
Netflix Is Killing BitTorrent in The US - AndrewWarner
http://torrentfreak.com/netflix-is-killing-bittorrent-in-the-us-110427/
======
ANH
To me, Netflix streaming is like some alien technology from the future. I live
in a rural area with terrible broadband (miniscule monthly cap). However, I
have an unlimited data plan for my phone and with a composite video cable I
can plug my phone into the television and stream movies from the Netflix app.
We've never had cable TV, and with Netlix and iTunes there's no point. Even
over 3G, we get surprisingly good video quality.

~~~
Encosia
If you're interested in how the sausage is made, I believe Netflix uses
Microsoft's Smooth Streaming[1] to accomplish that (I know they use it for the
in-browser client, but am not 100% positive about the native mobile apps).
Smooth streaming is an under-appreciated tool, IMO. Given its power, you might
reasonably assume it would be complex and expensive to set up, but it's a free
extension to IIS if you have any recent edition of Windows Server and is
amazingly simple to get up and running with your own video.

[1] <http://www.iis.net/media>

~~~
henriklied
Smooth Streaming is certainly a great piece of technology, and thanks to the
guys at Code Shop, it now works on several devices and using nginx, Apache and
lighttpd: <http://smoothstreaming.code-shop.com/trac>

~~~
kowsik
Netflix streaming _is_ like the bittorrent protocol (lots of participant hosts
and lots of chunked fetches). See this:
[http://labs.mudynamics.com/2011/04/07/mommy-netflix-is-
eatin...](http://labs.mudynamics.com/2011/04/07/mommy-netflix-is-eating-my-
firewall/)

------
kbatten
When I want to watch a movie, the first place I go to is netflix. I won't tell
you the second place I go to.

I'd pay an extra 5 bucks a month if it could increase the rate at which
netflix lets me "play now" movies. Yes, some movies I specifically want to get
on bluray, but there are plenty of others that video quality matters very
little to me.

~~~
dhughes
When I want to watch a movie, the first place I go to is Netflix Canada, half
of what I want is unavailable and it doesn't update very often (at least not
this month) so the second place I go to not too hard to figure out.

~~~
pyre
But you're supposed to wait patiently while the studios' marketing strategy of
segmentation plays out. Just like how people in rural areas of the US aren't
allowed to form municipal ISPs to get internet service that the big players
won't provide to them.</sarcasm>

There are way too many people behind desks in large companies that develop
marketing strategies that don't really take their customers into account, and
if their customers behave in a way that breaks their model, the general
reaction is to get angry at their customers for not playing to the tune of
their flute.

~~~
biot
Similar to when big companies violate the GPL. Way too many developers sitting
behind desks getting angry when their licensing model gets broken because big
companies don't play to the tune of their flute. </devil's advocate>

~~~
jackolas
That's actually why the GPL is ingenius, it uses copyright against itself (or
at least against the normal interests of copyright)

------
pdubroy
The article doesn't actually offer any evidence, apart from the fact that
Netflix has doubled its subscribers.

~~~
enjo
Exactly. If anything I'd bet the opposite might be the case. After all,
Netflix streaming and Hulu have both been an enabler for a lot of folks to
drop their cable subscription altogether(my wife and I have, for one).

The only problem is that there are still a few shows we really want to see
(like Game Of Thrones) that we can't find a way to legally acquire. Without
cable there is no HBO.

I bet more and more people are going to be turning to piracy to get the
content they want when they cut that cable cord.

~~~
sudonim
HBO on a cable subscription is still 15 - 20 clams. Even if it was available
streaming or unbundled, that's still a lot more than the cost of netflix.

~~~
sukuriant
But I'd be much faster to pay 15-20 than 65+(15 to 20)=80+ and watch 5
channels + HBO.

~~~
robryan
I think cable misses an opportunity by forcing you to have a heap of channels
you don't want just to get the stuff you do. I'd pay somewhere around $20 a
month to get the probably 5 or so channels of any interest.

