- Joined
- Oct 25, 2019
- Messages
- 11,111
- Likes
- 14,774
I'm sure you've watched European films, maybe just not ones suitable for Netflix. Or requiring dubbing.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Netflix cuts 4k bitrate in half promises you'll not see the difference, and raises prices....again.
- Thread starter Blumlein 88
- Start date
Apesbrain
Addicted to Fun and Learning
I say it every time, but at $168/yr. this might be the time I drop Netflix. What with Hulu, Prime Video, etc., there is just so much one can afford and keep track of. Going to consult with my wife and look carefully at how much Netflix we really consume.
Sharing accounts across households is a good way to reduce the cost, they really don't seem to care if one account is used by more than one house, and the profiles kind of encourage it. If you are paying for 4 simultaneous streams no reason to not try and get value for money.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2019
- Messages
- 11,111
- Likes
- 14,774
Every netflop! (no I don't. For an example of the latter try the Enola Holmes one, the former try the Ryan Reynolds one)
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2018
- Messages
- 6,238
- Likes
- 9,370
You are out of order, dead wrong and have a lot of nerve. Kodi is illegal if you are using it to stream copyrighted material which you are stealing. I would have reported your first post, but since the site has lost Thomas Savage as a moderator, I don't want to bother our host. I can't believe $1 per month is worth worrying about.
leeroy 85032
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2020
- Messages
- 113
- Likes
- 68
you are mistaken sir , kodi isn't illegal ..please do your homework, b4 you accuse people of wrongdoing .. all you need to do is google it .. it ain't rocket science ..to be completely transparent , broadcasting copyrighted material is illegal, since that has nothing to do with viewing there is no law broken by viewing , since torrants are re broadcasting , that would be illegal.. you're so positive of your stance ..ok.. post one instance of a person convicted of watching "illegally" via 3rd party add ons that don't include torrants(in the US, since that is where i reside)..your morals are most certainly not my priority to abide by nor am i compelled by law to adhere to your delicate sensibility.. so why don't you do a bit of research b4 you respond and we'll call it a day
edit'... your views on this are understandable, i'm sure you haven't done much /any research or are going by people trying to scare people into buying vpn's (pretty useless in real world application in this instance).. and since the bulk of the argument is driven by a multi billion dollar industry that has , for years ,unsuccessfully lobbied congress to outlaw said viewing... however in the recent past (2016 maybe ?) congress refused to include viewing via internet as part of legislation against 3rd party broadcasting.. currently major legal actions are being attempted against locast for copyright infringement of a similar nature (broadcasting network tv on internet via open air reception)... odds are congress and the courts might be a bit busy the next few months to get to these issues...and better (much better) legal minds than i , tend to think locast will win in the lawsuit that is currently underway...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2020
- Messages
- 95
- Likes
- 175
Well...It is obvious, that their goal is to sell more subscriptions without investing in their servers streaming abilities. It would be fair, if they gave us the choice, so we can decide what bitrate and quality we get according to our connection abilities. The presentation looks like typical PR twist, they are basically reducing our promised quality, that we have already agreed on and paying for, to share it with other users, to get more money. It is a weird move in my book, and i don´t like it.
Unlikely. Netflix uses AWS almost exclusively for streaming, and pretty much everything else, so investing in servers as you put it is mostly an indirect act. I strongly suspect Netflix is one of Amazon’s business cases for investing in Graviton servers, which will have much better price performance than x86 servers, and getting Netflix on Graviton would be a big enough win I suspect some advantageous pricing is involved. It is sort of humorous to see Netflix paying so much to probably their biggest competitor, the owner of Prime Video.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2018
- Messages
- 2,771
- Likes
- 8,149
There's nothing wrong with innovating compression algorithms and techniques for efficiency.
If there's an issue here that I see with Netflix, it's the larger issue of the combination of high-resolution with streaming compression to begin with (sort of reminds me of the audio obsession with high sample rates). Streaming has never really been reliably 4k or in some cases even HD, given the compression rates compared to, say, what you get watching the same movie/show in HD or 4k via a Blu-Ray disc.
Personally I don't care much - I'm not a videophile and am far more tolerant of small decreases in quality, and of lossy compression, with video than with audio. But once you start down the road of paying for a premium subscription tier for 4k that's not exactly truly 4k in the sense that it's advertised, how much does it matter if the streaming company cuts the data rate and perceptually you can't tell the difference?
