Netflix Now Works On Linux With HTML5 DRM Video Support In Chrome 201
An anonymous reader writes "Beginning with the Chrome 38 Beta it's now possible to watch Netflix without any Wine/Silverlight plug-ins but will work natively using Chrome's DRM-HTML5 video capabilities with Netflix. The steps just involve using the latest beta of Chrome and an HTTP user-agent switcher to tell Netflix you're a Windows Chrome user, due to Netflix arbitrarily blocking the Linux build."
Why is (Score:2)
I find it hard to believe that they would do it just because they can.
Re:Why is (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why is (Score:5, Insightful)
I used to be a long term NF user (the mail dvd's, that is) but the service started getting slow (mailings were not as fast as before) and many titles were dropped (not NF's fault, but I still had less choice).
TPB does what I need and there's never a problem with compatibility ;)
sorry, entertainment industry, but I gave up on you. for decades (quite a few of them) I helped fund your overpriced shite. that has now ended.
my cost is that of a VPN and that's it. and so, I'm 'there' until things drastically change, and I don't see that happening even in my lifetime.
so, even though linux is now 'working', I could actually care less. too little, too late.
Re:Why is (Score:5, Insightful)
So exactly how much less could you actually care then?
Re: (Score:2)
- I could actually care less if I really tried.
This small addendum makes my stress levels lower.
Stupid people are taking over the world; me getting het up about their poor grammar seems likely to make me one of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, return type is boolean, not floating point.
Re: (Score:2)
Hehe...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re:Why is (Score:5, Funny)
To the same kind of people who consider a lottery ticket an investment.
Sub unity ROI (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I could care less. But not much less.
Re: (Score:2)
In practice, "I could care less" means "I could hardly care less".
In practice, "I could care less" makes someone look like an idiot to someone else who actually thinks about what words mean before they use them. The saying was "I couldn't care less" but contractions['re] hard okay?
Re: Why is (Score:2)
Rather than "actually" how about "I could theoretically care less"
Re: (Score:2)
Either say "I don't care," or "I could not care less," or be prepared for a misunderstanding.
Not caring would mean a care level of zero. "I could not care less" implies the impossibility of going below zero.
To get over this endless debate, we just need to define "care" properly. To me, "care" is a positive thing with an obvious negative. Say you walk past a kid who is sitting there and crying. If you care, you ask them what's wrong and offer help. If you don't care, you keep walking. You can easily go below this zero level of caring, for example by beating them up or molesting them. Of course, s
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
People who say "I could care less" are wrong and no amount of rationalization changes that. The saying is "I couldn't care less" As in the amount one cares is zero. And no, you can't go below zero, if you were to go negative that would imply that you do in fact care about whatever it is, even if rather than wanting it, you now want to avoid it.
Not that I really care, I wasn't the one that started this thread, but it's ridiculous that people put so much effort into rationalizing something that is outright wr
Re:Why is (Score:5, Insightful)
I also think "I could care less" is dumb. I just wanted to point out how zero is not always the lower limit, because obviously this is an important topic to many a Slashdotter.
Frankly, if you mean "I don't care", then by all means say so, there's no need to put it in any fancier terms. Especially when you get it wrong, which is what frequently occurs whilst endeavouring to overliteralize, perchance even hypercorrect matters.
Of course, if you actually say "I don't care about $x", there's still a non-zero level of caring. If you genuinely don't care, you won't even think about it, you just walk away.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, if you actually say "I don't care about $x", there's still a non-zero level of caring. If you genuinely don't care, you won't even think about it, you just walk away.
That begs the question, if you genuinely don't care, will you just walk away? And the answer is only if you are an asshole, because otherwise you will probably take the time to involve the other party to the extent that you will inform them that you do not, in fact, care.
Of course, we already know you're an asshole, because you're trying to redefine a perfectly functional English word to make yourself correct. But you don't get a prize for being correct on Slashdot, all you get is satisfaction. And your sat
Re: (Score:2)
That begs the question, [...]
