DVD's.

It NetFlix plans to stick around, they need to run a tighter ship.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> True....then again...those are the same kinds of policies that Blockbuster followed...and we know how that story ended....
> 
> The real issue is that slacker enforcement leads to operational weakness, which leads to operational breakdown - not a good thing. That kind of activity has brought other companies to its knees. In the past, they also had quality control problems with returned DVD's that got sent out with nominal inspection....resulting in some mighty unhappy customers who got unplayable DVD's.
> 
> It NetFlix plans to stick around, they need to run a tighter ship.


You keep skipping the same step. I'll try one more time. There is no slacker enforcement, they are following their stated policy. They ARE enforcing that policy: current account? YES, Time limit: NO. That's the policy. You can argue that it is a bad policy (but others have disputed your assertions), but you can't say they lack enforcement. With that kind of logic, you'd make a hell of a cop.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

hasan said:


> You keep skipping the same step. I'll try one more time. There is no slacker enforcement, they are following their stated policy. They ARE enforcing that policy: current account? YES, Time limit: NO. That's the policy. You can argue that it is a bad policy (but others have disputed your assertions), but you can't say they lack enforcement. With that kind of logic, you'd make a hell of a cop.


Blockbuster changed that very same policy 4 times in one year, to adapt to competitive changes...none of those worked. There's no excuse for sloppy business practices....policy or not.

Where's a cop when you need them...??? :lol:


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

!


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Where's a cop when you need them...??? :lol:


Ahem! 

- Merg


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

The Merg said:


> Ahem!
> 
> - Merg


Took ya long enough to show up.... :lol:


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Blockbuster changed that very same policy 4 times in one year, to adapt to competitive changes...none of those worked. There's no excuse for sloppy business practices....policy or not.


But part of Blockbusters problem was they were still entrenched in the old brick and mortar way of renting videos. Having all those stores meant that your inventory has to be distributed among them. If you go to a no time limit policy, the chances that a customer will be able to get the movie from their local store is reduced.

With Netflix, they have multiple warehouses, but that allows them to stock a large number of each movie in one location. Even with customers holding onto a movie, there is a greater chance that another customer will be able to get it due to the greater quantity of inventory.

Also, Blockbuster had a much higher overhead to deal with due to the fact that they had brick and mortar stores.

- Merg


----------



## mikeny (Aug 21, 2006)

tonyd79 said:


> This.
> 
> I am not beyond watching a movie or two using On Demand (I have purchased a few items on Amazon, for example), but I almost never sit down to watch a movie knowing that I will complete it when I first sit down or when I decide it is something I want to watch.
> 
> For that, a hard copy that I get to keep as long as I determine I am going to keep it works for me. Streaming with Netflix just made it all worth my money overall.


To a DirecTV Cinema newbie, the process seems even more underhanded. The PPV I watched yesterday off the DVR seemingly reset it's expiration date for 1/11/11. Curiously, I tried to play it again only to be presented with the "Buy Now or Cancel" prompt. I could see another guy saying to themselves, "hey I already bought it yesterday, why not just click "buy now" again.

It's not presented well to Joe DirecTV Sub. People must 'rebuy' all the time by accident thinking they are entitled to it since they recorded it AND paid already.

"What you can't watch 2 days in a row"? They need to present this more clearly.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

"hdtvfan0001" said:


> I have been a customer, and have also used streaming.
> 
> You're apparently missing the issue here - knowing the information in their systems and actually acting upon extensive rental periods are two different activities. Even if they "don't care"...they should, if they want to run an efficient operation.


Their operation is very efficient.

You seem focused on getting DVDs back quickly but that does them no good. They just send another out so they do not have a change in overall inventory. In fact, as I stated, they actually SAVE cost if you hold onto movies. They get the money and don't have to spend anything or do anything at all.

It is obvious you don't get the business plan. As you keep referring to blockbuster which was the opposite business plan. In fact, blockbuster exists today primarily as a Netflix style business.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

tonyd79 said:


> It is obvious you don't get the business plan. As you keep referring to blockbuster which was the opposite business plan. In fact, blockbuster exists today primarily as a Netflix style business.


If the business plan is to be loosey goosey for folks to send back their inventory when they feel like it....I guess no....I don't get it, nor would any other responsible business owner.

They can do what they want, of course, but the fact that they don't seem to care enough to "manage" inventory in the field within their policy doesn't make them demonstrate their business risk either.

NetFlix has proven they have products/services to survivie to this point....I'm talking about going forward.


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> If the business plan is to be loosey goosey for folks to send back their inventory when they feel like it....I guess no....I don't get it, nor would any other responsible business owner.
> 
> They can do what they want, of course, but the fact that they don't seem to care enough to "manage" inventory in the field within their policy doesn't make them demonstrate their business risk either.
> 
> NetFlix has proven they have products/services to survivie to this point....I'm talking about going forward.


To survive? :lol: Don't you mean thrive? 

Disc media is just a steppingstone. Hence their name, *Net*flix. Their future will be just fine. In fact, they will only do better going forward.


----------



## Guest (Dec 14, 2010)

Their are some months when I don't rent any movies and some months where I only rent a few movies. Would DTV Cinema still be better than Netflix the way I rent movies?


----------



## oakwcj (Sep 28, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> If the business plan is to be loosey goosey for folks to send back their inventory when they feel like it....I guess no....I don't get it, nor would any other responsible business owner.
> 
> They can do what they want, of course, but the fact that they don't seem to care enough to "manage" inventory in the field within their policy doesn't make them demonstrate their business risk either.
> 
> NetFlix has proven they have products/services to survivie to this point....I'm talking about going forward.


I think what you're missing here is that Netflix continues to collect its monthly subscription fee from you when you hold onto that DVD, and they don't have to send you anything. That is not the Blockbuster model. I'd be happy to have you hold one of my DVDs for $10 a month.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

oakwcj said:


> I think what you're missing here is that Netflix continues to collect its monthly subscription fee from you when you hold onto that DVD, and they don't have to send you anything. *That is not the Blockbuster model. * I'd be happy to have you hold one of my DVDs for $10 a month.


 It was tried by BlockBuster too for some time, until they realized they were losing money doing it....by then, it was too late, and the rest, as they say, is history.

It's great for the consumer to have the opportunity to hold on to DVD's/Blu Rays for a long time....but I contend it's not goo business sense from the NetFlix side.

That said, choices are always good, and having multiple resources and various selections, including CinemaNow, etc., make us all winners in terms of consumers.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> It was tried by BlockBuster too for some time, until they realized they were losing money doing it....by then, it was too late, and the rest, as they say, is history.
> 
> It's great for the consumer to have the opportunity to hold on to DVD's/Blu Rays for a long time....but I contend it's not goo business sense from the NetFlix side.
> 
> That said, choices are always good, and having multiple resources and various selections, including CinemaNow, etc., make us all winners in terms of consumers.


I think you missed my post where I address Blockbuster's issue...

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=2656486#post2656486

Yes, Blockbuster did try the mail route, but they were still in bed with the brick and mortar aspect of renting videos. That is what really killed them.

- Merg


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

The Merg said:


> I think you missed my post where I address Blockbuster's issue...
> 
> http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=2656486#post2656486
> 
> ...


Gotcha copper.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Gotcha copper.


So... Have you now seen the light? 

- Merg


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

The Merg said:


> So... Have you now seen the light?
> 
> - Merg


I see your point...yes. But I still contend that NetFlix still has a huge business risk executing the "get it back whenever" policy. Turn out the lights...the party's over....


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> It was tried by BlockBuster too for some time, until they realized they were losing money doing it....by then, it was too late, and the rest, as they say, is history.


Uh, Blockbuster is STILL doing business this way. They have not discontinued mail service. What they are closing are their brick and mortar stores, which are losing money.

http://www.blockbuster.com/browse/queuemgmt/fullQueue

Want to try again about what Blockbuster does and doesn't do.

What Blockbuster tried was no return date on rentals but they got the same amount of money for a nightly rental as they did for 4 weeks. When a consumer sat on a movie, they were renting it for a lesser and lesser price per day as the time went on. So, with the Blockbuster model you are mis-citing, it was to their benefit if movies were returned.