Now, if Netflix is skating too close to the edge and they are trying to squeeze every last bit of data-rate savings by visibly degrading the image quality and claiming that most people can't tell, I do get the criticism there. But we won't know until that happens, yes?
In other words, if Netflix is going from the video equivalent of, say, 320kbps AAC audio to 256k, then I'd say who cares. But if they are going from the equivalent of 256k to 128k, then yes, that would be a raw deal indeed.
If there's an issue here that I see with Netflix, it's the larger issue of the combination of high-resolution with streaming compression to begin with (sort of reminds me of the audio obsession with high sample rates). Streaming has never really been reliably 4k or in some cases even HD, given the compression rates compared to, say, what you get watching the same movie/show in HD or 4k via a Blu-Ray disc.
Personally I don't care much - I'm not a videophile and am far more tolerant of small decreases in quality, and of lossy compression, with video than with audio. But once you start down the road of paying for a premium subscription tier for 4k that's not exactly truly 4k in the sense that it's advertised, how much does it matter if the streaming company cuts the data rate and perceptually you can't tell the difference?
Now, if Netflix is skating too close to the edge and they are trying to squeeze every last bit of data-rate savings by visibly degrading the image quality and claiming that most people can't tell, I do get the criticism there. But we won't know until that happens, yes?
In other words, if Netflix is going from the video equivalent of, say, 320kbps AAC audio to 256k, then I'd say who cares. But if they are going from the equivalent of 256k to 128k, then yes, that would be a raw deal indeed.
Kodi is not illegal, at least not where I live.
It doesn't come with any plugins that can stream such content, nor does it come with the repositories that have such plugins.
I use it to watch live TV and recordings from my tvheadend server. Use as a PVR frontend is quite common as it supports most of the backends out there.
It doesn't come with any plugins that can stream such content, nor does it come with the repositories that have such plugins.
I use it to watch live TV and recordings from my tvheadend server. Use as a PVR frontend is quite common as it supports most of the backends out there.
leeroy 85032
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2020
- Messages
- 113
- Likes
- 68
i think it's more the inherent thought that while they are degrading the signal they are jacking the rates.. all during an economic crisis that has other providers lowering profit margin to help the general welfare of public at large...this seems to be a "we do it b/c we can" move ... in the long run it's the non technical "dummies" like me that pay the freight .. i don't give 1/2 of two poops about bit rates and "viewable differences".. i see "more $ for lower quality picture".. and that's what 99% of the paying customers see...lucky for netflix that many of their customers are uninformed or too "stoopid" to know they are getting hosed $1-2 a month x however many times they've jacked us up in the last few years...
I don't want to express a legal opinion here as I am not a lawyer. That aside, what you state may not be correct. Record labels sued a number of individuals who were consuming copyrighted content that they deemed illegally distributed. Here is a quick reference: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electri...tents-fall-2005/projects/online_fileshrng.pdf
Whatever the law is, in this forum we need to stay way away from any encouragement, instruction or otherwise to consume content that may not be authorized. So please move on.
leeroy 85032
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2020
- Messages
- 113
- Likes
- 68
happily .. i found myself on the defensive and being chastised by the uninformed ...... the fact that congress *refused* to include viewing as a violation of law notwithstanding...btw .. those lawsuits you cite are more historical in value than evidentiary in nature, i understand your reluctance to worry about my thoughts rather than of those that pay you ... have a wonderful day
Say what? Should I get litigated for encouraging piracy on this forum (true or not), you would pay for my defense? I would think not.happily .. i found myself on the defensive and being chastised by the uninformed ...... the fact that congress *refused* to include viewing as a violation of law notwithstanding...btw .. those lawsuits you cite are more historical in value than evidentiary in nature, i understand your reluctance to worry about my thoughts rather than of those that pay you ... have a wonderful day
My responsibility and liability in this regard as a forum owner is huge compared to you posting anonymously. If you want to learn about the law, read about that. Your worst nightmare should be a bunch of corporate attorneys from Fortune 100 companies going after you. It doesn't matter if you are right. You can go bankrupt defending yourself. There is a reason I have this key statement in our Terms of Service:
In my last formal job, my job was to work with major content owners on distribution of their content, their piracy concerns, etcc. I spent a lifetime on these topics. So please don't start with thinking you know this topic. You don't.
