Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

LG & Netflix Team Up to Offer Downloadable Movies on TV

Posted by Zonk on Thu Jan 03, 2008 03:01 PM
from the yet-another-standalone-piece-of-tech dept.
Movies Businesses Media Toys Technology
eldavojohn writes "It might seem like they've come full circle, but the movie injection method has gone from TV to mail to online download to TV on demand. And Netflix & LG are betting it's going to be a hit. They're also betting you will want to buy yet another device for your home theater. A Wall Street Journal article notes: 'The partnership between Netflix, Los Gatos, Calif., and South Korea's LG represents another gamble by technology companies that video from the Internet, which is commonly downloaded to personal computers, will go mainstream when users can easily access it from TV sets. So far, Internet television products such as Apple Inc.'s Apple TV have largely been unsuccessful, stymied by a poor selection of videos, complexity of use and other shortcomings.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

Submission: LG & Netflix Team Up to Offer D/L Movies on TV by eldavojohn (898314)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

LG & Netflix Team Up to Offer Downloadable Movies on TV 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • This is Why blueray vs hddvd is irrelevant (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 2.7182 (819680) on Thursday January 03 2008, @03:03PM (#21899642)
    Because it is going to come down to the difference of just being able to read different FILE formats, like jpg vs. gif.
    • And LG (along with Nokia and Apple and Samsung) has been one of the major players stymying [rudd-o.com] the adoption of non-patentencumbered video formats as base webstandards
    • Because it is going to come down to the difference of just being able to read different FILE formats, like jpg vs. gif.

      Wouldn't that be nice...

      The problem is DRM. **AA isn't going to let you have it as a bunch of bits that you can store how you want and play on whatever you want. Even if you pay for it. So like it or not Blu-ray, HDDVD, and locked-down special purpose set top boxes are going to be the only sanctioned players for the forseeable future.

      Yes, eventually it'll all shake out, all the relevant for
    • Maybe in the long term, but in the short term (5 years?) there is plenty of room for 25/50GB optical storage for HD video. I don't mind torrenting and storing some SD TV shows now and then, but I'm certainly not going to want to waste my internet bandwidth (and harddrive storage) downloading high quality feature length HD video from the internet on a regular basis. I don't think the internet (or individual ISPs) could even handle that on a large scale.
      • So I can't have a collection? Just a list of filenames I need to pay for each time I access one of them?

        New to this whole "video rental" thing, I guess?

  • colossally stupid (Score:4, Interesting)

    by goombah99 (560566) on Thursday January 03 2008, @03:10PM (#21899732)
    What's Netflix's bussiness advantage over the cable companies? Simple, it's hard to push 7.6GB of dvd info over the wire. It's faster to mail it. And bule ray/HDDVD would play to netflix advantage.

    The only way to beat this effect is to reduce the bandwidth--which the cable companies can do just fine without netflix-- and to distribute the serving (bit torrent versus central caches).

    Unless the TV set is going to also do bit torrent style distrubuted serving they won't gain anything on the cable companies.

    The real magic is going to happen when apple or microsoft or adobe flips a switch one day that lets everyone opt in as a paid bittorrent node for some movie distribution company. You would get paid in credits for movie rentals based on how much bandwidth you served. then all of a sudden you could have high quality movie distribution.

    • Not so, says I...

      You can currently watch some netflix movies online and it streams them perfectly fine over my RoadRunner connection.

      Let Apple make their locked down AppleTV, these guys can probably make a standalone device which does what the netflix movie stream on demand does... only they had better get more selections.

      • Not so, says I...

        You can currently watch some netflix movies online and it streams them perfectly fine over my RoadRunner connection.

        Let Apple make their locked down AppleTV, these guys can probably make a standalone device which does what the netflix movie stream on demand does... only they had better get more selections.