Netflix is a service that the daily rate stays the same if you have 1 movie for a month or 6 movies for that month.



hdtvfan0001 said:


> It's great for the consumer to have the opportunity to hold on to DVD's/Blu Rays for a long time....but I contend it's not goo business sense from the NetFlix side.


Why? Just because you keep saying it is not good business, you have yet to give a reason. The only sort of reason you gave was that they don't know what their inventory is but Netflix probably knows their inventory better than any other mass market business.

You say it is good for the consumer. It is, to a point. Many Netflix customers sit on DVDs for a month or longer. That is not cost effective for the customer because they pay the same fee if they hold that one movie or flip 2 to 3 per week. Holding onto the movie longer *actually saves Netflix money* so what you say is not good business actually returns a larger profit. You have an odd definition of "not good business sense."

The real issue Netflix faces in the future is the delivery mechanism, not their pricing policy. As streaming increases, it is even cheaper for them to use and competition could drive them out, but, guess what...Netflix is a the forefront of streaming, too.

Odd that a business you keep bashing by just saying they have bad business sense is doing a bang up job of staying on the edge of the wave, first by changing how folks got DVDs (and helping drive Blockbuster out of business) and now on the streaming front.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I see your point...yes. But I still contend that NetFlix still has a huge business risk executing the "get it back whenever" policy. Turn out the lights...the party's over....


What is the risk? Explain it, if you can.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

tonyd79 said:


> Want to try again about what Blockbuster does and doesn't do.


Since you want to pit nicks...

They actually changed that model 3 times in 6 months in 2009....and again once in 2010 to where it is now. In the past, they tried the "return whenever" model too.


> You say it is good for the consumer. It is, to a point.


Uh...I said *having choices *was good for the consumer.

I'm guessing NetFlix is less concerned anyway with mail rentals and focusing their efforts and strategy on streaming for the foreseeable future.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

tonyd79 said:


> Holding onto the movie longer *actually saves Netflix money* so what you say is not good business actually returns a larger profit.





tonyd79 said:


> What is the risk? Explain it, if you can.


First of all...nobody's "bashing" anything...

Second....the mailing costs might be reduced, but so can the out-right loss due to damaged and lost inventory. Simple really.

Third....you seemed to conveniently miss multiple posts that specifically referenced the desire for them to succeed. Just because they are successful at the moment, it doesn't assure future success. They have to adjust and improve their service regularly. THAT was the whole point you seemed to miss, and the one Blockbuster totally missed.

So let's move on... I have a streaming NetFlix to watch tomorrow.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Since you want to pit nicks...
> 
> They actually changed that model 3 times in 6 months in 2009....and again once in 2010 to where it is now. In the past, they tried the "return whenever" model too.


You keep equating the models when they were not the same.

Blockbusters return whenever model didn't give them a revenue stream. You rented a movie for a standard 3 day fee but you could keep it forever WITHOUT ANY FURTHER INCOME.

Netflix you pay per month if you keep one movie or not. The money keeps coming in and coming in and coming in.

If the BB fee was $4 and you kept the movie for 2 months, they got $4 and you held up their inventory at that store (limited). You return the movie, transaction is over until you decide to rent another.

If you pay $9 a month to Netflix and keep a movie for 2 months, they get $18. And their inventory stays the same relatively because their deal is that you get a movie all the time, even if it is the next one. You return a movie, they send you the next one.

The BB brick and mortar keep the movie until whenever was stupid because beyond the first three days THEY GOT NO MONEY. Netflix continues to get money if you keep that movie or get a new one. They WANT you to keep it because it drives their costs down for the same amount of income.

You are comparing two diametrically opposed methods of doing business and claiming that one proves the other doesn't work.

Well, Netflix has been GROWING for 13 years with what you call bad business.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

The key points have absolutely nothing to do with the brick and mortar Blockbuster aspects.

Round and round - the circle is now complete.

OK. Thanks.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> First of all...nobody's "bashing" anything...
> 
> Second....the mailing costs might be reduced, but so can the out-right loss due to damaged and lost inventory. Simple really.
> 
> ...


You want to move on because you have no argument.

Uh? Longer rental times mean higher loss cost? HUH? Not when they keep movies out no matter if you return them or not. Movie A is out. It comes back, Movie B is sent out again. The majority of their losses are from MAILING. You just gave another argument IN FAVOR of keeping movies out longer from a Netflix point of view. Fewer mailings means fewer movies lost. Damage per unit of inventory is going to be the same if it is one movie or another. Who cares if it is Gone with the Wind or the Goonies that gets damaged.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> This has absolutely nothing to do with the brick and mortar Blockbuster aspects.
> 
> OK. Thanks. Round and round - the circle is now complete.


BS. Blockbuster's financial woes were (and continue to be) Brick and Mortar.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

tonyd79 said:


> BS. Blockbuster's financial woes were (and continue to be) Brick and Mortar.


Uh huh...OK sir.

Fact is it had everything to do with a large successful company not making changes in policies, practices, and business decisions fast enough. That also has the potential to apply to NetFlix, unless they respond.

I hope they make the right choices...then we can both be happy with their survival. Thank you very much.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> True....then again...those are the same kinds of policies that Blockbuster followed...and we know how that story ended....
> 
> The real issue is that slacker enforcement leads to operational weakness, which leads to operational breakdown - not a good thing. That kind of activity has brought other companies to its knees. In the past, they also had quality control problems with returned DVD's that got sent out with nominal inspection....resulting in some mighty unhappy customers who got unplayable DVD's.
> 
> It NetFlix plans to stick around, they need to run a tighter ship.


You get what you ask for in a timely manner, their inventory methods seem to be beyond reproach, their CSRs have never failed to be polite and have always solved my problems, small as they were. What more could you possibly ask? D* could learn something from the way NetFlix operates and treats it's customers. I've never had a problem with them that hasn't been resolved with one phone call.

I really think the reason they are going to more streaming must be the fees they pay for postal delivery and return. I see absolutely no reason to criticize any aspect of their business model.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Blockbuster changed that very same policy 4 times in one year, to adapt to competitive changes...none of those worked. There's no excuse for sloppy business practices....policy or not.
> 
> Where's a cop when you need them...??? :lol:


To put it crudely, but perhaps more understandably, I thought Blockbuster sucked. I don't see anything "sloppy" about NetFlix at all. If I had any problems with them, I wouldn't have two accounts for eight DVDs at a time.

As much as I have enjoyed D*, they have lied to me, supplied me with terrible equipment, argued with me for no discernible reason, allowed horrible installations, wrecked some of my equipment with bad downloads, the list goes on and on. And before anyone asks why I stay with them, they are the best of a bunch of poor choices, in my opinion. All that said, they have always received my bills on time and have no complaints with me. When comparing the two services, NetFlix is the winner. A better run company, a model for the future.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

rich584 said:


> To put it crudely, but perhaps more understandably, I thought Blockbuster sucked. I don't see anything "sloppy" about NetFlix at all. If I had any problems with them, I wouldn't have two accounts for eight DVDs at a time.
> 
> When comparing the two services, NetFlix is the winner. A better run company, a model for the future.
> 
> Rich


I'll give ya point one....no doubt they didn't do it right, and lost out accordingly.

With NetFlix having all its eggs in one basket, I disagree on the better run company....its a simpler model with less opportunities for the future.

If NetFlix is betting the whole enchilada on streaming...and a clear trend toward bandwidth controls and ceilings...they may grow hungry down the road.

Alot is very unpredictable in the content market these days.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

CraigerCSM said:


> Their are some months when I don't rent any movies and some months where I only rent a few movies. Would DTV Cinema still be better than Netflix the way I rent movies?


That's really up to you. I've been watching TV series for months, and am presently watching CSI: Miami. It's very interesting to watch a series evolve. I don't get that many movies from NetFlix, but I suppose I'll run out of old TV series to watch sometime in the future and then I'll have to reevaluate my NetFlix subscription. But, by that time, NetFlix will be mostly a streaming service and I already have about 10 streaming devices in the house that provide better PQ than D* does at a fraction of the cost. Things are changing faster than I expected, as witnessed by this thread.