~~~
MatthewPhillips
So.. what opportunity are they missing? The opportunity to get less money from
their customers? Doesn't sound like much of an opportunity to me.

~~~
yalurker
The opportunity is that they could have more customers. Many people are
canceling their cable subscriptions because the price is too high for the
value it offers. If cable companies allowed customers to have only a few
channels that they cared about for a lower fee, many of these people would
keep some level of cable subscription.

------
joelhaasnoot
And yet, there's still nothing in Europe that has "all you can eat" streaming,
just $7.50 movie rentals for movies from 2006...

~~~
speleding
Well, we can access everything through <http://www.unblock-us.com/> for $55 a
year and the US has been kind enough to provide an USD:EUR exchange rate of
almost 3:2 so for the price of a single movie you can get a month long
subscription to Netflix.

------
jaysonelliot
If I could rely on a streaming movie from Netflix to play uninterrupted and
without flaws from beginning to end, it would be wonderful.

That, and if I could find the movies I want to watch, of course.

The reality for me, at least, is that I cannot watch two hours of streaming
video from Netflix without the picture freezing or skipping at some point,
even if it's just a little bit.

I love film, and that's unacceptable. I need to either go to the store and get
the DVD, rent a download (not streaming) from iTunes, or hit the high seas. I
need to watch movies when I want, and I need them to play perfectly.

That rules out Netflix, at least for me, at least for now.

~~~
danilocampos
This sounds like a network issue – though that doesn't take away from your
point.

In my case, I can Watch Instantly for an entire movie, in HD, without any
trouble at all, and it does start almost instantly.

If you're getting the bone, though, that points to the limitations any
bandwidth-intensive business has to contend with as they scale. A decent
number of potential customers are stuck with sloppy internet. I wonder at what
point Netflix's growth becomes inhibited by the shitty state of US ISPs.

More interestingly, I wonder what moves they'll make to get around those
limitations. They are a crafty company.

~~~
r0s
There's really only one answer to that problem: full downloads.

I would tolerate a fair amount of DRM for that functionality. I have to
compare it to Steam, where streaming a game isn't an option. Steam's
convenience simply leaves no reason for complaint.

~~~
danilocampos
> There's really only one answer to that problem: full downloads.

I hope you're wrong.

The _real_ answer should be world-class broadband, instead of the nonsense
we're dealing with now. Full downloads are a bandaid but there's no technical
reason why streaming can't work perfectly for the people who want it. Telcos
are just lazy and have built-in monopolies.

In the meantime, what you're describing isn't a bad bandaid, but waiting for a
whole movie to download just isn't as fun as picking then watching instantly.

~~~
r0s
I agree that adequate broadband would solve this, and so many more problems.

I don't think that will happen for years at best, and then only for urban
areas. For the bulk of the population, downloads are the only long term
solution.

Let's be honest though, there's no real justification in ignoring the _option_
to download. Again I compare to Steam and their model.

~~~
Retric
IMO, the short term solution is for Netflix to let you buffer more of the
movie. There is a lot to be said for instant play, but if they reserved a
reasonable slice of your bandwidth to an ever larger buffer they could all but
eliminate stuttering after the first few minute of a movie. I mean they
already have adaptive quality based on bandwidth, so I see no reason they
can't do the same thing while trying to build up a 10+ minute buffer by the
middle of the movie if that's more important to people than a minor change in
quality.

~~~
gedekran
Right now I see at most a four minute buffer. That's one thing I would like is
the ability to change. Or the ability to specify my bandwidth settings so that
I could allow a HD movie or tv show to buffer at higher quality for longer if
my connection wasn't good enough and then start watching when there was enough
of the show buffered.

------
ChuckMcM
I don't find this surprising. "Piracy" is the expression of a market that is
unserved, which is to say that a product is offered at price X, the consumers
price is Y which is < X and the risk of piracy is Z which is <= (X - Y).

The MPAA and RIAA and a bounty of plaintiff lawyers are trying to increase the
cost of the risk, and people like Netflix are getting the price paid by the
consumer below X.