        You missed the point. Yes you can deliver reduced resolution movies over the web. Who is in a better position to do that, the cable companies or netflix? obviously the cable companies. In fact they already do it by a giant limited kludge on "digital tv". And they have a much faster connection between their caches and your internet connection than netflix can ever have (until they become an ISP. ) So no matter what the method of delivery, if it comes over the internet the cable companies can crush n

        • the only escape route is higher resolution which can't be served. Or distributed caching (managed bit torrrent), which beats the cable companies central caching.

          Sure, but bit torrent has one huge drawback... it can't stream. That makes it pretty much unusable for ondemand movies. Not to mention that cable companies can and do throttle peer to peer sharing.

          One thing the cable companies need to change is the pricing. For someone who watches a lot of movies, $4 per "rental" is pretty steep. Netflix easily b

          • Sure, but bit torrent has one huge drawback... it can't stream.


            True, but that really seems like a surmountable technicality. Even with bittorrent clients on the market today, you can prioritize a stream to get the parts in sequence. At least with well-seeded torrents it works OK. Can it be that much of a stretch to imagine those parts being played "on-delivery" much like streaming content?*

            -Matt

            *IANASG. (I am not a streaming guru.)

          • Re:colossally stupid (Score:4, Informative)

            by cashman73 (855518) on Thursday January 03 2008, @05:11PM (#21901602) Journal
            TVU Networks [tvunetworks.com] has a peer-to-peer streaming application, that works fairly well, too. So technically, it can be done.

        • Re:colossally stupid (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 03 2008, @03:51PM (#21900318)
          And cable companies have been better placed to do this for a long time. But Netflix is the one doing it and winning. The cable companies aren't. I love it when someone tries to argue that something isn't happening because they don't think it could happen. Especially when that thing is staring them in the face. Movie streaming from Netflix is here, it works and it's pretty good. A lot of content, good controls, good pricing. The cable companies are doing nothing in comparison. Netflix is on to a winner here, especially given that they have the content already, and you don't need cable internet (I have DSL) to do it.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by jandrese (485)
          Interestingly enough, my Cable Company (Verizon FIOS) does that with their Video on Demand service. The surprising thing: The movies from Netflix look better than the VoD movies which seem to suffer from an excessive amount of compression. The only advantage of the cable company is that their movie start streaming right away instead of waiting until it is downloaded. I've also tried Amazon's Tivo integration service and found the quality to be somewhere in the middle, although it too suffers from the ne
          • When I watch movies online from Netflix, the movies start playing after about 10 or 15 seconds. I suspect that you might have worse bandwidth from your ISP than I do, causing the app to want to get the movie downloaded before starting playing, because it doesn't think it can download it fast enough to play it without running out of video, which would be annoying.

            FWIW, my ISP is Cox Cable.
      • Technically, the biggest difference between Netflix streaming and AppleTV is that Netflix is Windows only and AppleTV is cross-platform with the Mac. (Apple TV can also play other non-DRM content, of course.) Oh, no WGA cert needed for AppleTV either.

        Both are DRM laden for their own content.

        Enjoy!
        -Matt
    • It won't be pushing 7+GB because it most likely won't be coded in MPEG-2 like DVDs are.

      Netflix already allows direct watching from a computer, at no extra cost above the membership fee.
    • If this was Netflix working with LG and / or perhaps a cable/satellite providers to offer more movies on demand through your Netflix account, then maybe they'd have something more realistic at the moment.

    • Re:colossally stupid (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Tibor the Hun (143056) on Thursday January 03 2008, @03:23PM (#21899934)
      Not stupid at all.
      I'm a Netflix subscriber, and having a nice organized Que is very convenient. If they found a way to stream that to my TV, I'd have no problems renting/buying another device for my "home theatre".
      AppleTV doesn't appeal to me that much, because of it's too-tight integration to iTunes and iTMS, so a nice "open" device tied to my Netflix que would fit the bill perfectly.
      And Steve may have been too late on the ball regarding the whole rental and movies deal.
      Yes, my iPod touch displays videos beautifully, but guess how many of them I've watched? Maybe 2 hours of NBC's office (thanks trackers). Videos on the go, just aren't something that most people (other than the bus/train riders) would have enough time to do.

