Netflix streaming is just about the greatest thing around (yeah, it’s better than Hulu) for video content. The interface is clean, easy to use, and the selection is good enough for my $10 a month. Streaming has also saved Netflix a whole lot of money.
To stream a movie in HD costs Netflix around 5 cents, 3 cents for standard def. That’s it. Now granted, that doesn’t account for licensing and all that, but it sure as hell beats the pants off sending things through the mail. That cost could even go down as more competitors enter the back-end market responsible for supporting the Netflix streaming system.
My question – why aren’t more things available for streaming? If it’s so cheap, that extra revenue could be kicked back in part to studios for freeing up more streaming content. Everyone wins.
Apple’s advertising for FaceTime is already being lauded as some of the best ad video the world has ever seen. It’s personal, evocative, and total bullshit. I think we all know that working with technology is rarely as smooth as those FaceTime ads make it out to be. For that reason, I bring you this video, courtesy of Funny or Die. This is what FaceTime is really like.
I wanted to put together a post today about the recently announced Blu-ray set of all six Star Wars films. The set includes never before seen footage, an exciting clip of which was shown at the Star Wars Celebration event. The clip showed Luke in a cave, creating his green lightsaber. Unfortunately, Lucasfilm has been crazy about removing it from YouTube and the like, so in it’s stead, I give you this – one of the funniest Star Wars spoofs I’ve ever seen. Thank you, Robot Chicken.
Do you want to ride in a plane that looks like it’s been exposed to hours of direct sunlight, its paint chipped and dinged from debris? Of course not! Still, it’s tough for me to imagine that part of my ticket cost is going toward paying all of these people just to repaint a plane. I’ve also never noticed how dingy a plane really is until I saw the plane at the end of this video. That thing is glowing.
At any rate, a very cool video about what it takes to make a plane look brand new again, luring you back in to a sense of security about one of the more unnatural things human beings have found a way to accomplish.
Netflix and Hulu started dueling for streaming dominance some time ago, and for the most part Hulu has been winning that fight. It looks like Netflix may have taken a leg up, though, and I’m hoping it stays that way.
According to comScore, Netflix barely edged past Hulu in unique visitors this past month. I’ve really enjoyed Netflix streaming service, but the company needs to get up to current seasons if it wants to give Hulu a serious run for it. One of my favorite shows, Party Down (which none of you were watching, which is why it got the ax – shame on you), had current season streaming from Netflix and I watched it every week. It’s a fantastic alternative to a cable subscription, which tends to just fill my living room with a lot of noise.
Hulu’s trying to keep the top spot with Hulu+, granting access to full current seasons and some legacy episodes for a fee. The company’s ad structure could really hold it back, especially when competing with the Netflix platform.
The fabled Hulu Plus is real, it seems, delivering “HD” programming to your mobile devices and internet-connected TVs for just $10 a month. You’ll have access to full current seasons of shows like 30 Rock and Glee and a library of older episodes from shows like Arrested Development.
I say “HD” because you should take a look at that screenshot above. Yes, that’s a screenshot. Notice anything? That it looks like shit, perhaps? That’s a shot from my iPhone 4 on a Wi-Fi connection and it looks like total crap. Sorry, Hulu, but you’re going to have to do better. Even worse than the quality, you still have to watch ads despite your subscription fee. You guys do know how to make me feel like a dollar sign.
What I really want for streaming video is something more akin to the Netflix Watch Instantly system. It’s painless, easy, and for serial programming it’s better than anything (even NinjaVideo). I’ve been watching Party Down recently – updated weekly with the new episode – and I’ve fallen in love with the Netflix system. If anyone has the future of online video in hand, it’s these guys. It’s not as expensive as Hulu Plus and you get access to a library of movies as well.
If you want to see Hulu Plus for yourself, download the free app and check out some preview episodes or opt-in to the preview invite system over at Hulu.