So leave the insults at the door and follow the rules. They are there for a reason whether you understand them or not.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2018
- Messages
- 6,238
- Likes
- 9,370
@leeroy 85032 please give @amirm a break. This forum does not have another moderator and any time he spends on problems is taken away from running tests on his laboratory grade gear. I mean, what do you really want?
leeroy 85032
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2020
- Messages
- 113
- Likes
- 68
i've already moved on...per your request.. was there something else?
Hi
I am in a situation where my Internet access is considered fast when it hits 10 Mb/s ... I may switch to another ISP which seems to provide 20 Mb/s under similar conditions ... I am, thus, buying second hand disks off Amazon and/or e-Bay.
Netflix is riding high, they have the subscribers. Seems their stock is high. They have challenged successfully the Hollywood studios, i-e , they produce their own (good to mediocre) movies. The same feel and excellence, that Hollywood is known for , Netflix can and have produced on the same footing. Good writing, direction acting, score, dialogues, etc ... a Netflix production is equivalent in everything to the best Hollywood can deliver. Hollywood acting, production and direction, royalty goes in to Netflix movies ... Clooney, Bullock , A-list directors actor, etc.
But I believe they (Netflix) are taking their eyes off the ball. The user experience is not good. Their interface is mediocre, they haven't made themselves a favor going binary (Thumb's up or down), they do not predict or suggest welll... Plus it is a nightmare trying to find a movie you may like... You have to resort to a Rotten Tomatoes reviews and backtrack to Netflix. Contrast this with Spotify interface which manages to constantly surprise the user in a consistent and agreable fashion... , Apple TV at least has the Rotten Tomatoes' scores which can help navigating some but at this point in time , there is no Spotify's Interface equivalent in Netflix ... Meanwhile there is Disney, and they are serious but are not considering the International market... We outside the USA have Netflix and will likely keep it... As a matter of fact, for many , the reduction in bandwidth is welcome. Not for me, one of those outliers and minority, videophiles... then again, sometimes .. it is good enough and that dollar a month doesn't hurt .. yet ... So we are keeping Netflix , until Disney or other streaming platform understands that, while the US market is yuuuuge, the rest of the World is perhaps, 10 times yuuuuger
Peace
I am in a situation where my Internet access is considered fast when it hits 10 Mb/s ... I may switch to another ISP which seems to provide 20 Mb/s under similar conditions ... I am, thus, buying second hand disks off Amazon and/or e-Bay.
Netflix is riding high, they have the subscribers. Seems their stock is high. They have challenged successfully the Hollywood studios, i-e , they produce their own (good to mediocre) movies. The same feel and excellence, that Hollywood is known for , Netflix can and have produced on the same footing. Good writing, direction acting, score, dialogues, etc ... a Netflix production is equivalent in everything to the best Hollywood can deliver. Hollywood acting, production and direction, royalty goes in to Netflix movies ... Clooney, Bullock , A-list directors actor, etc.
But I believe they (Netflix) are taking their eyes off the ball. The user experience is not good. Their interface is mediocre, they haven't made themselves a favor going binary (Thumb's up or down), they do not predict or suggest welll... Plus it is a nightmare trying to find a movie you may like... You have to resort to a Rotten Tomatoes reviews and backtrack to Netflix. Contrast this with Spotify interface which manages to constantly surprise the user in a consistent and agreable fashion... , Apple TV at least has the Rotten Tomatoes' scores which can help navigating some but at this point in time , there is no Spotify's Interface equivalent in Netflix ... Meanwhile there is Disney, and they are serious but are not considering the International market... We outside the USA have Netflix and will likely keep it... As a matter of fact, for many , the reduction in bandwidth is welcome. Not for me, one of those outliers and minority, videophiles... then again, sometimes .. it is good enough and that dollar a month doesn't hurt .. yet ... So we are keeping Netflix , until Disney or other streaming platform understands that, while the US market is yuuuuge, the rest of the World is perhaps, 10 times yuuuuger
Peace
restorer-john
Grand Contributor
Just go to your account: settings/profile and parental controls/viewing activity/view. Scroll down to the bottom and click 'download all'.
It will say "this will take a while", but it doesn't. Then you get a nice .csv file you can open in Excel and work out what you actually have watched since you started using the service.
Apesbrain
Addicted to Fun and Learning
Thanks, the process is a little different now but same result. I entered a request.