      It will be a battle of content, and I'd rather rent movies from Netflix than from iTunes, considering Netflix's excellent customer service and ease of use.

    • Re:colossally stupid (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jedidiah (1196) on Thursday January 03 2008, @03:30PM (#21900038) Homepage
      The Netflix advantage is that they have a larger catalog of content and they are actually willing to distribute it.

      That's always been their advantage.

      The download aspect of this might not make as much sense yet but that won't remain the case forever.

      This could also give consumers a cheaper path to HD content that would not require buying into one side of the format war.

      Local cable providers are far too drunk on the power they think they have by being a natural monopoly to really listen to the customer.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Jeff DeMaagd (2015)
        I think Netflix officers said last year that they knew that physical media wasn't going to be around forever, and that they were working on IP-based rentals. A simple box that does that would fit their goals. The only problem is that I don't want to get yet another box. Vudu, AppleTV, a Netflix box, TiVo+Unbox and so on are not all going to have the same selection, and it seems like an unnecessary expense at the moment if I already have a working media player that's as good. If my disc player died, then
        • Dlink has a really snazzy box (both SD and HD) that lets you stream web content to your TV. I wish Netflix had partnered with them, instead of me needed yet another box just for Netflix.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Lurker187 (127055)

        The Netflix advantage is that they have a larger catalog of content and they are actually willing to distribute it.

        That's always been their advantage.

        Yes, but the digital distribution rights are completely separate from the rental rights, hence the writers' strike. They're going to run into the same barriers that VUDU is running into, although with their established relationships, they might have an easier time of it. But they can't just rip their whole rental catalog. (At least, not legally.)

      • The Netflix advantage is that they have a larger catalog of content and they are actually willing to distribute it.
        Yep. I was just visiting some relatives in Diamond Springs, Ca. The Diamond Springs post office used to have one slot for local mail, and one for mail that was going outside the local area. Now they've changed the local slot into one that's dedicated solely to Netflix envelopes. In rural areas, watching videos is a big deal, because there's not much else to do, and it doesn't take long to get
    • Depending on the device, you don't have to stream it live. Like the Netflix queue, it will be "mailed" to you electronically and may take a day to ship.

      I don't understand, though, how this is any more "open" than what Apple has been doing for a year with AppleTV. It's tied to NetFlix's system, DRM, etc., so it's actually a lot more closed/proprietary. It's just that NetFlix will probably be able to line up significantly more studios willing to allow them to do digital distribution. (We'll see in 11 days
    • Never underestimate the bandwidth of a mail truck full of DVDs!

    • Simple, it's hard to push 7.6GB of dvd info over the wire. It's faster to mail it. And bule ray/HDDVD would play to netflix advantage.
      Funny, my experience with Netflix's streaming services on the PC says otherwise. Just last night I watched a 2 hour movie with only about 60 seconds of buffering. Oh sure, it might be slightly compressed, but it's close enough for me not to notice and/or care about the difference.
    • And what happens when ISPs start enforcing the no server clause that most of them have in their terms of service and start demanding recompense from Microsoft/Adobe/etc?
      • Do you not have a local station that broadcasts NHL games? If you're in or near a city that has an NHL team, you should be able to pick up at least some games OTA. (Grant you, we live and breathe hockey here in metro Detroit, but even when I lived in Vermont, the local Fox affiliate would simulcast Bruins and Canadiens games on a regular basis.) Alternately, if you don't mind listening rather than watching, XM has the entire NHL package and a bunch of other sports besides for $13 a month (less if you sig
  • Yes, it'll be nice to have new, alternative uses for my TV. No, I don't particularly care if it's on my TV or over more conventional appliances used for internet connectivity (tower, laptop, etc). The real revolution will be when all my media appliances work together seamlessly, all accessing my in-home centralized media server or some such.

  • So far, Internet television products such as Apple Inc.'s Apple TV have largely been unsuccessful, stymied by a poor selection of videos, complexity of use and other shortcomings.

