Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Netflix and iTunes Rentals Aiming At Different Crowds

Posted by Zonk on Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:45 AM
from the i-like-the-part-where-i'm-not-paying-for-24-hours-of-use dept.
Engadget notes an article in the New York Times discussing the substantially different markets that Netflix and Apple's movie rentals are aiming for. The site views the loosening of Netflix streaming restrictions as a reaction motivated entirely by the iTunes movie rental announcement, but beyond that the two services seem to have little connection. From Engadget's observations: "After speaking with Netflix's Reed Hastings, it was found that the vast majority of its streamable content was 'older,' and considering that users of this service can never look forward to brand new releases being available, the cost (i.e. free to most mail-in subscribers) makes sense. As for Apple, it's able to focus on crowds who are looking for a more robust, generally fresher selection, but of course, you'll pay the premium each time you indulge. Furthermore, Netflix has yet to make transferring video to any display / device other than your monitor easy, and while an LG set top box is indeed on the horizon, the differences in content selection are still likely to lure separate eyes."

Related Stories

[+] Apple and Fox Set to Announce Movie Rental Deal 192 comments
mudimba writes "Apple and Twentieth Century Fox are about to announce a deal that will allow users to rent Fox movies over iTunes. The deal will allow people to download movies that will only play for a limited amount of time. 'Pali Research analyst Stacey Widlitz said the deal follows a trend of Hollywood studios selling directly to consumers and cutting out the middleman. "It's just a sign the studios feel ... that another distribution channel is where they are choosing to go, and incrementally it hurts Blockbuster and Netflix," Widlitz said.'"
[+] Netflix To Lift Streaming Limits 249 comments
The AP has a story on Netflix's move to head off expected competition from Apple: the company will lift limits on streaming its movies for most subscribers. The story reports on rumors of an Apple movie-download service that may be announced by Steve Jobs on Tuesday. In the past Netflix has imposed limits on how long its subscribers could watch streamed movies; for example, those who paid $16.99/mo. could stream up to 17 hours per month. The limits will end on Monday for most subscribers (except for those paying $4.99 for two DVD rentals a month, said to be a small minority). The company has 6,000 movies available for streaming, compared to 90,000 that you can get delivered in the mail.
[+] NBC's Zucker Hints At Return to iTunes 68 comments
Bad corporate blood led to the collapse of the NBC/Apple business relationship in the fall of last year. Now, via the Engadget news feed, comes word that things may be thawing out between the two. A for-pay article in the Financial Times had words from NBC Universal's COE Jeff Zucker, saying: "'We've said all along that we admire Apple, that we want to be in business with Apple.' He then unexpectedly adds, 'We're great fans of Steve Jobs.' No telling what has caused the turnabout. Perhaps the writers strike gave both parties time to reflect on their mounting lost revenue." The site also notes that NBC signed a deal as part of the recent movie rental announcement, possibly contributing to the thaw. They link to a BusinessWeek article pointing out positive statements from Jobs reciprocating these 'feelings'.
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.

Netflix and iTunes Rentals Aiming At Different Crowds 25 Comments More | Login /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login
Keybindings Beta
Q W E
A S D
Loading ... Please wait.
  • Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by elrous0 (869638) * on Thursday January 17, @10:50AM (#22080952)
    The problem with AppleTV and this revolutionary new service is that, for some time, I've already had a device that lets me rent new movies via the internet (even *gasp* HD movies) and watch them on my TV. It's called an "Xbox 360." It even comes with the bonus features of letting me play videogames and chat with my friends.
    • Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (Score:5, Informative)

      by p0tat03 (985078) on Thursday January 17, @11:05AM (#22081114) Homepage
      I've got a 360, and it really doesn't do it for me, the movie and messaging components that is. Movie selection is piss poor, the device is hellishly loud, and messaging is buggy and crashy. Just signing into Messenger causes my device to hang for up to a minute! Ludicrous. The movie and messaging components of Xbox 360 are merely functional, they are not easy to use.
      [ Parent ]
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Now they just need a linux release of iTunes.