I see what you did there [begthequestion.info]. Let's take it one at a time, thanks. ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
I _could_ care less, but I don't care enough to try to not care that hard :-)
Re: (Score:2)
When used without sarcasm it is also called "synecdoche", and it's part of the reason why the word for "step" is not the word for "no" in French, why various words that had the exact opposite meaning in English at their earliest record.
Moreover dropping parts strengthens the assertion, another common feature in English.
The basic feature, though, is the statement is psychologicall
Re: (Score:2)
To get over this endless debate, we just need to define "care" properly.
That is correct, but it is not the definition that you used. From the dictionary [dictionary.com]:
By using this definition, it is not possible to go negative.
Re: (Score:2)
Not caring would mean a care level of zero.
Yes. And when you couldn't care less, you don't care.
"I could not care less" implies the impossibility of going below zero.
No. No it does not. It can only mean that if you completely ignore the meaning of the word care, which you are doing in an attempt to make your argument valid. You can never do that. You are plainly and simply wrong. Go back and study the meaning of the word "care" until you understand why.
Re: Why is (Score:2)
NERD RAGE!!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why is (Score:5, Funny)
That means you do care, at least a little [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Which is technically correct, otherwise he wouldn't have bothered commenting about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Yes, it is. Ripping someone off who tried to be fair to you is unethical. Ripping someone off who tried to rip you off isn't.
You might see the difference.
Re: Why is (Score:4, Insightful)
In these cases, the issue is a want (consume content) and not a need (consume food/water/air). So, you are ripping someone else off because you want what they have but do not need it.
And in those circumstances, you are the one being unethical. Only when you have a need that someone acts unfairly to address it, does ethics start to play a role.
Otherwise, you're just being inaccurate and melodramatic.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
I guess ethical is as much a matter of personal perception and preference as art is.
Personally, I don't consider it unethical to rip someone off who tried to rip me off. I won't start that kind of game, but I sure know how to play and win it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I do not. Mostly 'cause the crap released today ain't even worth spending bandwidth, let alone money.
But I do see your argument and yes, I'd agree.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem here is that the very justice system that should keep our society from falling apart is part of its downfall. A justice system must first and foremost reflect the collective will of the people it supposedly represents. Because that's the only way it can justify its authority unless it accepts that its main function is NOT to represent the general sentiment of "what is right". In a democratic society, that should be its function, though.
If laws do not represent anymore what the society governed b
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Here's a universal truth for you (i.e. no matter what the marketing and law shills are telling you, this applies at the base level).
There are three main categories of freeloaders:
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What about those who don't pay simply because they don't want or have to?
I'd be tempted to put them higher up the list than some of your three.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, I'll assume that these cheapskates don't have enough income to distribute for all their consumption habits, so again, make it convenient enough (e.g. watch now pay later, pay as much as you can, etc.) or available for a flat fee and they'll pay.
Re: (Score:3)
Artists who don't need to eat I suppose.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Why is (Score:2)
Artificial scarcity is inherently immoral in the first place. I'm not lazy nor am I greedy, I contribute as much as I can to the common wealth, and a little more than most. Therefore, I feel no guilt when I ignore artificial scarcity rules and enjoy things that are naturally abundant.
Re: (Score:3)
That's an oversimplification of what is happening.
Take a TV series that I decide to download instead of watching on TV. If it was on TV I would have DVRed it anyway and skipped the ads. Is not watching the adverts unethical or immoral? Few people pay close attention to them.
I download Game of Thrones. To watch it on TV I'd have to buy an expensive cable/satellite TV package for one show, so sorry but it isn't worth that much to me. HBO isn't available in my country so even though I had paid an excessive amo
Re: (Score:3)
Well, there's a difference between charging more than you're willing to pay and "ripping you off".
I've given this issue a great deal of thought. I'm something of an expert on ethics having spent a large part of my life diligently trying to eliminate ethical considerations from my behavior, and then the past few decades carefully adding them back in.