Remember that crazy ad push Blockbuster made in 2005. No more late fees! There were huge blue-and-yellow signs everywhere proclaiming the company’s latest attempt at competing with Netflix. Well, Blockbuster is rescinding that deal and bringing you back to late fee hell. Things are pretty ugly, too. A dollar a day ugly, up to a 10-day maximum. That’s pretty brutal, especially when rentals cost so much to begin with.
Obviously the company needs money, but this seems more like a reminder to sign up for Netflix than a “let’s save Blockbuster” move. The reasoning behind the throwback to days of yore is that customers who keep movies longer keep them away from other customers, forcing Blockbuster to purchase more copies to keep up with customer demand. To be honest, you have to wonder just how much demand is out there. When Netflix is delivering movies to my doorstep and provides streaming service across a couple different platforms, paying to keep movies an extra day or two seems downright stupid.
I used to think Blockbuster Online was the greatest thing on the planet. At the time, I was living close enough to a physical store that I was getting as many movies as I wanted plus the bonus of being able to turn them in for free movies for something like $10. It was great. It wasn’t long, though, before the store closed and I started mailing my movies back.
That same thing is about to happen in 500 locations across the country. Blockbuster announced this week that it would close 500 stores over the course of the year. The news comes as the company continues to bleed money, to the tune of $435 million for its most recent quarter.
“While we believe the future is bright, the next 12 to 18 months will remain challenging as we balance the secular decline of a single channel with the ascension of emerging channels, such as vending and digital,” CEO Jim Keyes said on Wednesday. The company is also trying to restructure its nearly billion dollar debt to stay afloat.
Behold, Panasonic’s very first 3DTV. Most display makers have been reluctant to talk about price when it comes to their 3D sets, and for good reason. They’re damn expensive. Take this 54-inch model, for instance. Though the price has only been announced in Yen, a simple conversion puts it at $5,900 USD. Ouch.
You might be thinking, “hey, that’s not so bad – that’s what I payed for my plasma eight years ago.” That may be true, but look at prices now. A solid 40-inch LCD or better can be had for under a thousand bucks. Are you willing to pay six times that for a technology that won’t see a decent amount of media for several years? I thought not.
Obviously prices will come down, and Panasonic already has plans to release 3D sets as small as 50 inches this year. It’s going to be some time, though, before home-theater-quality set breaks the $2500 barrier.
One of the big setbacks of 3D tech today is the glasses. They’re necessary in order for most audiences to get a good view, whatever their viewing angle. While there are autostereoscopic displays (no glasses required) in the wild, they typically only work from 8 or 9 viewing angles, which severely limits their functionality.
Sunny Ocean Studios in Singapore is hoping to change all of that. The company plans to debut an autostereoscopic set at CeBIT this year that supports 64 viewing angles on its 27-inch screen. That’s a huge upgrade from the current status quo. I have to wonder what the thing will look like, though. It has to take a significant amount of resources to produce the frames for 64 different viewpoints.
And how much is this thing going to cost? Armin Grasnick, founder of Sunny Ocean Studios, says he can do displays up to 100-inches both quickly and inexpensively. Something tells me that won’t keep the price tag from climbing.
OLED TVs will be the next big (small, really) thing to come to your living room. The tech will cost you, though. When Sony first announced it’s 11-inch OLED TV, the unit cost $2,500. LG wants to offer something bigger, though, and you can bet it will have a bigger price tag.
LG has previously shown off 15- and 19-inch models with hefty price tags, but it will introduce a 20-inch model later this year. Next year it will bump that up to 30 inches and in 2012 we’ll get a 40-inch OLED TV. As you can imagine, those things are going to be expensive. As the company’s VP, Won Kim, said, “They may be expensive, but it will be possible to buy a 40-inch class OLED TV in 2012.”
So if you want something that basically looks like you’ve hung some paper on your wall, albeit very high tech paper, and have $10,000 or so to throw around, LG just might have the OLED TV for you.