When the inequality ceases to hold, people switch into being paying customers.

~~~
phlux
Actually, I dont buy this due to the fact that piracy is largly around fresh
content, where netflix movie library is fairly old.

Sure, it _is_ getting better titles all the time - but given the fact that
hollywood thinks that paying ___$30_ __to see a movie at home after it has
been in the theatres for 60 (or was it 90) days is a viable price - You will
always see piracy of the latest content.

Further - given the quality of many of the movies that get released it is even
more reasonable to expect this to continue.

What will be interesting is when we see the first ever movie exclusively made
for netflix streaming.

That will denote a new era.

~~~
gojomo
Are you sure the 'fresh content' head dominates the aged long-tail?

The fresh content will dominate top-N lists, sure. It will also dominate
headlines, because it will more often be the subject of newsworthy early-leaks
and enforcement actions.

But there is so much more old content, and the collection/completist/sampling
motivations so important for unauthorized sharing, that I could easily see the
old content swamping the new in terms of total copies or total bandwidth.

~~~
phlux
This is HN, hopefully someone smarter than I could come up with an algorithm
that could model content bandwidth activity.

Content creates a spike of activity when it is "born" on the internet.

Content maintains activity over the life of its availability.

Activity may be a function of the contents [age, quality, rating, medium,
popularity, relation to other content _, etc]

\_It is a sequel, part of a set, etc.

It would be interesting to be able to utilize the rating from netflix/imdb to
predict how much total activity a piece of content might create.

------
veb
Makes sense to me.

If you torrent a movie, you have to find it from a decent place (otherwise it
could be a completely different movie, shitty release etc) then you may need
to find captions for it, if you need them. This kind of thing isn't actually
_easy_ for non-technical people.

However I think it comes down to the fact: most people want to pay but shit is
just so expensive otherwise.

~~~
joejohnson
I don't have a hard time with most of these obstacles anymore. It seems that
good quality rips of movies are pretty easy to find. However, I think torrent
clients are just slightly beyond the scope of most people's technical
expertise.

~~~
gedekran
Indeed. Peer review of files available will notify you of any problems. You
only need one person with the technical expertise to set it up.

I used to have my mother set up with torrents. All her tv shows were
downloaded automatically. Often times she would watch it live and then delete
the file, but if she missed watching it live then she had that file waiting
for her. Also if she wanted a movie or older tv show, then all she had to do
was click on a link on her desktop and search the website for what she wanted.
Click on the torrent and it would download to the proper folder.

These days it's the same except she clicks on something she wants and it is a
nzb file. As well newly aired tv shows download for her automatically. I've
noticed she doesn't watch as much live anymore. Though she is using Netflix
more often now as well.

------
dfc
The article fails to establish any causal link between Netflix subscriptions
and decrease in bittorrent use. It is just as likely that an increase in
Netflix subscriptions is evidence of a renewed interest in movies; and this
renewed interest will also produce an increased demand for movies not yet
available on Netflix.

------
kin
Netflix is not significantly killing BitTorrent directly. For one, mainstream
BT users are afraid of using BT. Non-mainstream BT users are using usenet
'cause it's just so insanely fast. People's favorite trackers are being shut
down left and right and then there's the people who're now streaming legally.

As much as I love Netflix, I still DL for any content it doesn't have (HBO and
such), currently airing seasons, and new releases. I just can't justify $5 a
movie rental or $1 an episode rental.

On a side note one thing I really need is a way to stream the playoffs. I
would pay $$ to stream the playoffs in HD, not just season games.

~~~
baddox
There are _plenty_ of non-mainstream BT users that use private trackers.
Private trackers are superior to Usenet.

~~~
kin
I didn't rule out private trackers, I just failed to mention it.

In any case, I personally find Usenet superior to private trackers but I can
see it from the other side. They both have pros and cons.

My main gripe with private trackers is that it's not as fast and I have to
constantly worry about my ratio and seed. Granted, I pay for Usenet so it's a
trade-off.