Regarding the downloading of professionally produced media without permission: My rule of thumb is how read
Re: (Score:2)
then send the artist a check for $5, which I figure is about how much they'd be making on the download.
It's about 5x as much as they make on a CD sale, maybe 20x as much as on a download.
Re: (Score:2)
If you've given up on them then support someone else's work that doesn't use DRM. Don't use TPB and justify it to yourself because it was inconvienent.
They are stealing our rights to privacy and free speech, so he is "stealing" a movie. You are right in that it is not a fair trade... But shooting them presents other problems.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why is (Score:5, Insightful)
Because no matter how strongly they state that a configuration is not supported, if it's not expressly blocked, people will try to get technical support for it. And with the distro landscape as it is, supporting mainstream software on "Linux" is a nightmare.
Re: (Score:3)
If it is browser based, is it really THAT hard to "support"? Just wondering.
BTW- as far as I am aware, no distro includes or supports Chrome, anyway... only Chromium (which is open source).
Re: (Score:2)
BTW- as far as I am aware, no distro includes or supports Chrome, anyway... only Chromium (which is open source).
What do you mean by support?
On my linux box, I have both Chromium and Chrome installed. Chrome makes it easier to switch google apps profiles [howtogeek.com] than Chromium.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I've started to differentiate two notions of "support" in the past year or so. One of them, the most popular definition among users, is "it works on my system". The other is what the developers mean: "we'll answer your email regarding your predicament". If it works it doesn't mean that it's also supported. It just means you're one lucky guy. You may be 10 billion lucky guys, but if the developer doesn't want to support your lucky install, expect borkage with each new release.
Re: Why is (Score:2)
Which raises another question. Can you make Chromium work with Netflix?
I'm a firefox guy personally. I use pipelight and it works quite well.
Re: (Score:2)
Which raises another question. Can you make Chromium work with Netflix?
I'm a firefox guy personally. I use pipelight and it works quite well.
I use it as well but it has a habbit of getting the audio stream out of synce with the video and tends to misbehave with multiple monitors. I will have to try this on chrome and see if it works better.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh good. I thought I was just using pipelight wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Unlikely, unless you do a pipelight-style solution. The HTML5 support won't work because the CDM is only part of the closed source Chrome builds.
Re:Why is (Score:4, Informative)
From the replies on the linked blog post, people are having distro-specific successes / failures even after following the instructions. I can imagine this being anything from distro specific paths, to permissions on certain binaries that could be different for say, Fedora from Mint, to codec issues (though as I understand it with Chrome the codecs are all basically wrapped up in the binary?) The specific technical details of this situation are a bit out of my area of expertise but I don't think any of the things I guess at here are out of the realm of possibility.
Technical issues aside - I welcome this development. I know and understand completely that a lot of people have issues with DRM making it's way into the core HTML (5) specs, but I kind of see it as unavoidable if we want to enjoy commercial content without needing completely non-standard garbageware like Silverlight or Flash. I have used Netflix with the Compholio Wine / Pipelight stuff, and while it works, it struggles to do so.
Yeah, there is a slippery slope and lots of compromise - but I would have less reason to ever boot into Windows if my paid subscriptions to content that I enjoy could work natively under "Linux". And just don't ask me to stop watching movies or playing 3xA game titles, because I won't.
That's why Steam is so specific. (Score:2)
You find that for Windows and OS-X, support is pretty broad. Stated as things like "Windows XP, Vista, 7 or 8" and pretty lax hardware allowances. However when you look at games for Linux they are things like "SteamOS" or "Ubuntu 14.04 LTS and Steam OS" and sometimes specific hardware that is supported.
Why is that? Compatibility issues. They aren't going to go and support every varied Linux distro out there. They've found a couple that work (and the same thing really, SteamOS descends from Ubutnu LTS) and t
Re:Why is (Score:5, Insightful)
If it is browser based, is it really THAT hard to "support"?
