CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

ecrabb · Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 11:08 pm Post subject:

Greg/Schmoe/Rod... Wan actually has a valid point, here. Read up on "net neutrality" if you don't believe some ISPs are absolutely trying to figure out how to monetize certain kinds of traffic in order to maximize profit from from their networks.

The idea that Netflix wouldn't roll out a service if they hadn't investigated the viability is fine, but it kind of misses the point. For one thing, it only holds true at a specific point in time. 2 or 3 years ago when Netflix started building their on-demand service, I doubt anybody was even doing in DPI yet. So, even if Netflix did their due diligence, that was then and this is now! Things have changed! Just as you found out Greg, your ISP now does deep packet inspection so they can tell when you're running P2P. If you are, they trash your QoS in order to guarantee QoS for their other customers (and in order to reduce their cost liability to their NAP (or backbone provider). This really sucks because there actually legitimate applications for Torrent, for instance. What makes you think bandwidth caps couldn't be next?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_packet_inspection

Now, I don't know if anybody is filtering or bandwidth capping for streaming video yet, but don't think it couldn't happen.

You have to think about who's who, here. Netflix is a direct competitor and competes head-to-head with Comcast's and other broadband providers' on-demand video services. What incentive does Comcast or other ISP's have to allow that service if it's a competing service?

SC

schmoe · Joined: 30 Mar 2008 Posts: 374 Location: Seattle, WA

I think we could debate all day speculating on what may happen in the future. I was simply commenting on the way things are today. It's simply not an issue as of right now. If you decide not to embrace a technology for fear of what may happen six months to a year from now or greater, you are totally free to make that choice.

I absolutely agree that ISPs will try to be as greedy as they can. Personally I believe they won't get very far, but that is a completely separate debate.

Angus_rg

ecrabb · Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 11:41 pm Post subject:

Schmoe... True. You're absolutely right. I think Wan was just pointing out that what is available today, may not be available or may cost more tomorrow. I sure wouldn't spend $800-900 for the high-end Vudu box right now... especially given that it does nothing else.

I would also point out that for people like me with a crummy 1.5mbps DSL line, ALL these services range from questionable value (waiting hours to download a movie to the Apple TV or to a Vudu, to completely worthless for the Netflix offering. The audio being stereo is a non-starter for me, and the picture quality at 1.5mbps is just total crap. I'd put it not far off VHS... and with some digital motion artifacting on top of that. It looked just "OK" on my 21" monitor - I can't even imagine how sh*tty it would look on a projector.

Yes, I need a faster connection, but I hate the cable company here (and it would cost me $20 more/mo, and Qwest is taking their sweet damn time rolling out their 10mbps service... So, for now I'm stuck at 1.5... Unfortunately.

That's an interesting article, Angus... I especially liked the last line: "The rest of us will be happily watching Netflix's collection of 80s movies." Wink

I agree, too - I'd rather watch SD w/great surround than an HD pic with crummy compressed stereo... Which, again - is why Netflix mailed BD's is a perfectly fine solution for us at this point.

SC

WanMan · Joined: 19 Mar 2006 Posts: 10270

WanMan · Joined: 19 Mar 2006 Posts: 10270

schmoe · Joined: 30 Mar 2008 Posts: 374 Location: Seattle, WA

greg_mitch · Joined: 03 May 2006 Posts: 5320

Yes I agree again. No one is calling Wan a liar here. He threw out enough terms over my head in the last post that I would trust his opinion.

My point was only that Netflix had some discussions, deep discussions about the internet backbone being able to handle their streaming.

Here is another question, maybe for another thread. How do you feel about the internet as a regulated utility with set rates for transmission and government subsidized upgrades, etc. Does everyone have the right to be online?

Does it help our country to be better connected, like say Japan?

ecrabb · Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 5:29 am Post subject:

Well, this is interesting... I was doing some reading on the Vudu site. First of all, the cheaper box is only $150, now. So, that's cool, even though it still just does one thing - at least it's a little more reasonable. This little nugget in the FAQs sure caught my attention, though:

schmoe · Joined: 30 Mar 2008 Posts: 374 Location: Seattle, WA

I agree. We on this forum have discerning tastes, otherwise we wouldn't be into fancy projectors and such. I'd prefer to have the highest quality audio and video possible.

The streaming stuff has its place. We use it for some TV shows where high quality isn't going to make a difference, and since we don't pay for one of those pound-me-in-the-a** cable TV subscriptions, it's a great alternative way to get content to your TV.

I personally wouldn't go for the peer-to-peer stuff though. I'll stick with the way XBox does Netflix.

WanMan · Joined: 19 Mar 2006 Posts: 10270

SC, you need to move to Lafayette, LA. Their municipal fiber Internet service starts at 10Mbps symmetric with no caps or contracts for <$30/month naked. I think their 30Mbps symmetric is $57.95 per month.