    Yeah, but it's clear that Jobs is about to turn the Eye of Sauron on the long-neglected Apple TV segment of the product line. Looks like he'll have some competition right off the bat.

      • Apple TV would have sold better if it had the ability to download content directly from iTMS

        Exactly. I wonder if there will be an upgrade announced in a couple of weeks.

  • If you're like me and read the story doing a doubletake on:

    Apple Inc.'s Apple TV
    It is to distinguish that product from this apple TV [newlaunches.com].

  • On my TiVo please (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MBCook (132727) <foobarsoft@foobarsoft.com> on Thursday January 03 2008, @03:19PM (#21899874) Homepage

    Just please let me do this on my TiVo, my Series 3. I don't want to watch movies on my laptop (especially if you make me use Windows to do it, I'm a Mac guy). I don't want to watch them on my iPod (mine can't play movies, but if I want to watch a movie on the go I'll stick a DVD in my MacBook Pro). I don't care about DRM that only lets me have 3 DVD at a time (ala the current subscription model I use on Netflix). It's OK if I can't transfer it between TiVos, or copy it do my computer. I really don't care.

    Just let me download and watch movies and TV shows to my TiVo. Like Amazon Unbox, but tied to my Netflix queue and subscription model. Unbox looks nice enough, but I already pay Netflix, so I haven't really used it (my parents like it though).

    It doesn't have to be HD. HD would be fantastic, but as long as it's 480p I'll be happy (since that fits with the DVDs I use now). Note that this doesn't mean 480p letter boxed that my TV can zoom, so I lose 150 lines to black bars, the wide screen content should be 480p tall.

    Do that, I'll gladly sign up. I'll pay a tiny bit extra, say $1-2 per month on my Netflix account for the privilege. I would find this tremendously useful.

    Netflix says they don't want a "Netflix Box", they want 100 of them. Good! Make the TiVo Series 3 one of them. I don't want another box either. I don't want to buy a new TV to get the functionality. I love my TiVo's UI, and I love Netflix's content. Please put them together. Make me a happy consumer.

    • And make my Media Center or MythTV one of those boxes as well.

      Just getting Netflix listings on Media Center requires a 3rd party html app that fakes the http calls made by Netflix' RSS features. Why can't Netflix take a little bit of time and write an installable app to do this that would integrate nicely into existing products?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by gatzke (2977)

      Unbox is not bad on the Tivo. I have had troubles with some low quality encodings (Chuck and Larry) and sometimes it is confusing since their stuff has three different cost levels (rent 24, rent longer, buy). Some things are released rent only, some buy only. Also, they don't always immediately start to download, so you sometimes can't watch for a few minutes at least.

      I was hoping the same thing, get netflix involved for the Tivo. I bet Tivo and Amazon are in bed exclusively, so they probably can't brin
    • They are set top boxes. The whole point of the venture is to move them from computer screens to televisions.

      I'm just hoping for an analog hole. Maybe a component output?
    • Netflix tried to work a deal out with Tivo. Tivo wanted too much money. Tivo went to Amazon instead.
    • I'm 110% with you. I've been begging for this and have emailed both Netflix and TiVo to that effect, but apparently it ain't [pvrblog.com] gonna happen.

      I don't want another box, another input/output to hassle with, more cables behind my tv, another remote, another stupid UI [battellemedia.com] to deal with, etc. I like my TiVo, and I like the UI. I like that Netflix has a huge selection - typical movies to now canceled [netflix.com] shows [netflix.com]. I had a Netflix subscription to catch up on episodes of Farscape when a friend introduced me to the show in
      • I could do the same thing if I used a Comcast box, but they're crud and I don't want one. But having one of those means you get a selection of what they want. I want a selection of what Netflix has now. I want it integrated with my queue, so I don't lose all the time and planning that went into that. I want it to use the Netflix model so I can watch 12 things in a weekend if I can turn 'em over fast enough, or watch 1 a month, all for the same monthly fee. I don't want to mess with the "this content is free
  • Could the wi-fi/hard-drive capabilities of the PS3 & Xbox360 be utilized to receive/store/play internet video content?
    • Absolutely,
      but unfortunately no one at Sony believes that there is any future to Moving pictures. For something like that to succeed, Sony would need:
      -a large catalog of moving pictures,
      - some form of a magical network connection for distribution, and lastly
      -a device connected to a TV
      Sadly, none of those things are yet feasible.