Yes. I have actually done phone support, and you would not believe how dumb some people are. Many will call for support before they even turn their computer on. They want someone to babysit them through the entire process before they even try to do it themselves. The only way to deal with these people cost effectively, is to hire a bunch of Indians or Filipinos, and have them walk the users through a canned script. Once you start throwing in additional variables, and Linux has a lot of variables, then the complexity of the script increases exponentially. Pretty soon, you end up having to hire expensive tech support people that are actually capable of thinking and troubleshooting. Why should Netflix do that for an extra 1% in sales?
Re: (Score:3)
Yes. I have actually done phone support, and you would not believe how dumb some people are. Many will call for support before they even turn their computer on. They want someone to babysit them through the entire process before they even try to do it themselves.
Come on, those kinds of people don't run Linux at all. The Linux problem is pretty much the exact opposite, you've got a bunch of dangerously knowledgeable users who've all tweaked their setup and expect all their special little snowflakes to be supported even though it's not.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes. I have actually done phone support, and you would not believe how dumb some people are. Many will call for support before they even turn their computer on. They want someone to babysit them through the entire process before they even try to do it themselves.
Come on, those kinds of people don't run Linux at all. The Linux problem is pretty much the exact opposite, you've got a bunch of dangerously knowledgeable users who've all tweaked their setup and expect all their special little snowflakes to be supported even though it's not.
I got someone a few weeks ago running Linux who didn't even know what distro they had. Their brother had set the machine up for them.
We figured out they were using Ubuntu. This is an Internet tech support outfit and I was the second person to talk to them. We found the networking on the machine was disabled. Re-enabling restored the connection.
Sub says they had tried that with the last person they'd talked to before me a couple days ago, and it would just go back to being disabled after it tried enabling fo
Re: (Score:2)
Hire some fucking tech support people with a brain.
Your should re-read what ShanghaiBill said. The issue isn't just Linux-related.
When a large number of your calls are people who have few computer skills, your support costs balloon.
You can either hire a large number of unskilled people to read scripts, which causes YOUR specific issues with support, or you hire competent people to troubleshoot, who don't come cheap, and now you have to raise the cost of your service to cover the additional support payroll -- which makes people leave you for the other provid
Re: (Score:2)
In Gentoo you get three versions of Chrome - stable, beta, unstable. My wife's Arch running laptop has Chrome although to be fair I did have to add it from the community package source which seems to be pretty obligatory anyway.
Pretty sure Ubuntu and Mint have it available. I doubt very much that Debian, with its legendarily large repo of stuff can't manage a major browser.
If you can install Linux there's a fair chance you can get Chrome to run on it.
Re: (Score:3)
Chrome itself isn't available in the repositories of Debian or Ubuntu. Chromium is. Mint may have it. The usual way is to get the deb file from Google, which adds a source entry for Google's repos.
Re:Why is (Score:5, Funny)
A Linux user calling tech support...that's rich.
Re:Why is (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, I've heard Linux users calling tech support all sort of things. Most of them not suitable for polite conversation, but still...
Re: (Score:2)
Reaching a "tech" that's not scripted on the first, second or third call is just as rare.
Happens ALL the time (Score:4, Interesting)
I work for an engineering college at a big research university. As such, lots of computers, some of them Linux. Despite the smug assurances you may see online that Linux users don't need support, nothing could be further from the truth. Some people who choose to use Linux at work do it because they've a lot of experience with it, and aren't much trouble. However many more do it either because:
1) They have a tool that only runs on Linux, or more accurately that they can only figure out how to make run on Linux. It is usually something cobbled together by a researcher at another university for Ubuntu and only compiles easily on that. If you knew what you were doing you could modify it for something else, but they don't. They usually end up needing a moderate amount of support.
2) They have the idea that Linux is the "l33t professional" OS and it's what you need to use if you want to be a serious computer user, so they want it. No thought goes in to it, they have no experience with it, no understanding, they figure it'll just be easy. These kinds need a ton of support.
