
Netflix Pulls Plug on Public API - bananaoomarang
http://techcrunch.com/2014/11/16/netflix-api/
======
fragmede
What the name for when a company seems to have stagnated, based on the lack of
change in their front-end, even though you're sure there're engineers
diligently toiling away at things?

Netflix's frontend has not have any real improvement in quite a while. "Share
on Facebook"? "Kids Mode"? "Watched by Piper Chapman (Orange Is the New
Black)"? C'mon!

Where's the Rotten Tomatoes or IMDB integration? Why does their search still
have zero options to help you search? Where's Netflix's rendition of A Better
Queue or Instant Watcher?

The shutting down of the public API wouldn't be such a big deal if they paid
more attention to their frontend. It also seems that Netflix thinks that if
they don't bring up the fact that there are movies that aren't on Netflix, we
won't notice.

The next company that comes to mind is Craigslist. I _know_ there are
engineers there working on hard problems (the scale they operate on is
amazing) but in the midst of the current mobile and UX revolution, all they've
manged to do is add a frame around the results page so it's easier to search
again?

OKCupid is another site that comes to mind where it looks like the front end
is just stuck and has stopped progressing.

(Gmail gets a pass because Google just gave up and made Inbox instead.)

~~~
RollAHardSix
So? I like Netflix's front-end. So does my daughter, my mother, my mother's
mother, my dad (who is terrible with tech), and almost everyone else I know.

Craigslist is much the same, what they have is easy to recognize, very easy to
use for both sellers and buyers, and it has been _consistent_.

If it's not broken don't fix it.

~~~
fragmede
> So? I like Netflix's front-end. So does my daughter, my mother, my mother's
> mother, my dad (who is terrible with tech), and almost everyone else I know.

Not sure what your point is here. I don't particularly like it, I have friends
who complain about it, and some of my coworkers (who are great with tech, btw)
also dislike it.

Have _none_ of the people you mentioned have ever recognized an actor but have
been at a loss for where they've previously seen them? Say, that's not
something that Netflix could help with?

The continued existence) of InstantWatcher, CanIStreamIt?, Flixster,
Fanhattan, Yidio, proves that there's a not-entirely-satisfied portion of
their customer base. Why it seems they're doing nothing to appeal to those
users is beyond me.

> Craigslist is much the same, what they have is easy to recognize, very easy
> to use for both sellers and buyers, and it has been consistent.

It _is_ consistent, I'll give you that. Sellers ignoring phone calls, not
returning voice mails, unreplied emails, listings for things which have
already been sold with an irate seller that _does_ pick up but then calls you
an idiot for not telepathically knowing the item has been sold, bait-and-
switch tactics masquerading as incompetence, the poor quality of listings
themselves - that listing in autos for $1 is _definitely_ accurate. Listings
gaming the search by cramming half the dictionary at the end of the post.
People saying they'll meet you to buy the item and then being an hour late or
just completely flaking.

Yeah, that's totally not broken.

> If it's not broken don't fix it.

Back in 2006, smartphones _weren 't_ broken, but I'm sure glad Apple came
along and 'fixed' it.

~~~
pduszak
> People saying they'll meet you to buy the item and then being an hour late
> or just completely flaking.

Clearly a problem with the front-end.

~~~
fragmede
Craigslist could have an escrow service for money so as to disincentive not
following through, or only staking claim to an item if you're serious about
paying for it.

They could have a seller/buyer rating system _cough_ eBay.

I mean, you're not even trying...

~~~
Noted
I think he was trying to point out those aren't UX issues, they're features
you wish existed

~~~
foxhill
he's not arguing the craigslist UX is _broken_ just that there are lots of
areas where it could be _improved_.

> they're features you wish existed

the netflix UX is not broken. it just hasn't changed. yea, we clearly want
more features. and netflix should too - getting to the top and then stagnating
is _exactly_ what their predecessor did..

just because you're happy with the way things are, doesn't mean it cannot
possibly improve.

------
Animats
APIs are something a service offers when it needs help to grow. Once the
service gets big, the API goes away, or becomes a pay service.

Google once allowed search queries via a SOAP interface. That's gone. They
also dropped RSS feeds. But the API for submitting paid ads, that works. The
paid cloud services are fine.

Twitter doesn't like third party Twitter clients any more and will pull the
API key of anyone who writes one. A third party client might have a spam
("sponsored tweet") filter.

~~~
smacktoward
_> APIs are something a service offers when it needs help to grow. Once the
service gets big, the API goes away, or becomes a pay service._

I wouldn't phrase it exactly that way. All the examples are of something much
more specific: APIs go away when a company embraces an advertising-driven
revenue model.

Google offered a SOAP API because back then they weren't an ad company. When
they became an ad company the API went away, because you could use it to get
Google search results without the ads. Twitter supported third-party clients
because back then they weren't an ad company. When they became an ad company
the API went away, because you could use it to read tweets without seeing the
ads.

Once you decide your company is going to make its money via ads, the
strangulation of any channel people can use to get to your service without
seeing the ads inevitably follows.

~~~
lukifer
I agree that this is the pattern generally, but it doesn't explain Netflix's
decision specifically, unless they're secretly planning an ad-based revenue
model, which doesn't seem likely.

------
chops
It's too bad, but the writing has been on the walls for a long time. A close
friend of mine had build a great little iOS app a while back designed to let
you know when items on your queue were going to be pulled from Netflix
instant. After several months of the app being live in the app store, Netflix
decided to limit the results to showing either greater than 2 weeks or less
than 2 weeks. Eventually, that information was removed from the API
altogether, and my friend pulled his app from the store.