      Microsoft, on the other hand doesn't have neither the money or clout to do something like that. Their true strengths are search, web-mail, MP3 players and Live.
      The moving pictures -
      • Nailed it. Microsoft, at least, has the excuse of no content. But why isn't Sony all over this? It just seems so obvious.
        • Not only does it seem obvious, but it seemed obvious 5 years ago!
          And in all those years, they could have slaughtered the market, considering their media library.

          That they don't have this capability, to at least distribute their own movies, to this day, is way beyond my simple way of thinking...

  • About bloody time (Score:3, Insightful)

    by SirGarlon (845873) on Thursday January 03 2008, @03:42PM (#21900198)
    Programming-on-demand is about the only future I can see for television. The advertising-supported broadcast model falls totally flat for me. I subscribed to Netflix so I can watch movies the few good TV shows when I want, without commercials. If I can do this for a reasonable price with instant gratification (instead of the current Netflix three-day latency), then count me in.

  • I've been doing this for 7 years... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RPI Geek (640282) on Thursday January 03 2008, @03:45PM (#21900244) Journal
    ... with an s-video cable. The only difference is that now they want me to pay for it.

  • This will result in blueray and HD DVD both dieing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Raisey-raison (850922) on Thursday January 03 2008, @03:55PM (#21900388)
    As a consequence of a loony civil way between Blu-ray and HD-DVD, Microsoft, apple and now Netflix will kill both formats.

    Microsoft has helped keep the civil war alive.
    http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20071205123352_Microsoft_Accused_of_Eventual_Blu_Ray_HD_DVD_Formats_Fiasco.html [xbitlabs.com]

    Without a stalemate Christmas 2007 would have seen massive buying of cheap HD players. We would all being watching HD movies and be getting used to them. We would get so spoiled by the superior picture quality that we would not succumb to inferior download quality.

    However now that there there is a stalemate going on people are nervous to buy either standard and each standard is still quite expensive. Some people including myself don't want to buy some standard that wont play all movies because some are exclusive to only one format.

    Now people will simply say since there is no reliable HD standard why not download a lesser quality version from Netflix or apple or Microsoft. They will do this for both rental purposes and to buy a permanent copy. Then they will get very habituated to it. As time goes watching movies buy obtaining a physical medium will seem less and less attractive. In 2012 there will be enough bandwidth for most high speed internet connections to download HD movies. HD-DVD and blue ray will be both be dead and buried by 2014.

    But this requires the stupidity of both Sony and Toshiba to keep their rivalry going and be unwilling to compromise even though it is both of their interests to do so. They seem though to have come through 100% on the doofus front.

  • Thank God (Score:4, Informative)

    by elrous0 (869638) * on Thursday January 03 2008, @04:35PM (#21901060)
    As of right now, I can only do this on my Xbox 360, my PS3, my Tivo, and my computer. Just the other day I was thinking "Man, I just wish I had yet ANOTHER way to do the same damn thing!"
  • So - we have lots of people going out to buy boxen that display movies over the Internet. Wonderful. Now, let's have lots of people in my neighborhood download a movie tonite. Do you really think I will be able to read Slashdot or find Google with 1 Gb/s of movies going through my lan segment?

    It is a wonderful idea if somebody can build out the bandwidth in cable Internet but somehow I suspect that increasing bandwidth so that people have an alternative to cable movies on demand is not one of the brighte
  • To download and buffer an 8.4GB DVD? And how long does that take?
    • I doubt the mail service is going away for a good while. It's a transitional time, not an abrupt leap time. It takes a while for media formats to go away.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.