A few examples:
--A grad student said she needed Linux on the computer she had bought and configured (without consulting IT). All the software she wanted run on Windows and out Linux guy even told her she'd be better off with Windows. Nope, had to have Linux. We got a continual stream of tickets when she couldn't figure things out, had problems with the AMD driver and so on, and he finally told her "Let us install Windows or go away."
--A professor who bought a system and FPGA card, again without consulting us, and then said he needed Linux. This was after his grad student tried and failed to install it, hosing the system in the process. We put Linux on, and then it turns out neither he nor his grad student have any idea how to make the FPGA card work. It has no programming, you have to do it from scratch. They also don't know how to use Linux to the point they whined about "not having admin" on the Linux install which they had full control on, they just couldn't work out sudo.
--A couple of grad students that insisted a new server needed to be Linux "for best performance". This was during a time when we didn't have a Linux guy (we are a small team, and our last one had left we were in the process of hiring the current one) so I looked in to it, and found the lead and recommended platform was Windows. I talked to the professor about it and she said go ahead with Windows, they grad students could deal, since support would be easier on Windows. Got the server up and running, first thing they wanted? Two programs that are Windows only and were mandatory to what they were doing. Had we given them Linux, we would have been reinstalling the server right away because it literally couldn't run the software they needed.
The flipside of Linux seeing increasing use is that there are plenty of clueless Linux users. They don't go in to Linux saying "I really enjoy computers and learning about them, I want to learn all about this OS, how it works, how to support it, how to modify it, etc." Rather they go in saying "Oh Linux is free!" or "Oh Linux is what hackers use!" and have no idea what the fuck they are doing, and need help.
Re: (Score:2)
I work for an engineering college at a big research university. As such, lots of computers, some of them Linux. Despite the smug assurances you may see online that Linux users don't need support, nothing could be further from the truth. Some people who choose to use Linux at work do it because they've a lot of experience with it, and aren't much trouble. However many more do it either because:
1) They have a tool that only runs on Linux, or more accurately that they can only figure out how to make run on Linux. It is usually something cobbled together by a researcher at another university for Ubuntu and only compiles easily on that. If you knew what you were doing you could modify it for something else, but they don't. They usually end up needing a moderate amount of support.
2) They have the idea that Linux is the "l33t professional" OS and it's what you need to use if you want to be a serious computer user, so they want it. No thought goes in to it, they have no experience with it, no understanding, they figure it'll just be easy. These kinds need a ton of support.
A few examples:
--A grad student said she needed Linux on the computer she had bought and configured (without consulting IT). All the software she wanted run on Windows and out Linux guy even told her she'd be better off with Windows. Nope, had to have Linux. We got a continual stream of tickets when she couldn't figure things out, had problems with the AMD driver and so on, and he finally told her "Let us install Windows or go away."
--A professor who bought a system and FPGA card, again without consulting us, and then said he needed Linux. This was after his grad student tried and failed to install it, hosing the system in the process. We put Linux on, and then it turns out neither he nor his grad student have any idea how to make the FPGA card work. It has no programming, you have to do it from scratch. They also don't know how to use Linux to the point they whined about "not having admin" on the Linux install which they had full control on, they just couldn't work out sudo.
--A couple of grad students that insisted a new server needed to be Linux "for best performance". This was during a time when we didn't have a Linux guy (we are a small team, and our last one had left we were in the process of hiring the current one) so I looked in to it, and found the lead and recommended platform was Windows. I talked to the professor about it and she said go ahead with Windows, they grad students could deal, since support would be easier on Windows. Got the server up and running, first thing they wanted? Two programs that are Windows only and were mandatory to what they were doing. Had we given them Linux, we would have been reinstalling the server right away because it literally couldn't run the software they needed.
The flipside of Linux seeing increasing use is that there are plenty of clueless Linux users. They don't go in to Linux saying "I really enjoy computers and learning about them, I want to learn all about this OS, how it works, how to support it, how to modify it, etc." Rather they go in saying "Oh Linux is free!" or "Oh Linux is what hackers use!" and have no idea what the fuck they are doing, and need help.