Rich


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I'll give ya point one....no doubt they didn't do it right, and lost out accordingly.
> 
> With NetFlix having all its eggs in one basket, I disagree on the better run company....its a simpler model with less opportunties for the future.
> 
> If NetFlix is betting the whole enchilada on streaming...and a clear trend towards brandwidth controls and ceilings...they may grow hungry down the road.


If bandwidth ceilings come in to play, the ONLY companies what will be able to thrive in a streaming VOD business model are cable/fios companies --- not D*, not Dish nor Netflix, Amazon, Apple, Blockbuster etc who are all dependent on cable for delivery.

If cable institutes caps, they will have a clear competitive advantage over both D* or Dish. However, with that said, IMO, even if caps are in place, there will always be a tier with unlimited access.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> BS. Blockbuster's financial woes were (and continue to be) Brick and Mortar.


And terrible management decisions.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

raott said:


> If bandwidth ceilings come in to play, the ONLY companies what will be able to thrive in a streaming VOD business model are cable/fios companies --- not D*, not Dish nor Netflix, Amazon, Apple, Blockbuster etc who are all dependent on cable for delivery.


really?

So if you can only download certain quantities of content per month...that won't impact streamed services...hmmmm...interesting....but also totally wrong of course. Also, there will likely indeed be that "top tier" for bandwidth...just almost no one willing to pay for it.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> really?
> 
> So if you can only download certain quantities of content per month...that won't impact streamed services...hmmmm...interesting....but also totally wrong of course. Also, there will likely indeed be that "top tier" for bandwidth...just almost no one willing to pay for it.


I have no idea what you are reading but that is not what I wrote. In fact, it is completely opposite of what I wrote.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

raott said:


> I have no idea what you are reading but that is not what I wrote. In fact, it is completely opposite of what I wrote.


So you assume I'm debating your point???...or perhaps maybe it was agreeing/confirming it...it happens.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> So you assume I'm debating your point???...or perhaps maybe it was agreeing/confirming it...it happens.


You put a "really?" right before your paragraph.

I dont think anyone with an objective view would believe you were agreeing with what I wrote. You misread what I wrote, period.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

raott said:


> You put a "really?" right before your paragraph.
> 
> I dont think anyone with an objective view would believe you were agreeing with what I wrote. You misread what I wrote, period.


So now you're debating about that, right? Sarcasm can be a friend.

Just checking...


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> So now you're debating about that, right? Sarcasm can be a friend.
> 
> Just checking...


How about simply say "yeah, I misread it, sorry", rather than sarcasm and eyerolls.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

raott said:


> How about simply say "yeah, I misread it, sorry", rather than sarcasm and eyerolls.


How about not debating every post and every point. 

So onward we go to the topic at hand...


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

raott said:


> How about simply say "yeah, I misread it, sorry", rather than sarcasm and eyerolls.


I really don't like that Smilie rolleyes. Sarcasm is something we could all do without.

I also detest this Smilie: . Make me think of the caricatures of Japanese people that were so prevalent during and after WWII.

Rich


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Ok, bottom line here is this.

Blockbuster failed because it held onto the brick and mortar too long and didn't go all in on the rental by mail and streaming. Why is this a big deal? Billions of dollars a year down the drain in building leases, property taxes, utility bills and so forth that Netflix frankly just doesn't have. Very little overhead for Netflix.

As for people holding onto movies "too long". That's actually good for Netflix since they are still getting money per month from that person and spending nothing themselves on that customer. 

As for Netflix and the future...by starting to emphasis streaming they *are* reacting to the market which is heading in that direction. If the cable companies continue/start to limit bandwidth and enact caps that hurt that business model guess what? Netflix still has discs to send you in the mail.  Right now there is nothing "beyond" streaming to look out for. When that comes and Netflix doesn't get into that space then we can gripe at Netflix for not keeping up with the times as Blockbuster didn't. Right now Netflix *is* keeping up with the times and evolving ahead of the curve.

As to the original question of value of Netflix vs. PPV or premium channels...I myself went Netflix quite a few years ago. For the cost of only 2 PPV's a month I get the latest movies (as many as I can churn a month) long before they hit any premium channel (even with a 30 day delay upon release) and it's a lot cheaper then PPV no doubt and a LOT better quality with Bluray. I guess PPV's only advantage is the spur of the moment but there is never a time I have to watch a movie "right now" as I always have the latest movies showing up at my door every week.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

bonscott87 said:


> Ok, bottom line here is this.
> 
> Blockbuster failed because it held onto the brick and mortar too long and didn't go all in on the rental by mail and streaming. Why is this a big deal? Billions of dollars a year down the drain in building leases, property taxes, utility bills and so forth that Netflix frankly just doesn't have. Very little overhead for Netflix.


I'd be willing to bet that automated setup they have for discs is very costly and the maintenance on it must be a major cost. Add in the fees they pay the USPS and going full blast into streaming is gonna save them a huge amount of money.

Rich


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

bonscott87 said:


> Ok, bottom line here is this.
> 
> Blockbuster failed because it held onto the brick and mortar too long and didn't go all in on the rental by mail and streaming. Why is this a big deal? Billions of dollars a year down the drain in building leases, property taxes, utility bills and so forth that Netflix frankly just doesn't have. Very little overhead for Netflix.
> 
> ...


Man, that looks somewhat familiar to what I was thinking of posting... Oh wait, I think I did post it... 

Right on Scott!

- Merg


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

bonscott87 said:


> As for Netflix and the future...by starting to emphasis streaming they *are* reacting to the market which is heading in that direction.


In fact, Netflix was a pioneer in the streaming business. They were the first service I had heard of that you could watch movies on your computer. There may have been earlier ones but they were on the forefront of the streaming wave (and were the first onto most internet appliances like Roku, etc.).

With that, it is hard to accuse Netflix of not looking forward or being married to one delivery mechanism.



The Merg said:


> Man, that looks somewhat familiar to what I was thinking of posting... Oh wait, I think I did post it...
> 
> Right on Scott!
> 
> - Merg


He is not the only one. Nor were you.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

tonyd79 said:


> In fact, Netflix was a pioneer in the streaming business. They were the first service I had heard of that you could watch movies on your computer. There may have been earlier ones but they were on the forefront of the streaming wave (and were the first onto most internet appliances like Roku, etc.).
> 
> With that, it is hard to accuse Netflix of not looking forward or being married to one delivery mechanism.


Most definitely. Only now they are going nearly "all in" with streaming, before it was almost more "toe dipping" although they were very aggressive in getting themselves on pretty much everything including the toaster. But what they are doing now is doing multi-million dollar deals with the studios to get more movies streaming sooner. The big thing they are missing is new movies streaming but they are now addressing that. Which continues their all in philosophy. But if streaming were to fail, they still have the disc business to "fall back" on which has always made money so far.


----------



## bt-rtp (Dec 30, 2005)

My only issue with Netflix is that the streaming HD content over the Internet is not as good picture quality as a given DirecTV HD channel. This will and is improving.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

bt-rtp said:


> My only issue with Netflix is that the streaming HD content over the Internet is not as good picture quality as a given DirecTV HD channel. This will and is improving.


What device are you using for streaming?

Rich


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

rich584 said:


> What device are you using for streaming?
> 
> Rich


Does not matter. The PQ will not be as good as DirecTV HD. Bandwidth is lower. Nor does Netflix do 5.1 sound yet.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

bonscott87 said:


> Most definitely. Only now they are going nearly "all in" with streaming, before it was almost more "toe dipping" although they were very aggressive in getting themselves on pretty much everything including the toaster. But what they are doing now is doing multi-million dollar deals with the studios to get more movies streaming sooner. The big thing they are missing is new movies streaming but they are now addressing that. Which continues their all in philosophy. But if streaming were to fail, they still have the disc business to "fall back" on which has always made money so far.


Agree. I think they needed streaming to get mainstream (no pun intended) with other services out there for studios to understand what it was and to be able to get more content. Plus they needed competition out there to make STB makers pay attention. When you offer just Netflix, maybe Blu Ray players don't support streaming but when they can offer Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon, Pandora, etc., it makes it worthwhile for the CE manufacturers and then, in turn, Netflix and the studios.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> Does not matter. The PQ will not be as good as DirecTV HD. Bandwidth is lower. Nor does Netflix do 5.1 sound yet.