          They should remove the AppleTV dependency (lock-in) on iTunes, and let me browse my network folder via alternate method. I know this will never happen, because most of Apple's products try to direct people to th
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            So hack it. I currently have an XBMC, but I'm eyeing an AppleTV for my next rev of hardware (and maybe by then XBMC will even be stable on linux which runs on Apple TV)

            http://wiki.awkwardtv.org/wiki/Mount_a_Remote_Drive_via_NFS [awkwardtv.org]
            http://wiki.awkwardtv.org/wik [awkwardtv.org]
          • Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (Score:4, Interesting)

            by DavidinAla (639952) on Thursday January 17, @04:55PM (#22085948)
            Just because iTunes doesn't organize music the way you want it to doesn't make it a "horrible music organizer." For me and for many people, it's an excellent music organizer and playback system. In fact, it's my only music system at home, because it was so superior to standalone stereos. What you really seem to mean is that it doesn't do what you want, so it doesn't meet your needs. That's reasonable. But don't pretend that a product is lousy just because it's not designed the way you would have designed it.
            [ Parent ]
    • Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Rude Turnip (49495) <rudeturnip AT valdot DOT org> on Thursday January 17, @11:19AM (#22081300) Homepage
      Right now I'm using an Xbox 360 for exactly the same purpose. However, it only "works good enough" for me because I have the patience and know-how to get the most out of my Xbox. Aside from games and a built-in (but NOISY) DVD player, Apple TV has the following things going for it over Xbox 360:

      -Your purchases get backed up to iTunes on your PC. It annoys me to no end that every other week or so I have to delete shows I've paid for because you can't back up programming to your computer.

      -Your purchases are denominated in actual currency, not "Microsoft Points." Enough said on that point.

      -Built-in video podcast browsing...once the software update hits Apple TV, of course. There is no straightforward way to watch these on Xbox 360. There is a lot of good, free, legal programming out there (Web Drifter, Diggnation, Stranger Things, NASA). With the 360, you need either the Zune software, Miro or iTunes to aggregate the podcasts. In the 2 latter cases, you then need a UPNP/DLNA server to serve the videos out to the 360.

      -Better video support. The 360 plays H.264 videos (my DVD rips) just fine...however, Windows Media Player does not catalogue them into my library. I should not have to hack my registry to force it to do so. Importantly, I should not have to rely upon 3rd party software (TVersity) to serve out such videos. The other way to do it is to download Microsoft's Zune software, which natively catalogues H.264...one hell of a way to run a company, Microsoft, no consistency across the board and every step is taken to lock me in, which results in crippled hardware.
      [ Parent ]
  • Netflix is different than Apple... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by CF4L (1072112) on Thursday January 17, @10:52AM (#22080976)
    Netflix did an excellent job of separating themselves from Apple. They didn't punish their current subscribers by charging them extra for this service (as Apple did for iPod touch owners with the new apps).
    • by adamstew (909658) on Thursday January 17, @12:07PM (#22082034)
      there is FREE software going out to all current gen iPods (including the touch) to enable the rental ability with them.

      What was not free was the additional apps (maps, stocks, weather, mail, etc.) Those are going to be included in future shipments for free, but current shipments they have to charge something because of accounting reasons...same reason they had to charge for the 802.11n in the macs that had the hardware but not the software to use the 802.11n standard.

      iPhone and Apple TV get the software updates for free because they accounted the revenue for those devices differently than they do regular iPods and macs, so they are able to add additional features for free.

      netflix didn't have to do this because netflix has no hardware (yet). They are just adding additional services to their subscription model in order to be more competitive.