I suppose I'm too late to append /sarcasm to my posting...but hey thanks for playing! You put in a big effort A+
Re: (Score:2)
Because no matter how strongly they state that a configuration is not supported, if it's not expressly blocked, people will try to get technical support for it. And with the distro landscape as it is, supporting mainstream software on "Linux" is a nightmare.
It might be simpler than that.
Up till now there hasn't been a browser that would identify as Linux and run Netflix (unless the Wine/Silverlight combo did so).
So if a browser identifies as coming from Linux it's a surefire guarantee it won't work, so rather than trying to run and throwing up an obscure but unfixable error it's better to simply tell the user to give up right at the start.
Now there's a Chrome beta where Netflix can run on Linux, maybe when the beta is released they'll start official Linux supp
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They could pick a Distro or maybe two. They could support Suse and Ubuntu and let that be it. If anyone wanted to watch Netflix on linux they could use one of those or figure out their own support.
Re: (Score:2)
Linux isn't really more hackable. Having access to its open source only makes it more legal.
Re: (Score:2)
Linux isn't really more hackable. Having access to its open source only makes it more legal.
The only way you could be sitting there claiming that having the source doesn't make hacking easier is if you have no idea what you're talking about whatsoever. With closed source, you have to either reverse-engineer another program which does what you want or you have to hope that someone has documented what you know about, and they probably haven't if we're talking about Windows. With FoSS, you go read the source. How is that not easier?
Re: (Score:2)
With closed source, you have to either reverse-engineer another program which does what you want or you have to hope that someone has documented what you know about, and they probably haven't if we're talking about Windows.
Interfaces are very well documented in Windows world. Sure, you can't hack the core OS, but if you want to create anything on top of it (drivers, applications) it's actually a very hackable environment.
Re: (Score:2)
True,. If you distribute a Linux binary then as long as the user is running the same library .so versions as it was linked with, chances are that it will run with no problems irrespective of the distribution.
Re:Why is (Score:4, Informative)
Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix, was also on the Board of Directors for Microsoft from 2007 through 2012.
So yes, they can.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed_Hastings
Re:Why is (Score:4, Insightful)
Ex-Microsoft people, always causing trouble to their new companies to benefit their old company. See also: Stephen Elop.
Re: (Score:2)
Ex-Microsoft people, always causing trouble to their new companies to benefit their old company.
How does that shit get modded up? After all while Netflix support Microsoft they also support Microsoft's biggest competitors: Sony (Playstation), Apple (OS X and iOS), Nintendo (Wii), Google (Chromebooks and even Android to a degree). The fact that they don't support "Linux" (even though they do support Linux in the form of Chromebooks and Android) hardly seems to be some Microsoft-centric conspiracy now does it?
Re:Why is (Score:4, Informative)
He also was CEO of Pure Software. The guys who did the Purify malloc debugging tool for UNIX. Being in the board of directors does not mean much.
Re: (Score:2)
Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix, was also on the Board of Directors for Microsoft from 2007 through 2012.
So yes, they can.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed_Hastings
So what's the theory for Netflix working fine on my PS4, Wii, Apple TV, iPhone, iPad, iMac, etc.?
Christ, nobody cares that strongly about Linux. I mean... that's why there's no conspiracy to exclude it... I'm sure you love it, but damn.
Re: (Score:2)
My theory is they consider Linux users to all be hackers and they're sure that we'll find a way to destroy their DRM if they allow a Linux client.
Re: (Score:2)
My theory is they consider Linux users to all be hackers and they're sure that we'll find a way to destroy their DRM if they allow a Linux client.