~~~
baddox
If you pay for a seedbox, you shouldn't have to worry about ratio. Torrent
speeds from a decent tracker and seedbox will be insane (as in maxing out the
seedbox's 100 or 1000 megabit pipe), and then you just FTP/SSH the files to
your home.

A decent seedbox costs around the same as Usenet access (cheaper if you split
a dedicated seedbox with other people). Seedbox speeds will be comparable to
Usenet, pre-times will almost always beat Usenet, and you can easily make
requests through the tracker (this might also be possible with Usenet
communities too).

Also, good trackers have strict uploading and file naming rules, so you don't
have to sort through crappy filenames or worry about corrupted files. Granted,
there are probably Usenet communities that also address these problems.

~~~
gedekran
There were only a few things torrents were better at when I switched away from
them for usenet. Where as usenet was only better for privacy reasons and
speed. Now for me it is better in almost every aspect.

Really obscure things. Torrents with such things will have very few
seeders/leechers and take a long time to download anyway and never max out
bandwidth. With usenet older things were deleted and had to be uploaded again.
(Anything older than a few weeks) These days the retention is getting close to
three years.

Release times were in favor of torrents. Now the time difference is but a few
minutes, some first via a torrent and other via usenet. The fastest of course
would be via IRC/FTP.

I spend around $100 a year for usenet access and am unsure the costs of a
seedbox. I never have to worry about upload ratio and am not sharing files
with anyone else. The primary means of people getting caught for copyright
infringement. I also download at the full speed of my connection at all times.
Also that connection is encrypted so the ISP can't even see what I am getting.
I often get about 500GB a month. I pay about a penny and a half per gigabyte.

One feature that wasn't available to me when I switched was what utorrent had
which others may have had as well. RSS downloading of torrents. Was very handy
with setting up tv shows and acted very much like a internet tivo. Now I use
sabnzbd and sickbeard for such things.

The only thing I still like about torrents is the way it handles errors. It
will check the data as it downloads and discard and redownload a section of
data needed. With usenet, my client will download all of it and then verify
the parts and if there are any errors, it'll auto download the needed par
files to repair the damage and then extract the file. Such things aren't
needed with a torrent.

One good thing about usenet is that if you have the proper client you can
basically stream from it. As the .rar files are downloaded and extracted one
by one in order. With torrents parts of the file are downloaded randomly and
does not lead it self to be streamed.

------
ChrisMac
For me it's the comfort factor. I stream Netflix through my Wii, so when I
watch movies that way I get to sit on my couch and watch my big screen TV.

When I watch stuff on my computer I have to sit in my uncomfortable desk chair
and view my small-ish monitor. Getting my whole computer hooked up to my TV
seems like a hassle at the moment. On the other hand, Netflix is always ready
to go and that usually wins.

~~~
dangrossman
There are many devices cheaper than a Wii that will stream video over a
network, allowing you to watch your downloaded movies without connecting the
computer directly to a TV.

~~~
gedekran
Exactly. I have a WDTV Live Plus that allows me to stream netflix and other
services. Also watch any HD movie or tv show downloaded from the internet or a
local drive/NAS. There are many such affordable devices out there offering
that ability.

------
maratd
From personal experience, this is only partially the case. Netflix IS more
convenient and the cost is minimal, but their library is limited. I can
download any movie/show I can think of via "alternative" means. That's not the
case with Netflix, especially when dealing with foreign media that requires
subtitles. Netflix still has a long way to go before I no longer have uTorrent
running 24/7.

~~~
Florin_Andrei
It will forever be "only partially the case", no matter how successful Netflix
becomes. It's only a matter of proportions.

------
BadassFractal
This is true for me personally. The Zune store, which is an all-you-can-eat
music service has completely removed the need to download music from
torrents/emule. I can just pay 10 bucks a month and enjoy all the content I
want.