      Either way, it's not apple trying to screw customers out of money for updates...if they were, they would rather you bought a new iPod touch to get the additional features, rather than a moderately priced upgrade.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Didn't they charge $2 for that 802.11n update? $20 is more like a for-profit venture than an accounting technicality. Since they're charging $20 to update iPod Touches (mine is like 3 weeks old for Pete's sake), I will be astonished if the forthcoming SDK
  • TV shows (Score:4, Insightful)

    by gEvil (beta) (945888) on Thursday January 17, @10:54AM (#22080998)
    As I've said before, the Netflix service isn't too great for new movies (as this article points out), but it is wonderful for older TV shows (and some newer ones). Now that they've lifted the time limits, I'll be sitting down and watching tons of old shows. Full seasons of Alfred Hitchcock Presents, Amazing Stories (well, the first season at least), and tons and tons of BBC stuff (Doctor Who and Red Dwarf, anyone?). I saw that they recently added Dexter Season 1. Hopefully they'll be putting up Season 2 of that soon, too. Perfect timing, too, since it's the middle of Winter and there's nothing new on TV due to the writers strike.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      "there's nothing new on TV due to the writers strike"

      Hmm.. and who is getting a residual payment from your downloads of those older shows?

      I'm uncertain about what might be better, but if the writers are going to stick with some form of deferred compensatio
  • More than just old movies (Score:5, Informative)

    by peipas (809350) on Thursday January 17, @10:57AM (#22081032)
    Some of the most attractive offerings on Netflix's streaming service are television shows. There are lots of seasons and even complete series available through the service. I was able to watch the entire run of the British show "Coupling," the UK's raunchier version of Friends. They also have every Law and Order known to man, short-run series like "Dead Like Me," and even modern shows like Heroes and 3rd Rock.
  • Public Libraries (Score:5, Informative)

    by PIPBoy3000 (619296) on Thursday January 17, @10:57AM (#22081040)
    I always wonder why these sort of discussions leave out public libraries. Our local library has an amazing DVD selection (much of it purchased from a failed video store). Sure, the new stuff is often hard to get (Hot Fuzz had 66 holds on it, last I checked), but there's tons of classics, Anime, and other things I missed in the theater.

    It's become a weekly tradition for me to head out to the library after Saturday breakfast and return with my booty of media. Like Santa, I open my sack and hand out books and movies to my kids and occasionally my wife (depending on whether or not she's on the naughty list).
    • Re:Public Libraries (Score:5, Funny)

      by krakelohm (830589) on Thursday January 17, @11:09AM (#22081178)
      Having the wife on the naughty list is not a bad thing...
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Public Libraries (Score:4, Insightful)

      by PhoenixFlare (319467) on Thursday January 17, @11:22AM (#22081352) Journal
      I always wonder why these sort of discussions leave out public libraries. Our local library has an amazing DVD selection (much of it purchased from a failed video store)

      Because most people's libraries weren't lucky enough to have a failed video store to acquire a collection from - Netflix's selection is so much wider than any public library (or video store, for that matter) i've ever been in or heard of, there's almost no point making a comparison.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        . If you wait 9-12 months the 'new release' movies go to gallery. I can rent, for a week, three gallery movies @ 3 dollars.


        Dude, have you even looked at Netflix pricing [netflix.com]? You can get unlimited rentals per month (2 movies at a time) for $13.99/month and you can EASILY get first run new releases. I used to be into the Blockbuster thing, but the newer titles were never in s
  • by LMacG (118321) on Thursday January 17, @11:07AM (#22081140)
    Dogs and cats are not the same.
  • by Tibor the Hun (143056) on Thursday January 17, @11:18AM (#22081278)
    I know this is mostly regarding the streamable Netflix movies, but I'd like to point out that their Que is worth the price.
    I haven't seen anything like that on Apple's service, but I may be mistaken.

    One other thing that Netflix has over Apple, is no 30 day wait after a new release. Sure, there may be a few days wait in some cases, but it's not 30.
    (Piratebay also has no such restrictions. The movie studios probably wanted to strike a good deal with those jolly rogers. Great move studios, nothing like waiting 30 days after a region-encrusted release...)

    On the other side, Apple has a convenient way to transfer movies to my iPod touch, which is excellent.

