Netflix Gauging Interest In an iPhone App

gollum123 writes "A new survey sent out to Netflix subscribers indicates that the iPhone might be the next device that its streaming service rolls out on in the coming months. (The NY Times credits Hacking Netflix for the tip.) According to a tip sent to Hacking Netflix, the subscription video company is now asking users how likely they would be to use an iPhone app to view movies via its online streaming service. According to the survey, an iPhone app would give users all the same functionality that they have when streaming on a PC or other device, including all the same movies and TV shows without advertisements or trailers. If the app is rolled out, the ability to watch on the Apple mobile device would be offered at no additional charge to existing Netflix subscribers. There is good news for AT&T implied in the survey questions: it appears that the app would require users to be connected to a Wi-Fi network."

how about improve the mobile site first?

[phideaux3]

It'd be useful if the home site detected the browser and redirected to the mobile site. Many probably don't even know about mobile.netflix.com because they don't get redirected. Would be great if sub-queues could be accessed when mobile, but they wanted to kill those anyway... :(

Re:Something I am actually interested in

[Nikker]

I have to say as an owner of a 3GS battery life watching mp4's is amazing. I've used it on its own watching video in the car and hooked up via media cable (RCA) to my TV and both seem to play 10% battery life / hr viewing. I've watched 2 movies each about 1 1/2 - 2 hrs long and still had 50%+ left. As far as streaming goes I get about 400-600KBs average from Fido/Rogers and it's not very likely you'll be streaming anything over 420i so it shouldn't be that bad with 3G. If you're looking for a higher res video then I'm not sure how it will handle but the mp4 hardware decoding really helps out on this device(can't say the same for other iPhone models though).

Re:Something I am actually interested in

[Aqualung812]

video over 3g would be questionable

Dude, both TFA and the summary point out that it is only for WiFi.

Re:Why not an app that is platform neutral?

[guruevi]

1. Good luck finding an API or IDE that is compatible with all those platforms at once
2. Good luck finding similar functionality across all OS'es let alone all devices
3. Good luck finding the same performance across all devices

Each platform needs to be developed for separately because there's no 'gcc' or 'gtk' or 'qt' that makes anything uniform across all platforms.

Besides, almost none of the devices out in the market besides some Nokia, Apple and Android devices even have the power and the chips capable to download and play back videos AT ALL. None of the other devices (WinMo, Symbian, ...) even have standard browsers with support for Flash OR HTML5 so web developing is also out of the picture.

And the iPhone has the biggest marketshare in 1. "smartphones that you can develop for without corporate support ($$$)" or 2. "smartphones with a viable marketplace" (of course success of 2 is because of 1). Also the Maemo, Android and iPhone's are the only phones where the device is not locked down by default by the provider.

Re:Why not an app that is platform neutral?

[mswhippingboy]

Java will run on all platforms except (non-jail broken) iPhones, although even this can be gotten around via some tools (xmlvm, metismo, etc). BTW, java could technically run on the iPhone but Apple won't allow it (for a boatload of BS reasons, when in reality it boils down to greed and customer control). Just another reason to skip the iPhone.

Re:Why not an app that is platform neutral?

[mdwh2]

Oh there is - Java runs on just about all phones. The Iphones can't support it though, which is why custom apps have to be especially written for them instead.

Re:Am I the only one?

[jisatsusha]

Really? I've had no problem with watching BBC iPlayer on my 3GS for a couple of hours at least, and I've had it since June.

Re:Why not an app that is platform neutral?

[Karlt1]

Oh there is - Java runs on just about all phones. The Iphones can't support it though, which is why custom apps have to be especially written for them instead.

Have you actually used Java to develop for multiple phones? The "Write Once Run Anywhere" mantra of Java is definitely not true for mobile platforms. Netflix can't just write a streaming media app in Java and it will run with every J2ME platform -- or even every phone from the same vendor.

Parent is not a troll

[raddan]

I've converted a variety of media to be played on small screens with the thinking that it would be great for when I have travel-downtime. For me at least, it does get tedious. I just don't enjoy such a small screen. Someone else mentioned an iPad, and for me, that would probably be the tipping point (I'd think about getting one), but a cellphone screen doesn't cut it. Especially since I tend to prefer reading during downtime than watching TV.

On the airplane wi-fi front, I was on a US Air flight recently, and they had wi-fi onboard. Since it was new, they were running a promotional deal where you get one free flight's worth of wi-fi if you give them your email addy (little do they know I'm an email admin... and have virtually unlimited email addresses!). I was floored at how fast it was, considering that I was, you know, hurtling through the air at 30,000 ft. I transferred files to and from my fileserver, I had an SSH session open, and the latency didn't seem any worse than my connection at home. Impressed... but I probably still wouldn't pay for it (just as I don't pay the extra $60 for 4 more inches of legroom; the $6 Jack Daniels can easily compensate for that). Now, granted, this was all subjective-- I didn't run any speed tests-- but I was expected something like modem-speed, so I was pleasantly surprised.

Re:Gauge it out!

[dgatwood]

Either you're mistaking 3G coverage for total coverage, you're lying, or your phone is massively broken. As in the antenna must be missing entirely. I'm only aware of one dead spot in that general area, and that's a weak spot for a few hundred feet causing a problematic tower changeover on De Anza Blvd just south of Fremont. Even sunk down below the ground on Central, 280, etc. I get completely solid coverage. There are a couple of glitchy spots, mind you (880 just north of 85, 101 somewhere around the airport, and Lawrence expressway at the 101 offramp), but those are just spots where the tower handoff can cause the occasional call to drop while driving. When stationary, you should never have any real problems with coverage in your area.

Further, I think that there's actually an AT&T cellular tower on TOP of one the Apple campus buildings. Unless there's something seriously wrong with your phone, you shouldn't be able to get anything less than perfect signal strength near there. In fact, you should just about be able to crack the thing open, cut and tear the antenna's trace entirely off the circuit board starting right where it goes into the GSM chip, and still have enough signal to place a call successfully in Apple's parking lot.... I've gotten 3-4 bars inside concrete elevator shafts and other solid concrete structures in that area.

Seriously, if you're having connection problems within five miles of Apple, throw your phone in the trash and get a new one. There's something very, very seriously wrong. AT&T's coverage around here is quite solid and has been for many years.