Gotta disagree with you. I use 3 Panny BD65s that upscale all NetFlix content and the PQ is much better than D*'s. The Pannys and my one Sammy HR-C5500 all upscale to 1080/60p. The Rokus don't upscale and perhaps that's what you've based that opinion on. The Rokus do put out an impressive 720p on NetFlix content that has "HD" at the end of the dots. That is at least as good as D*'s 720p. But you can't compare the Rokus to the upscaling BD players. 1080/60p PQ is almost as good as 1080/24p.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

rich584 said:


> Gotta disagree with you. I use 3 Panny BD65s that upscale all NetFlix content and the PQ is much better than D*'s. The Pannys and my one Sammy HR-C5500 all upscale to 1080/60p. The Rokus don't upscale and perhaps that's what you've based that opinion on. The Rokus do put out an impressive 720p on NetFlix content that has "HD" at the end of the dots. That is at least as good as D*'s 720p. But you can't compare the Rokus to the upscaling BD players. 1080/60p PQ is almost as good as 1080/24p.
> 
> Rich


Looks like I'm right between the two opposing views on this...

I use the LG550 Blu Ray player and get Netflix HD that is pretty much on par with DirecTV's HD...not better, not worse. In theory, that's the way its suppose to be. In practice, it is just that here....and that's on a 116" screen no less.

For that very reason, I see it as a compliment (of content choices) to CinemaNow, not an alternative.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Looks like I'm right between the two opposing views on this...
> 
> I use the LG550 Blu Ray player and get Netflix HD that is pretty much on par with DirecTV's HD...not better, not worse. In theory, that's the way its suppose to be. In practice, it is just that here....and that's on a 116" screen no less.
> 
> For that very reason, I see it as a compliment (of content choices) to CinemaNow, not an alternative.


I've never tried an LG BD player. Does that upscale to 1080/60p? If it does, you should be seeing a better picture than D*'s 1080i. I do see differences in my three Panny BD players and my Sammy BD player. The Pannys upscale all content and it's always in the proper aspect. So when I watch L&O SVU from it's earliest days, I get a really good picture. That same show is barely viewable on a Roku and my Sammy doesn't put it in the proper aspect, which should be the original 4:3 it was filmed in. The Pannys do.

The Sammy has much more bells and whistles than the Pannys do, but all I look for is PQ and the Pannys are better at that. Reminds me of the Mitsubishi VCRs vs the Sony VCRs. The Mitsubishi did so much more than the Sony did. The remote control was much more impressive and had more functions than the Sony remotes, but, as much as I wanted to keep the Mitsubishi VCRs, the Sonys simply put out a better picture. There wasn't much difference in the price, just the PQ and, in the end, that's what counts the most.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

rich584 said:


> I've never tried an LG BD player. Does that upscale to 1080/60p? If it does, you should be seeing a better picture than D*'s 1080i. I do see differences in my three Panny BD players and my Sammy BD player. The Pannys upscale all content and it's always in the proper aspect. So when I watch L&O SVU from it's earliest days, I get a really good picture.


That's driven as much by the display as it is the source device, of course.

I have a 1080i projector in that room for the 116" screen, not a 1080p one. The picture is excellent, with great image contrast/color, as well as clarity. In fact, a neighbor had a 1080p projector installed about 9 months ago for $11,000 and *he keeps telling me *how ticked he is... because "mine looks better than his".  Then again, Blu Ray and CinemaNow also looks great on it.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

rich584 said:


> I've never tried an LG BD player. Does that upscale to 1080/60p? If it does, you should be seeing a better picture than D*'s 1080i. I do see differences in my three Panny BD players and my Sammy BD player. The Pannys upscale all content and it's always in the proper aspect. So when I watch L&O SVU from it's earliest days, I get a really good picture. That same show is barely viewable on a Roku and my Sammy doesn't put it in the proper aspect, which should be the original 4:3 it was filmed in. The Pannys do.
> 
> The Sammy has much more bells and whistles than the Pannys do, but all I look for is PQ and the Pannys are better at that. Reminds me of the Mitsubishi VCRs vs the Sony VCRs. The Mitsubishi did so much more than the Sony did. The remote control was much more impressive and had more functions than the Sony remotes, but, as much as I wanted to keep the Mitsubishi VCRs, the Sonys simply put out a better picture. There wasn't much difference in the price, just the PQ and, in the end, that's what counts the most.
> 
> Rich


You should see the new Oppo. Excellent PQ on everything, including upscaled Netflix.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> That's driven as much by the display as it is the source device, of course.
> 
> I have a 1080i projector in that room for the 116" screen, not a 1080p one. The picture is very, very solid and great image contrast/color, as well as clarity. Then again, so is Blu Ray and CinemaNow on it.


I'm using two 1080p and one 720p Panny plasmas. The difference between 1080i and 1080/60p is very noticeable. Takes me a few minutes to get used to the 1080i content from D*, but once I do, it's quite acceptable.

My wife asked me the other day about a projector. We've got a big room with a very high cathedral ceiling and it would be ideal for a projector. We hardly use the room for anything most of the time. We have it set up as a living room/dining room, but we rarely eat in the dining area and never use the living room part unless we have company. Don't have TV in that room.

I can't believe how much the cost of projectors has come down. In '92 I signed a purchase order for a projector that would handle everything from computers to movies for use in an auditorium that we were upgrading and the projector took a couple days to set up. It cost $40,000 dollars!

Watching the guy from the AV company we contracted the job out to set that thing up kinda soured me on projectors, but I did use them when teaching later on at a college, but all they were designed for was use with computers. Very handy in a classroom. That was before HD was being used.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> You should see the new Oppo. Excellent PQ on everything, including upscaled Netflix.


Every time I've tried an OPPO, I've had problems with them. But that was a while ago and all they had at that time were upscalers and the Sony upscalers put out a better picture at a much lower cost. But, hell, I'll try anything. What model are you using?

I've got so many BD players it seems as if they are breeding like bunnies. One more can't hurt. :lol:

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

rich584 said:


> I'm using two 1080p and one 720p Panny plasmas. The difference between 1080i and 1080/60p is very noticeable. Takes me a few minutes to get used to the 1080i content from D*, but once I do, it's quite acceptable.


That's Pandora's box to an entirely new debate that I'll avoid...since its been debated by many before...but I have not drank the 1080p "significant" superiority koolaid yet, based on extensive hours of personal observations.


> My wife asked me the other day about a projector. We've got a big room with a very high cathedral ceiling and it would be ideal for a projector. We hardly use the room for anything most of the time. We have it set up as a living room/dining room, but we rarely eat in the dining area and never use the living room part unless we have company. Don't have TV in that room.
> 
> I can't believe how much the cost of projectors has come down. In '92 I signed a purchase order for a projector that would handle everything from computers to movies for use in an auditorium that we were upgrading and the projector took a couple days to set up. It cost $40,000 dollars!


Yup on all counts. The newest HD projectors create stunning imagery, and 1/2 or less the price of comparable projectors just 3 years ago. You can get a very impressive setup of projector and screen under $10K now, which is well below the $22K it took just 2-3 years back....and the technology keeps getting better as well each year.

Once you've seen a *quality* 1080 projector image on a 116" (or larger) *quality* screen, its virtually impossible to go back to a measly 55" HDTV, I don't care how good it is.

Mrs HDTVfan refuses to watch any movie of any kind anymore without seeing it on the projector in the Home Theater we built a few years back (my Avatar). No problem with the Wife Acceptance Factor (WAF) here. 

Like I said earlier...both Netflix and CinemaNow stuff is might fine there too.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

rich584 said:


> Every time I've tried an OPPO, I've had problems with them. But that was a while ago and all they had at that time were upscalers and the Sony upscalers put out a better picture at a much lower cost. But, hell, I'll try anything. What model are you using?
> 
> I've got so many BD players it seems as if they are breeding like bunnies. One more can't hurt. :lol:
> 
> Rich


BDP-93...It's only pre release right now, but if you email them at [email protected] they _might_ have some left. Remember, they're pre release, so some kinks are being worked out. It's $499.99 and you receive a complete refund if unhappy at any time up to 30 (or 90?) days after public release. More info here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1291855


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

sigma1914 said:


> BDP-93...It's only pre release right now, but if you email them at [email protected] they _might_ have some left. Remember, they're pre release, so some kinks are being worked out. It's $499.99 and you receive a complete refund if unhappy at any time up to 30 (or 90?) days after public release. More info here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1291855


Yeah - that unit's gonna be another winner for Oppo.