You’re probably thinking, “of course I can – they look completely different.” They do, you’re right. But they’re the exact same player. That Lexicon on top costs $3,500, whereas the Oppo is only $500.
It’s a strange story, one Wired picked up the other day. From what anyone can tell, Lexicon seemingly bought up a bunch of Oppo BDP-83s and packed the units into a new case. Yes, the whole player, chassis and all. Here’s Audioholics’ Clint DeBoer:
When we received the player the first thing we did was open it up to get a look at the inside. Imagine my surprise when I found that not only did the Lexicon share the same boards and transport as the Oppo – it was in fact AN OPPO BDP-83 PLAYER, CHASSIS AND ALL, SHOVED INSIDE AN ALUMINUM LEXICON WRAPPER.
There is one small difference – the Lexicon has a THX certification. The Oppo does not. How’s that for three grand?
This morning YouTube announced a new site aimed at connecting citizen journalists with one another and with larger news networks. Called YouTube Direct, the site also allows news editors to make requests for footage of events, like natural disasters and political rallies. I’ve not been a huge fan of citizen journalism in the past, mostly because of the unedited trash people tend to gobble up as truth. This, though, puts that news back into the hands of the editors, which admittedly is its own problem, but I’ll take it over the alternative.
The site allows editors to post call-out videos requesting footage from your average Joe, a service that’s being tested by large news sources like the Huffington Post and NPR. The new site isn’t about revenue, though, according to YouTube’s head of news and politics, Steve Grove. “It’s an incentive to upload great video, because of the recognition you’ll get from legitimate news organizations.” The blog post announcing the site linked to videos you’ve probably seen of a teacher slapping an autistic child and a Chinese earthquake.
AT&T might have done well to keep quiet about Verizon’s “map for that” ads. Since bringing a lawsuit concerning the original commercial, Verizon has launched three more ads, all bearing the same message: AT&T’s network sucks. It’s not that the message is anything new, but AT&T has made it clear that network quality is a pressure point, and now Verizon’s going to squeeze.
The new ads will likely air all through the holidays since they’re all about Christmas. In one the iPhone ends up on the island of misfit toys, not fitting in until it shows its new friends the AT&T 3G coverage map. That one works on two levels, digging at AT&T and reminding Apple that Verizon still really wants the iPhone.
The second ad turns the naughty gift from coal into AT&T’s network, and the third features a man having a Blue Christmas (yes, the song runs in the background) until he walks home to find a festive red package sitting on his front porch.
The last two ads sound like the usual competition bashing you see in any industry, but that the commercials have so much truth behind them makes them devastatingly effective. Talk to anyone with an iPhone and you’ll hear about AT&T’s crap network. Apparently no one has mentioned to Big Blue that fixing their network would solve all kinds of problems, the least of which is this new ad campaign.
If you’ve been sitting on your next TV purchase for that glut of OLED TVs to flood the market, you shouldn’t. LG’s VP of OLED sales and marketing, Won Kim, says prices won’t come down to LCD levels until 2016. Seven years is a long way off, and so much can change that Kim might be wrong, but in any case, OLEDs won’t be reasonable anytime soon.
Kim’s statements came shortly after LG announced a 15-inch OLED TV for its Korean market at the end of this year. No announcement for the US market, and that’s sort of been the standard so far. Only Sony sells an OLED stateside, and it’s just 11-inches. So it’s not just market prices we’re waiting on – the whole system has to mature enough to even be able to deliver the product.
Kim did say we would see 40-inch OLEDs by something like 2012, but you can bet they’ll be expensive. Of course by then who’s to say LCDs and Plasmas won’t be nearly as good as an OLED? The “absolute black” that makes the OLED so attractive (among some other features) is nearly attainable now with dimming LED TVs. In seven year this generation of technology could come a long way.