    I'm a Netflix subscriber, and I'm pretty sure I'll stay with them, but I think Apple may get some of my money here and there too.
  • by blueZ3 (744446) on Thursday January 17, @11:21AM (#22081328) Homepage
    I think that $3 for a movie "rental" is way too expensive, which is the very reason I dropped Blockbuster for Netflix in the first place. I don't care if it is a new release, recent T.V. episode, or whatever--three dollars is half the cost of a matinée on the big screen.

    We don't have cable or satellite T.V. and I can't see spending money on the antenna we'd need for broadcast digital--five hundred channels of nothing is still nothing. So we have Netflix. While I don't watch much, my wife watches about one episode of a T.V. series each day. Perhaps every other week we get a movie, and occasionally we'll watch episodes some old series together. So we run through maybe 10-15 DVDs worth of content each month. That type of viewing pattern would be significantly more than the $18 a month we currently pay Netflix, say around $45 if you had to get all the TV episodes as individual "rentals"

    It will be interesting to see if Apple can do to video viewing what it did to music (make the music player ubiquitous, or nearly so). The main issues I see are cost (per video) and cost (for a device to play the content).
    • I think that $3 for a movie "rental" is way too expensive,
      I watch primarily older films, and I always check DVD Price Search [dvdpricesearch.com] before making a purchase. The upshot is I pay on average $7 per film (often as part of a box set), and I can watch it any time I
    • We don't have cable or satellite T.V. and I can't see spending money on the antenna we'd need for broadcast digital--five hundred channels of nothing is still nothing.
      That makes no sense.

      1. Broadcast digital uses the same antenna that your wife is using right now to pick up analog TV.

      2. Next year you're at least going to have to buy a converter box (government subsidized, though) in order to keep doing that. But your s
    • THREE dollars is too expensive for a movie?! This blows my mind! What, in your opinion, is a movie worth? Movie rentals at Blockbuster in the 80s were $3 and it amazes me that now, you can get movies without leaving home for the same price. We're talking a
  • by ContractualObligatio (850987) on Thursday January 17, @11:52AM (#22081848)
    The big difference between the two is that Apple is making a genuine try at starting a business: they've revamped the Apple TV after the first attempt didn't get a great reaction, they've cut deals with all the movie studios, they let people do the obvious thing with movies, namely watch them on the TV.

    NetFlix, on the other hand, may be smart enough to realise that internet access to movies is inevitable, but only came up with some shitty "on your computer only" service, with bandwidth restrictions. It's a little experiment without serious backing. My bet is that whoever within NetFlix has responsibility for the online service has little power within the company, and is probably seen as competition to the main DVDs-by-post business. Apple's announcement probably gave that person a rare bit of clout to argue to the rest of the company that unless the NetFlix streaming service improves, it will simply become a laughing stock.

    All that said - if they deliver on easy access via the TV, their model of "classic" and hard-to-find material plus their que idea is a great one. Hope the online person now gets the respect and funding they deserve. They've got to prepare for the future where the postal service just ain't necessary for their business model.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Netflix is not a ripoff financially, though they are t3h evil in not being transparent. Basically, you will have trouble renting DVDs for less than $2 each. On a 2-at-a-time plan ($14) you will get immediate service if you rent each movie for an average of
    • Re:Netflix Is A RipOff (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Belial6 (794905) on Thursday January 17, @11:47AM (#22081754) Homepage
      No, they have not. The law suit that they lost was had nothing to do with 'throttling', as keeps getting repeated. What they were sued for was for immediately sending high usage subscribers a movie lower on their list instead of the top one if they had to choose between sending a high usage subscriber the last copy, or a low usage subscriber. They have since updated their TOS to reflect this.

      You should rally have been looking at your post office as the culprit. Netflix has way to many people to be individually targeting people for delayed shipments. The only way that they could realistically get any benefit from it would be if they had a system to automatically flag accounts. There are way to many people like me that have spent years (over 5 for me) returning just about every single movie the day after they receive it for Netflix to have an automated system to throttle.

      [ Parent ]