If I (and I'm sure 99.9% of Linux users) really wanted a DRM free copy of something I watch on NetFlix, I'd not go through the trouble of de-DRMing it myself, I'd just download the damn thing form the many places it's already DRM free. I pay a premium for NetFlix with two DVD/Blue Ray disks and unlimited streaming. Id' like be able to watch steaming on my Linux computer. Same goes for Amazon Prime. All the crap you have available for streaming is already available at a multitude of places. You aren't p
Re: (Score:2)
It's certainly true in my case. I'm an asshole and proud of it. Being an asshole means giving out shit instead of taking it. Most of my friends are assholes too. My policy with people like Netflix is simple, I don't give them my money. I can tell they don't care as their policies show that up front. Not caring about customers always bites you in the end if you're not a monopoly like Microsoft.
Re:Why is (Score:4, Insightful)
"due to Netflix arbitrarily blocking the Linux build"
i.e., generating a valid page based on detection of a Linux-based USER-AGENT from the browser, to save the user from trying to troubleshoot what has been, until recently, a problem that the user could not fix. Hardly sinister.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Why is (Score:3)
I would hypothesize that, by preventing access from Linux users in such an easily defeated way, they shield themselves from legal responsibilities for proper functioning of the service on the multitude of Linux configurations out there, while still making it easy for the knowledgeable Linux user to pay their monthly fees and "make it work" on their own if they so desire. Which, really, is a win for everyone in the current environment.
Re:Why is (Score:5, Interesting)
He's really not. Right now, for example, he mostly works on a Chromebook. At least that's what he's usually on when I see him working in the kitchen*.
(I work at Netflix)
* Reed doesn't have an office / cubicle / set location, so he tends to work either in a common area or in a random conference room until you kick him out because you reserved the room
Hack (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Probably two days ago.
Raspberry PI (Score:2)
working in Debian Sid VM (Score:5, Informative)
I was able to get this working using the instructions in the original post - with the following changes:
I first tried with Debian stable. The google-chrome-unstable deb installs OK, but I couldn't get the video to play. /var/lib/libvirt/images/siddy.img -cpu kvm64,+nx -enable-kvm -m 1536 -soundhw hda -usb
I saw posts that it might work with sid. So I cooked up a sid vm.
My default NAT network was disabled, I found some instructions to re-enable it.
Once I had a sid vm, I found that there was no sound. I set it to ac97 in virt-manager but ended up abandoning virt-manager and using this command line
sudo qemu-system-x86_64
Once I had sound and networking going, I installed the google-chrome-unstable deb in the VM. Then I found the user-agent extension and installed that. I created a user-agent using EXACTLY the string given in the original post...
And now I'm watching a netflix movie.
Right now I have the chrome in the VM displaying to a Xephyr window in the host environment, will be interested to see if there is a better way.
And it's true we should not have to do crap like this to use our netflix accounts!
Re: (Score:2)
And it's true we should not have to do crap like this to use our netflix accounts!
Now, try doing that outside the US, where you are also blocked because of location, not just OS.
But then I'd have to install and use Chrome (Score:2)
That's no good. *Gack*
Re:Wake Me Up (Score:5, Insightful)
(Slight sarcasm alert)
Re: (Score:2)
Desktop is over. Everything is now tablet, and a few years ago was "The Year Of Linux On The Tablet," or Android anyway...
Yeah, the headline is misleading - Netflix has been working on linux for several years. Now there will be an X11 app that it will work with too.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
How do I remove the DRM, save it as mkv and upload it to TPB?
Why bother? It's already there.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
And if your computer is too old to play MPEG-4 video files, simply change the extension to ".mpg"
Re: (Score:3)
And how do you plan to stop it?
The problem is, whatever answer you get from a remote machine that is not entirely under your control depends on what that remote machine wants to tell you, not on what it should tell you in your opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that has stopped those pesky game crackers dead in their tracks. So it sure will work on movies!
Re: (Score:2)
This is great news! Now I can refurb laptops that have HDMI but are generally not so fast and had XP or Vista with Ubuntu and sell them as netflix devices.
Yea, but don't go with any of the *bunto dists. It's not working on 14.10a2 AFAIK.
Re: (Score:2)
Or you could just recommend they upgrade their DVD player to a blu-ray player so they don't have "yet another box" on the entertainment center since will have the capabilities of both.