One of the best features of the new iMac is that the 27-incher can be used as a passive display via the mini DisplayPort. Unfortunately, that feature only currently works with other devices sporting the same port, which is virtually nothing. Not even Apple’s DVI adapter will work.
That’s not to say adapters won’t be supported later, it’s just a really great feature that, sadly, doesn’t work at launch. By adding the dummy monitor feature, Apple is essentially giving you a near-cinema display for just over half the price of a 30-inch monitor. Oh yeah, it also comes with a computer inside. But if you were thinking you’d hook that 360 up to your new iMac for extreme graphical sexiness, it looks like you’ll have to wait.
During yesterday’s earnings conference call, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings announced plans to launch a streaming-only rental service. Unfortunately that program won’t be launched in the US. The new program is meant to expand the company’s international profile, but that’s not the only reason we won’t see it stateside. Hastings also said the model needs to be proven in other markets before expanding.
That probably means Netflix wants to know the model can be profitable before launching worldwide. The new system faces unique challenges as the rent-by-post services just aren’t an option in other countries. Hastings says the postal systems in other countries can be too “tricky” for physical mail to really work out.
I’m all for a streaming-only option. Sure, I can have that now as a part of regular Netflix service, but the DVDs are more of a hassle to me than anything else. Why bother with them when all I want is on-demand movie selection?
This summer gave us a lot of speculation about the actual cost of running YouTube. Now the video site serves up nearly 100 billion videos a year, making some analysts wonder where all the bandwidth money is coming from. As Arbor Networks, a net flow monitoring hardware provider, has it, there is no money changing hands. Google’s YouTube is being run on the good ol’ barter system.
“I think Google’s transit costs are close to zero,” says Craig Labovitz, Arbor Network’s chief scientist. Google also said earlier in the year that standard pricing models just don’t apply for YouTube. Google has bought up a bunch of unused fiber-optics known as dark fiber through which it sends data to other networks. Those ISPs then trade traffic with Google. It’s a system I’ll admit I don’t completely understand, but when you think about the sheer amount of traffic Google generates, it seems logical they could trade some of their own fiber-optic space for a little bandwidth here and there.
As my source article at Wired points out, this is a fundamental shift in the way the net is carried. It used to be run by smaller ISPs, paying into larger ISPs, paying into intercontinental networks. But when Google sends 10% of all internet traffic around the web, it’s bound to find new ways to compensate the bandwidth providers, which is exactly what the company has done for YouTube.
The Wired article is a great read, and full of some cool information for anyone curious about the Net’s structure and where things are headed.
Movie theaters are looking into IR light as a way to help combat piracy from movie-goers with cameras. Japan’s National Institute of Informatics has requested help from Sharp, which came up with the following method.
By projecting IR from behind the movie screen, movie theaters can wash out a camcorder’s image by flooding the sensor with light that is undetectable to the human eye. The light passes through the screen through small holes designed for sound. The resulting effect is a grid of light over the image, rendering the cam unusable.
There is, of course, the problem of getting every theater to install these things, which will likely further increase ticket prices in a declining market. It was a nice thought guys. Really, it was.
It looks like Apple has given the 40GB version of Apple TV the cement boots treatment. The model disappeared from the online store at some point overnight. The 160GB model, on the other hand, got a nice little price cut, down to $229. Previously it was the 40GB at that price point, while the 160GB cost $329.
Though there have been rumors of an Apple TV update recently, the hardware still hasn’t changed much since release. The newest rumor is that iTunes LP content has been specifically formatted for viewing on Apple TV, meaning once again that we could at least see a software update in the near future.
In the meantime, you might want to grab the reduced 160GB model if you’ve been considering it. It’s a pretty nice deal on the little box.
Netflix streaming is just about the greatest thing around (yeah, it’s better than Hulu) for video content. The interface is clean, easy to use, and the selection is good enough for my $10 a month. Streaming has also saved Netflix a whole lot of money.