Now if they could only bring down the price a bit more to be competitive...


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Yeah - that unit's gonna be another winner for Oppo.
> 
> Now if they could only bring down the price a bit more to be competitive...


Agreed about both. The price tag made me hesitant, but I needed a dual HDMI output unit since my AVR doesn't pass 3D.These units were my choices:

Panny #1 DMP-BDT300 - $400
Panny #2 DMP-BDT350 - $430 - adds DLNA feature
Sammy BD-C7900 - $399

I also needed DLNA that streamed mkv, so that rules out the Panny #1. So, $100 got me a better upscaling chip and excellent customer service. $500 for a BR is crazy, but it has it's perks.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

bt-rtp said:


> My only issue with Netflix is that the streaming HD content over the Internet is not as good picture quality as a given DirecTV HD channel. This will and is improving.


Sure it is........when was the last time you looked, what equipment were you using, and what was your internet connection speed??? All THAT makes a very BIG difference.......

Trying to compare my D* HD to a Netflix stream through my Wii and D* wins every time.

Comparing D*'s HD feed to a Netflix HD stream through my PS3 over my 20mbps internet connection and it's a toss up.....I've seen SD programming from Netflix through my PS3 to my 65" Mitsi that I had to go back several times to check if it was SD or HD....it was THAT good. The programming from Netflix that's NOT 1080P is all upconverted to 1080P by the PS3 for a VERY good result.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

sdirv said:


> Sure it is........when was the last time you looked, what equipment were you using, and what was your Internet connection speed??? All THAT makes a very BIG difference.......
> 
> Trying to compare my D* HD to a Netflix stream through my Wii and D* wins every time.
> 
> Comparing D*'s HD feed to a Netflix HD stream through my PS3 over my 20mbps Internet connection and it's a toss up.....I've seen SD programming from Netflix through my PS3 to my 65" Mitsi that I had to go back several times to check if it was SD or HD....it was THAT good. The programming from Netflix that's NOT 1080P is all upconverted to 1080P by the PS3 for a VERY good result.


I think the real point of all this is just what you somewhat illustrated - it depends.

One of the reasons streaming gets mixed reviews is simply the mix of equipment out there to support it, and the diversity of bandwidth available to support it. The average consumer today may or may not have enough Internet bandwidth to get a quality stream in many cases, whereas other users have no issue at all.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

tonyd79 said:


> Does not matter. The PQ will not be as good as DirecTV HD. Bandwidth is lower. Nor does Netflix do 5.1 sound yet.


Huh???? Care to explain?????

Netflix has been streaming 1080P content in DD5.1 with the PS3 since mid-October.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

I know movies on Netflix are marked HD, but which ones are 1080p?


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I think the real point of all this is just what you somewhat illustrated - it depends.
> 
> One of the reasons streaming gets mixed reviews is simply the mix of equipment out there to support it, and the diversity of bandwidth available to support it. The average consumer today may or may not have enough Internet bandwidth to get a quality stream in many cases, whereas other users have no issue at all.


Which is exactly right.

Reminds me of my mother in law telling me about how bad her D* HD sucks, so I go down to her place and check. She's got a DVR (not HD at all) in her mobile home hooked to a single LNB dish on a portable mount out front and connected to an ancient 25" tube TV with a composite cable.....but the guy from the indie installer told her it was high definition.

So we see folks drop in here with "reviews" on the product (N*) who may or may not have the equipment needed, the bandwidth needed, etc. and those "reviews" steer others in their decisions.

Every time I see a comment about how N* "can't do this of that"....I'll be asking for clarification. How long ago was it that the person actually had/saw N*, what equipment was used, how fast the internet connection was....

And when we talk about "equipment needed to support it", the best device on the market currently for streaming N* is the PS3. Mine's been in the "rack" for years (literally), it's one of the older 80gb models. There's other good equipment out there I'm sure, but I don't have experience with them so can't comment...I'll leave that to others.

I'm a little bit of a N* fanboy I guess (as I am with D* too), but when I post/reply about N* I talk about equipment and bandwidth requirements. Those "requirements" are nothing considered to be exotic.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

sigma1914 said:


> I know movies on Netflix are marked HD, but which ones are 1080p?


Although N* does label which programs are in DD5.1, they don't list resolution.....only that programming is in HD.

I would suppose that's done since labeling programs as 1080P and then not having them "show up" that way for people without the required equipment or bandwidth would only make people "upset" (??)

I don't see D* listing resolution in their guide either (they do list 1080P programming for some demand stuff), it's just shown as HD no matter what the resolution is.

D*'s able to do it on PPV programming since they control the equipment you use, you configure your system to indicate capabilities (and the system actually checks) and then you're not actually streaming at all. But rather downloading programming to a hard drive to watch later (even though "later" may be in 4 minutes).


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

sdirv said:


> Although N* does label which programs are in DD5.1, they don't list resolution.....only that programming is in HD.
> 
> I would suppose that's done since labeling programs as 1080P and then not having them "show up" that way for people without the required equipment or bandwidth would only make people "upset" (??)
> 
> ...


Thanks. If you know any off hand, please share. (Like you, I love Netflix.)


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

sdirv said:


> I'm a little bit of a N* fanboy I guess (as I am with D* too), but when I post/reply about N* I talk about equipment and bandwidth requirements. Those "requirements" are nothing considered to be exotic.


Ironically, I'm anything but a NetFlix fan, yet I respect the fact that they offer a service many enjoy. I've used them as well, but not likely as much as many others here, yet enough to see what they offer in terms of selection and quality. No problems viewing here.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 28, 2005)

It's not many data points, but...

I have a 720p Sony 34" CRT. I recorded an HD movie from D*. I then streamed the same movie from Netflix via Roku and 10mbps internet. I then compared single frames from each version, using frames that had very small details in the background, such as the hands on a clock. I was surprised to see that the Netflix version actually had a sharper image and I could see minor details that were blurry on the D* version.

As always, YMMV.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> That's Pandora's box to an entirely new debate that I'll avoid...since its been debated by many before...but I have not drank the 1080p "significant" superiority koolaid yet, based on extensive hours of personal observations.


Speaking of Pandora, boy was I wrong about Pandora Radio. That's a great application and it seems to come with every streaming device. I just brushed it off as "more crap that I'll never use", but I use it everyday.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> BDP-93...It's only pre release right now, but if you email them at [email protected] they _might_ have some left. Remember, they're pre release, so some kinks are being worked out. It's $499.99 and you receive a complete refund if unhappy at any time up to 30 (or 90?) days after public release. More info here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1291855


Bit of a steep price, but then every OPPO I've bought (and quickly returned) has had a hefty price tag on it. I'll wait on that one. Thanx for the info.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sdirv said:


> Sure it is........when was the last time you looked, what equipment were you using, and what was your internet connection speed??? All THAT makes a very BIG difference.......
> 
> Trying to compare my D* HD to a Netflix stream through my Wii and D* wins every time.
> 
> Comparing D*'s HD feed to a Netflix HD stream through my PS3 over my 20mbps internet connection and it's a toss up.....I've seen SD programming from Netflix through my PS3 to my 65" Mitsi that I had to go back several times to check if it was SD or HD....it was THAT good. The programming from Netflix that's NOT 1080P is all upconverted to 1080P by the PS3 for a VERY good result.


So far, the only HD content that NetFlix streams is 720p and all my upscaling BD players turn that into a great 1080/60p picture.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sdirv said:


> Huh???? Care to explain?????
> 
> Netflix has been streaming 1080P content in DD5.1 with the PS3 since mid-October.