Netflix follows the same approach and is even more successful at it.

~~~
joejohnson
The Zune store is missing so much music that I want to download, so I wouldn't
pay for it at any price. Torrent sites always have the best selection.

------
emitstop
I'm not sure that "killing" is the best word to use here. I would say that it
is definitely making a dent. I've been using Netflix (and hulu) more and more,
and torrents less and less.

Being able to instantly watch is a huge incentive for me. I also like to think
that my views help the show stay on the air. Realistically, Hulu and Netflix
viewcounts probably don't count much, but better than nothing right?

------
BonoboBoner
When oh when will I finally be able to become a Netflix customer in Germany
without having to deal with proxys, VPNs, etc?

------
simpsond
Us Netflix users should do everything in our power to show that Netflix
reduces piracy. Then, the studios, which own all of the IP, will work out a
reasonable deal and we will have a larger streaming library. I don't care if
it's true or false, i'm just tired of the MPAA not getting with the program!

~~~
dasil003
No, reducing piracy actually means nothing to studios. What they care about is
making money. If piracy disappeared tomorrow but revenues did not go up, that
is a worst-case scenario for the studios. They actually like having an
scapegoat for their flagging sales, especially when it's illegal and opens up
the opportunity for legal recompense.

The truth is that the content companies are willing to play ball with Netflix
because they make money, but they are also scared of Netflix's market power
and the fact that they make much less per unit than they do from cable or DVD
sales. The fact is Netflix is already capable of slashing someone's cable bill
by 90%, and the effect on DVD/Bluray sales is potentially even more dramatic
for certain consumers.

------
ZipCordManiac
They just need a better distribution model for new movies and they would kill
it completely. If I had to pay, say, 10c for a 24 hour new rental on top of
the monthly I'd likely be using it all the time.

~~~
dasil003
Yeah, and the studios just gave up 60% of their profit. They'll never sign
that deal.

~~~
tomjen3
20c then.

That is still more than they get if we just forage the movie.

~~~
dasil003
You're forgetting to factor in how much money they lose if the people paying
$200 a month for PPV and premium channels just switch to paying $15 a month
for Netflix.

------
omginternets
Correlation != (causation || identity).

For all we know, bittorrent rates could be falling for another reason and
American consumers could be responding to this by opting for netflix.

Come on... everybody should know this...

~~~
DrHankPym
You're right that there could be other reasons for BT rates to be falling, but
for me, personally, it's exactly what the article says: I prefer to use
Netflix over BT.

------
nkeating
Interesting (& not surprising)that Netflix has proven to be a larger deterrent
to piracy than anything the studios or government has come up with

~~~
malnourish
Private industry!

------
dmazin
People often give reasons such as "Movies are too hard to acquire" to justify
pirating movies. And Netflix solves them. Good for Netflix.

------
rhdoenges
The article isn't saying that netflix is really killing torrents but rather
that it has the potential to do so.

~~~
gedekran
It's impacting torrent usage. Likewise after I got netflix, I use usenet much
less for movies and tv shows that they have available for instant streaming.
Or want to download something much higher quality than what netflix offers
currently.

------
ivoflipse
Perhaps the studios should consider letting it expand to Europe as well...

------
barrydahlberg
Grr. Piracy is still dominating down my way in NZ.

------
iam
Netflix has a long way to go before their quality is even as good as the "HD"
channels on a Cable network.

------
lotusleaf1987
Easy trumps free.

~~~
derekp7
Flat rate also trumps free. That's why Netflix is better than Comcast on-
demand (at $1 to $5 per movie) -- I want the ability to turn off a movie after
20 minutes if it is junk, without feeling like I just wasted a couple
Washingtons or a Lincoln.

~~~
rhizome
Since the headlines the other day about Netflix overtaking Comcast, I predict
that price is going to change very soon (but not so soon that it's seen as a
proximate cause).

------
HelloBeautiful
That is a bad news. If the movie industry succeeds in getting rid of privacy,
the prices of Netflix subscriptions, BR disks, movie tickets, etc. will go way
way up ... And those money won't go anywhere near the artists and other
content producers. Plus ppl will be unable to use free software like Linux and
Firefox to watch movies.

------
ballard
There's all watching canv.as. If you want an invite, hit me up.