Didn't know that. Huh. Wonder why they don't just stream it to all devices?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Bob Coxner said:


> It's not many data points, but...
> 
> I have a 720p Sony 34" CRT. I recorded an HD movie from D*. I then streamed the same movie from Netflix via Roku and 10mbps internet. I then compared single frames from each version, using frames that had very small details in the background, such as the hands on a clock. I was surprised to see that the Netflix version actually had a sharper image and I could see minor details that were blurry on the D* version.
> 
> As always, YMMV.


I've always said in many posts that I thought NetFlix 720p was better than D*'s 720p. Hard to get folks to agree, but I see it. And I'm not imagining it.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> Thanks. If you know any off hand, please share. (Like you, I love Netflix.)


Just called NetFlix and the CSR told me that they do, indeed, stream in 1080p on PS3 and they're waiting for the manufacturers of streaming devices to catch up to Sony. Sorry, I was wrong again.

I asked about the "HD" and she said that all the BluRay content was in 1080p and 5.1 on PS3s, altho she didn't sound positive, but that makes sense. She also told me that after the New Year hits, the HD content will be vastly increased. She said that they are working as quickly as they can to stay ahead of the pack.

Rich


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

"rich584" said:


> I've always said in many posts that I thought NetFlix 720p was better than D*'s 720p. Hard to get folks to agree, but I see it. And I'm not imagining it.
> 
> Rich


You are imagining it. The bandwidth is not there. Or your upscaler is making it look good to you. Raw delivery is not near the directv quality at this point.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

rich584 said:


> Didn't know that. Huh. Wonder why they don't just stream it to all devices?
> 
> Rich


Firmware??? (shrug). Who's writing the Netlix applications onboard all those devices???


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

tonyd79 said:


> You are imagining it. The bandwidth is not there. Or your upscaler is making it look good to you. Raw delivery is not near the directv quality at this point.


Who's bandwidth?????

Just because YOU don't have the required bandwidth, doesn't mean others would be in the same boat.....

You've made this point a couple times now, the last time you said it I asked what equipment you were using, what your internet speed was, but You didn't respond.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

sdirv said:


> Firmware??? (shrug). Who's writing the Netlix applications onboard all those devices???





sdirv said:


> Who's bandwidth?????
> 
> Just because YOU don't have the required bandwidth, doesn't mean others would be in the same boat.....
> 
> You've made this point a couple times now, the last time you said it I asked what equipment you were using, what your internet speed was, but You didn't respond.


Puzzling...I have DSL 3Mbps service here, and the LG 550 here streams just fine.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

sdirv said:


> Trying to compare my D* HD to a Netflix stream through my Wii and D* wins every time.
> 
> Comparing D*'s HD feed to a Netflix HD stream through my PS3 over my 20mbps internet connection and it's a toss up.....I've seen SD programming from Netflix through my PS3 to my 65" Mitsi that I had to go back several times to check if it was SD or HD....it was THAT good. The programming from Netflix that's NOT 1080P is all upconverted to 1080P by the PS3 for a VERY good result.


Just wanted to point out that the Wii is not capable of HD. It's an SD device only, even if you hook it up with component cables. Thus why streaming "HD" content thru the Wii would always look worse then D* HD because the Wii can't do HD.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

tonyd79 said:


> You are imagining it. The bandwidth is not there. Or your upscaler is making it look good to you. Raw delivery is not near the directv quality at this point.


The recent NatGeo stuff on Netflix that I have streamed in HD (not on a PS3 so not 1080p) looks as good as the stuff I've seen on Discovery HD on DirecTV. So the quality is there if you have a good connection.

HD I stream off cbs.com is also near to the OTA 1080i quality I get with CBS.

And since Internet streaming and OTA is about all I do anymore I am very happy with the quality, at least on my connection.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

bonscott87 said:


> Just wanted to point out that the Wii is not capable of HD. It's an SD device only, even if you hook it up with component cables. Thus why streaming "HD" content thru the Wii would always look worse then D* HD because the Wii can't do HD.


I knew that, the point I was making (I guess) was that I often see statements form people about how Netflix PQ isn't as good, or will never be as good, for a variety of reasons.....but they don't seem to let anyone know what equipment they've used to watch it on, how fast their internet is, etc.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Puzzling...I have DSL 3Mbps service here, and the LG 550 here streams just fine.


I don't know what's puzzling about what I posted, or maybe your reply was about what I was replying to......I've seen the guy post a couple times now about N*'s PQ not being on par with D*'s and blaming it on bandwidth. (???)

Seems like your equipment streams fine on 3mbps service, even though I'd think that would be a bit low to stream HD content. I had 12mbps service when I only had the PS3, but up'd it to 20mbps service once I started adding N* capable devices in other rooms and had the thought that "someone" in the house may want to stream N* at the same time I'm watching you-tube videos on my laptop out by the pool while I have my coffee in the morning......

My dad has started asking me about Netflix (he's 80), had to tell him that as long as he was running 786K DSL he should forget about it......he says his provider says he's got high speed internet. (shrug).


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

sdirv said:


> Who's bandwidth?????
> 
> Just because YOU don't have the required bandwidth, doesn't mean others would be in the same boat.....
> 
> You've made this point a couple times now, the last time you said it I asked what equipment you were using, what your internet speed was, but You didn't respond.


I meant what Netflix is sending. They are not sending what is the equivalent of HD on satellite or cable.

I assure you, my Netflix download is ALWAYS 4 dots.

BTW, sorry if I missed every post you ever made.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

sdirv said:


> My dad has started asking me about Netflix (he's 80), had to tell him that as long as he was running 786K DSL he should forget about it......he says his provider says he's got high speed internet. (shrug).


Yeah...that's like an aircard in terms of speed...not quite enough.

3Mbps though works just fine here.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Also it's not just the total bandwidth. It's also 1) what are you *really* getting. Before I dumped Charter I was paying for 6 but would rarely get 3.5 if I was lucky. Also is it a steady rate or does it bounce around a lot, if it does then Netflix will thottle down until it gets a more steady speed.
and 2) is that a solid connection or do you get a lot of packet loss or latency. If you have high latency or a decent amount of packet loss then that will really limit the quality of your connection and Netflix won't send you the best quality stream.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sdirv said:


> Firmware??? (shrug). Who's writing the Netlix applications onboard all those devices???


The CSR said it was up to the various manufacturers of streaming devices to upgrade their devices to receive 1080p. Makes me wonder why Rokus are not receiving 1080p since they upgraded months ago. But she did admit she didn't know a whole lot about the whole 1080p thing.

Meanwhile, here's a *link* that y'all might find interesting.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Puzzling...I have DSL 3Mbps service here, and the LG 550 here streams just fine.


And I've got a booster on my Cablevision cable modem and it hits 30 up and 5 down. I have no trouble streaming at all.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sdirv said:


> I knew that, the point I was making (I guess) was that I often see statements form people about how Netflix PQ isn't as good, or will never be as good, for a variety of reasons.....but they don't seem to let anyone know what equipment they've used to watch it on, how fast their internet is, etc.


True, let me be one of those with full disclosure: I have three Rokus, three Net ready Panny BD65s and a Sammy HT-C5500, and all stream better than D*'s content, regarding PQ, of course. I don't get 5.1 on any of them, but it's coming. We also have an Xbox and a PS3 in the house. My son uses them on a 720p plasma and his PQ is very good too.

The Rokus 720p is consistently better than D*'s 720p and the four BD players all upgrade to 1080/60p and provide a much better picture than D's 1080i. I have downloaded one 1080/24p PPV movie (_Australia_) and I compared it to a BluRay disc and I couldn't see any difference.

All things being equal, the Panny BD65s have the best all around PQ. Blows the Rokus away, but that will change when Roku starts streaming in 1080p.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> I meant what Netflix is sending. They are not sending what is the equivalent of HD on satellite or cable.
> 
> I assure you, my Netflix download is ALWAYS 4 dots.


Something is wrong. You should see four dots followed by "HD" on some content. If you look at the descriptions they tell you what's in HD. If you see it in the description and you only see four dots, something is wrong. The Rokus I have all put out a better picture with the above mentioned 720p content than D*'s content.

Rich


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

"rich584" said:


> Something is wrong. You should see four dots followed by "HD" on some content. If you look at the descriptions they tell you what's in HD. If you see it in the description and you only see four dots, something is wrong. The Rokus I have all put out a better picture with the above mentioned 720p content than D*'s content.
> 
> Rich


I do. Why did you assume I am not.

If your picture is better on your Roku, something is wrong with your directv setup.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> I do. Why did you assume I am not.
> 
> If your picture is better on your Roku, something is wrong with your directv setup.


You said in the post I referred to: "I assure you, my Netflix download is ALWAYS 4 dots." You did not say anything about seeing the "HD" at the end of the four dots. You might try to make your posts clearer.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> If your picture is better on your Roku, something is wrong with your directv setup.


I don't even use the Rokus, my BD players put out 1080/60p and I use them for NetFlix content. And that 1080p picture blows away the 1080i picture that I get from D*. As it should. There's nothing wrong with my D* setup.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

rich584 said:


> I don't even use the Rokus, my BD players put out 1080/60p and I use them for NetFlix content. *And that 1080p picture blows away the 1080i picture that I get from D**. As it should. There's nothing wrong with my D* setup.
> 
> Rich


DirecTV also supports some 1080p content for equal comparisons, of course...


----------



## morgan79 (Oct 9, 2007)

i downloaded it threw my ps3 & was watching the hdx movie trailiers the other day & worked perfect 1080p pic & dd 5.1 sound, when u sign up you get one hd movie for free..i just got hooked up to 10 meg cable & its works fine.....i also use netflix cant wait untill they start streaming hd with 5.1 sound..for me its a no brainer,, pay a flat fee per month & watch as many blu rays as i want..i can wait 30 days ,if i really wanted to see the movie i would have seen it at the theater....


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

morgan79 said:


> i downloaded it threw my ps3 & was watching the hdx movie trailiers the other day & worked perfect 1080p pic & dd 5.1 sound, when u sign up you get one hd movie for free..i just got hooked up to 10 meg cable & its works fine.....i also use netflix cant wait untill they start streaming hd with 5.1 sound..for me its a no brainer,, pay a flat fee per month & watch as many blu rays as i want..i can wait 30 days ,if i really wanted to see the movie i would have seen it at the theater....


Vudu's HDX is the best streaming I've seen.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> DirecTV also supports some 1080p content for equal comparisons, of course...


I've stated that in many posts. I couldn't tell the difference between _Australia_ on BluRay and the 1080/24p version I downloaded on PPV. That's the only movie I've ever used PPV on and I just wanted to make the comparison. I really didn't see any difference at all.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> Vudu's HDX is the best streaming I've seen.


If I finally get rid of that Premier package, I'll try that. I just can't seem to pull the trigger on that $114 nightmare. I wouldn't mind downloading PPV content then. Does Vudu have that same 24 hour limit?

Rich


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

tonyd79 said:


> You are imagining it. The bandwidth is not there. Or your upscaler is making it look good to you. Raw delivery is not near the directv quality at this point.


new drawback to Netflix just reared it's head. Recieved notification that charter cable is hard capping their internet access.

Tier 1 - 100GB
Tier 2 - 250GB
Tier 3 - 500GB

If you exceed multiple times you are canceled, has already been reported that thye have termed some customers for exceeding the cap by 1TB


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> new drawback to Netflix just reared it's head. Recieved notification that charter cable is hard capping their internet access.
> 
> Tier 1 - 100GB
> Tier 2 - 250GB
> ...


I have real stupid question. Streaming over your home network (PC to BR) doesn't count, right?


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

tonyd79 said:


> I meant what Netflix is sending. They are not sending what is the equivalent of HD on satellite or cable.
> 
> I assure you, my Netflix download is ALWAYS 4 dots.
> 
> BTW, sorry if I missed every post you ever made.


Dots????

So you get 4 dots, on what equipment, at what speed?????

I don't care if you missed "every post I ever made (which hasn't been all that many here), but once again (for the third time) you haven't answered the question I asked in reply to your statement.

Are you getting "4 dots" on an old laptop using 768K DSL????

Or are you using equipment capable of displaying the highest resolution provided by Netflix (currently the PS3) with a true highspeed "pipe"?? I'm not purposely trying to be argumentative, just hoping you can explain what you said.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

bonscott87 said:


> Also it's not just the total bandwidth. It's also 1) what are you *really* getting. Before I dumped Charter I was paying for 6 but would rarely get 3.5 if I was lucky. Also is it a steady rate or does it bounce around a lot, if it does then Netflix will thottle down until it gets a more steady speed.
> and 2) is that a solid connection or do you get a lot of packet loss or latency. If you have high latency or a decent amount of packet loss then that will really limit the quality of your connection and Netflix won't send you the best quality stream.


THIS is important, it's not just the advertised speed your provider says you're getting but the ability to sustain those speeds with some amount of "clarity".....


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

rich584 said:


> I've stated that in many posts. I couldn't tell the difference between _Australia_ on BluRay and the 1080/24p version I downloaded on PPV. That's the only movie I've ever used PPV on and I just wanted to make the comparison. I really didn't see any difference at all.
> 
> Rich


A lot of factors come into play&#8230;

TV size, viewing distance, watching fast motion shots, static shots, quality of the blu-ray disc you're using as a reference, quality of TV, eye vision etc.

From 11 feet away (52" TV) I can see a difference in quality when playing a high quality blu-ray. With my glasses on. :glasses:

DIRECTV 1080p is a solid product. With its lower bitrates, it can never equal the quality of a "good" blu-ray disc. Obviously DTSHD audio is years ahead of DD. No need to go there.

With a few of the DIRECTV 1080p "freebees" I've seen, the picture was great. However, they just don't have the same visual "pop" that a "good" blu-ray has.

All bets are off if the reference blu-ray is low quality. Unfortunately, most blu-ray movie studios don't utilize the full potential of the technology. They try to squeeze more crap on the disc by lowering bitrates.


----------



## anleva (Nov 14, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> Vudu's HDX is the best streaming I've seen.


I tried it last weekend as I noticed I have the Vudu service available via my Samsung Blu-Ray player and they were offering a free one. 1080p/24 and Dolby Digital Plus 5.1 sound. Very impressive. Still I won't use it much as I still prefer renting a physical Blu-Ray.


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> new drawback to Netflix just reared it's head. Recieved notification that charter cable is hard capping their internet access.
> 
> Tier 1 - 100GB
> Tier 2 - 250GB
> ...


Ouch, that sucks!

Has anyone done the math? How many HD streaming movies can you watch with the 500GB cap? If it's 5 movies a month that would suck. If it's 50 movies a month, there's no issue.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Hutchinshouse said:


> A lot of factors come into play&#8230;
> 
> TV size, viewing distance, watching fast motion shots, static shots, quality of the blu-ray disc you're using as a reference, quality of TV, eye vision etc.
> 
> ...


Agreed.

Rich


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

sdirv said:


> THIS is important, it's not just the advertised speed your provider says you're getting but the ability to sustain those speeds with some amount of "clarity".....


Yup...a very important point...latency was also mentioned earlier in another post.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Hutchinshouse said:


> Ouch, that sucks!
> 
> Has anyone done the math? How many HD streaming movies can you watch with the 500GB cap? If it's 5 movies a month that would suck. If it's 50 movies a month, there's no issue.


 you also need to factor in your normal internet usage, web browing, email, gaming, etc. This is the exact reason whe I am looking at uverse internet.


----------



## joed32 (Jul 27, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> new drawback to Netflix just reared it's head. Recieved notification that charter cable is hard capping their internet access.
> 
> Tier 1 - 100GB
> Tier 2 - 250GB
> ...


I have Charter in SoCal and haven't heard anything about a cap.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

They are all going to Caps and just because you have a Cap don't expect to have the same bandwidth all the way up to that Cap as FAP plays into it and they start throttling back on your bandwidth allowance even before you get to the Cap.

That is why I just bought a Virgin Mobile MIFI 2200 with Unlimited Data Usage because it will be a thing of the past very shortly!!!

Verizon has a 5GB Cap with their MIFI 2200 for $50 and 10 GB Cap for $80/month so get used to it.


----------



## Bob Coxner (Dec 28, 2005)

richierich said:


> They are all going to Caps and just because you have a Cap don't expect to have the same bandwidth all the way up to that Cap as FAP plays into it and they start throttling back on your bandwidth allowance even before you get to the Cap.
> 
> That is why I just bought a Virgin Mobile MIFI 2200 with Unlimited Data Usage because it will be a thing of the past very shortly!!!
> 
> Verizon has a 5GB Cap with their MIFI 2200 for $50 and 10 GB Cap for $80/month so get used to it.


Unfortunately, there's no constitutional guarantee that the Virgin Mobile will remain unlimited. Remember that AT&T data with the original iPhone was unlimited and now the best you can get is 2gb per month. (Yes, grandfathered plans remain unlimited but you lose it if you make a late payment or any change)

We're all ultimately at the mercy of providers.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Bob Coxner said:


> We're all ultimately at the mercy of providers.


How true.


----------



## DaveC27 (Apr 14, 2010)

Bob Coxner said:


> (Yes, grandfathered plans remain unlimited but you lose it if you make a late payment or any change)


Not strictly true AT&T let me upgrade from my 3G to the 4G and keep my plan. I guess they'd have to because why would anyone want to move


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Bob Coxner said:


> Unfortunately, there's no constitutional guarantee that the Virgin Mobile will remain unlimited. Remember that AT&T data with the original iPhone was unlimited and now the best you can get is 2gb per month. (Yes, grandfathered plans remain unlimited but you lose it if you make a late payment or any change)
> 
> We're all ultimately at the mercy of providers.


I am Grandfathered and they are taking out the Monthly Payment Automatically from my VISA so if I miss a Payment it is their fault so I am Good To Go!!!


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

joed32 said:


> I have Charter in SoCal and haven't heard anything about a cap.


take it you have not read the new TOS they posted last month

http://www.charter.com/footer/footerPage.jsp?tag=policies_resi_hsi_accep_use_policy

14. NO EXCESSIVE USE OF BANDWIDTHThe Service is for residential use and only within limits that Charter considers reasonable for the service level to which Customer subscribes.* Residential service usage for Customers subscribing to the Lite or Express packages should not exceed 100 Gigabytes ("GB") of data per month. Usage for Customers subscribing to the Plus or Max packages should not exceed 250 GB of data per month and usage for Customers subscribing to the Ultra60 package should not exceed 500 GB of data per month. Charter reserves the right to revise or implement additional usage limits at any time.*It is a violation of this Policy to use the Service in excess of these limits. In these cases, Charter may, in its sole discretion, notify Customer of excessive use and (i) request Customer to employ corrective or self-limiting actions to comply with this provision; (ii) suspend or terminate Customer's Service account; or (iii) request that Customer subscribe to a version of the Service (such as a commercial grade Internet service, if appropriate) for use at higher data consumption levels that align with Customer's usage patterns. Charter's determination of the data consumption for Service accounts is final.

Acceptable Use Policy, Effective November 2010.
Version 9.2

Here is the current discussion on it at dslreports

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r25062735-HSI-Here-come-the-CAPS-


----------



## joed32 (Jul 27, 2006)

You're right, I never even go to their site let alone read the fine print. I just know that I haven't been limited in any way. I stream Netflix and download On Demand movies all the time and apparently I'm not hitting their limit.


----------



## Maleman (Apr 18, 2007)

I am interested in trying the DTV HDCinema. I have never done it before due to the time deadlines for watching.

I read most of this thread, can someone sum up for me.......how do i keep this on my DVR for longer than 24hrs? I don't need to watch it instantly but would like a bit of control on when i watch it?

thank u 

P.S I am assuming i just need ethernet from the dvr to my router?


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Maleman said:


> I am interested in trying the DTV HDCinema. I have never done it before due to the time deadlines for watching.
> 
> I read most of this thread, can someone sum up for me.......how do i keep this on my DVR for longer than 24hrs? I don't need to watch it instantly but would like a bit of control on when i watch it?
> 
> ...


Record it, but do not Buy it until you are ready to watch it. Once you purchase it, you have 24 hrs to finish viewing it. When you record it, there will be an expiration date out in the future, but it won't revert to 24 hrs until you purchase it.

- Merg


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

joed32 said:


> You're right, I never even go to their site let alone read the fine print. I just know that I haven't been limited in any way. I stream Netflix and download On Demand movies all the time and apparently I'm not hitting their limit.


they modified the tos in Nov and are starting to enforce it in Dec


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

wingrider01 said:


> take it you have not read the new TOS they posted last month
> 
> http://www.charter.com/footer/footerPage.jsp?tag=policies_resi_hsi_accep_use_policy
> 
> ...


I read a Newspaper Article about Bandwidth Caps and Limitations about 6 months ago stating that everyone would be Limiting their Data Usage on a Monthly Basis even though many will just state it in the Fine Print.

And now it is happening. That is why I bought the Virgin Mobile MIFI 2200 with Unlimited Usage for $40/month as this is the last one you will see.


----------



## psuscott0483 (Apr 16, 2009)

i bought christmas vacation 2 days ago which said available until 12/30. i bought it and watched the first 30min or so then i had to run some errands, i forgot about it until now, is it gone?

i was about to ask since it was bought in 1080p but recorded on a 1080i dvr if i watch it via MRV to a 1080p tv/box will it be in 1080p? but that question might be irrelevant now.


----------



## DogLover (Mar 19, 2007)

psuscott0483 said:


> i bought christmas vacation 2 days ago which said available until 12/30. i bought it and watched the first 30min or so then i had to run some errands, i forgot about it until now, is it gone?
> 
> i was about to ask since it was bought in 1080p but recorded on a 1080i dvr if i watch it via MRV to a 1080p tv/box will it be in 1080p? but that question might be irrelevant now.


It should not be gone, but you would need to purchase it again to finish watching it. When you purchased it, you might notice that the expiration changes to 24 hours later. After that time has expired, it should stay in your list, with the exiration back to the original 12/30. (That way, to watch it again or finish watching it, you don't have to download it again.) After that 12/30 expiration date, it will auto delete from your machine.

I have not tried it, but from what I understand, if you watch it via MRV on a box hooked to a 1080p capable TV, you will be able to see it in 1080p.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

richierich said:


> I read a Newspaper Article about Bandwidth Caps and Limitations about 6 months ago stating that everyone would be Limiting their Data Usage on a Monthly Basis even though many will just state it in the Fine Print.
> 
> And now it is happening. That is why I bought the Virgin Mobile MIFI 2200 with Unlimited Usage for $40/month as this is the last one you will see.


funny about those unlimited data plans, buried deep int he TOS there are caps dictacted. Was curoius on the one you mentioned and had trouble finding anything relating to the terms of service.

Cricket advertises unlimited data, but they have buried in their TOS that if you utilize over 5gb in a month billing they will drop your internet connection speed until the end of the billing period, verizon has the same type of wording only they hard cap it.

edit - did find this on a 3rd party review site

Virgin Mobile now offers unlimited 3G Internet for $40 per month, with no contract, on Sprint's nationwide network. There's also an anemic $10, 100MB tier, but the $40 plan is the truly radical one. According to Virgin, there is no data cap on the service, but the carrier reserves the right to lower your speed for "unreasonable" usage. They're keeping that vague, but it reads "BitTorrent" to me. MoreVirgin's $40 plan gets you more data than the competition's. Cricket and T-Mobile both offer $40 plans without contracts, but with 5GB limits after which they throttle your speed. AT&T and Verizon Wireless both offer 5GB for $60 a month, with contract (although both also offer more limited tethering plans for less.) Sprint charges $60 a month for 5GB of 3G and unlimited WiMax 4G, which makes sense if you're in a WiMax city.

So VNM does have an out just like the rest of the providers


----------



## psuscott0483 (Apr 16, 2009)

DogLover said:


> It should not be gone, but you would need to purchase it again to finish watching it. When you purchased it, you might notice that the expiration changes to 24 hours later. After that time has expired, it should stay in your list, with the exiration back to the original 12/30. (That way, to watch it again or finish watching it, you don't have to download it again.) After that 12/30 expiration date, it will auto delete from your machine.
> 
> I have not tried it, but from what I understand, if you watch it via MRV on a box hooked to a 1080p capable TV, you will be able to see it in 1080p.


it was deleted from the dvr last night when i got home, bummer


----------