From that single anecdotal data point, I had the Netflix API has always been a
mess anyway, and poorly documented.

~~~
dotnetkow
What was the app's name? I built the same thing but for Android app about 4
years ago: FixMyQ. It's still a painful use case that I wish they would
officially implement, or at least be more transparent about. I always
suspected that they didn't/don't want users to focus on movies expiring at all
(makes sense). However, rather than educating users as to why this happens,
they pulled the info like you mentioned. Such a shame!

~~~
chops
It was called Queueview. I couldn't find its homepage (in sure it was taken
down), but the Facebook page, complete with all the notices about the API
changes is here:
[https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?v=timeline&filter=1&id=31...](https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?v=timeline&filter=1&id=310709142291577)

------
saurik
I do not understand the backend reason for this (and did not when I saw the
announcements about this two years ago): while I can see not wanting to
provide a full movie metadata API, having "is this or is this not available on
Netflix right now" seems like a really important API to have, one that allows
websites people use to browse and find movies to funnel users into Netflix
(and seems a natural fit for their very popular affiliate program).

Apple actually provides massive database dumps of everything available in
iTunes, for free, to anyone who asks, which is why virtually every music
discovery site or app has a "buy this on iTunes" button, not just "a small set
of developers whose applications have proven to be the most valuable for many
of our members" (which is a quote from the Netflix developer blog earlier this
year; you have to pull this from Google Cache now, sadly).

I don't see how "stream/rent this on Netflix" is a bad thing for Netflix (but
am totally willing to believe I am not "seeing far enough", because this is
not my area of expertise, hence why I am asking this question: I hope to be
enlightened ;P). (edit:) I guess maybe for the same reason Uber and Lyft don't
want APIs? Because they want to dominate the end user searching and discovery
experience as well? But like, even Walmart and Amazon offer APIs... ;P.

~~~
CamperBob2
Netflix is great, don't get me wrong... I wouldn't want to do without them.
But at the same time, a large portion of their business model is devoted to
making sure that nobody can tell just how little content they have to offer.
There is no other explanation for deliberately nerfing their search engine and
killing off third-party apps.

If and when Netflix is able to reach fair and reasonable streaming contracts
from all of the major studios, I believe the API will come back. Right now,
though, it's more of a liability than an asset to them.

~~~
meowface
>But at the same time, a large portion of their business model is devoted to
making sure that nobody can tell just how little content they have to offer.

You nailed it.

Netflix is the best thing out there for legal streaming TV and movie content;
it's that "legal" part which makes things complicated. Objectively speaking,
Netflix clones that pop up but have no qualms about distributing pirated
content provide a much better experience for users, because just about
everything they want to watch is a click away.

In fact, Netflix's entire UI was designed with this in mind. All the "main"
views try to give the impression that there is a _lot_ of content, yet the
search functionality is not very visible or easy to find and takes 2 steps to
actually use. This seems to be a rule that applies to many applications: when
your home page is just a search bar, that often means 80% or more of what the
majority of users want is available. When your home page is a directory, or
just a flattened spattering of content, you know that user's options are
constrained.

Netflix is trying to push customers to use their application as more of a
feature listing rather than mislead them into thinking it's a universal "watch
whatever you want", because they know people will be disappointed if they
think it's the latter (and I would assume A/B testing and metrics have
demonstrated this to them empirically). So they go with a model of "here's a
bunch of stuff you can choose from, you may not have heard of this show but
it's good!" instead of "your own personal streaming media hub".

Obviously one can't fault them for this, since they have to rely on B2B
relationships that don't always necessarily provide an excellent value
proposition for the partner business and/or are very expensive for Netflix,
and they have to obey the law. I'm also hoping they can work out more
contracts with more studios.

~~~
Yhippa
Very true and you seem to be right. The HBO GO app is very much like this.

------
teacup50
In case this wasn't obvious to you, Netflix is not the internet's friend, fun
examples include:

\- Browser DRM (making it impossible to produce a fully functional AND open
source browser)

\- HDCP-for-sockets (e.g., to replace HTTPS with something they can tie to
platform DRM-protected key exchange --
[http://techblog.netflix.com/2014/10/message-security-
layer-m...](http://techblog.netflix.com/2014/10/message-security-layer-modern-
take-on.html))

... and now this.

~~~
freehunter
Well, it's either that or they just shut down. With Flash not supported on
mobile devices or Linux and same thing with Silverlight, what are the other
options for them to stream content in a manner acceptable to the companies
licensing their shows to them?

But we've had this debate many times in the past. It's just one of those
things that people love to keep bringing up as if it changes anything.

~~~
teacup50
So you're not culpable for your actions if you make a deal with the devil,
just because it's to keep your business afloat?

~~~
EpicEng
Let's not be dramatic ("the devil", really?). Are you really saying that no
Netflix is better than Netflix with browser DRM? I don't like the Hollywood
players either, but it certainly shouldn't surprise anyone to learn that they
don't want their content to be trivially copied and distributed outside of
their control (read: death grip.) Personally, I'll take the Netflix we can
have over no Netflix at all.

~~~
teacup50
Ethics aren't ethics if they can be abandoned for simple expediency.

~~~
EpicEng
I'm not convinced that the "ethics" surrounding content protection are so cut
and dry (I'm ignoring malware masked add DRM here as i don't believe or
applies). I wish that Hollywood would get with the times. I wish they would
give me affordable and reasonable mediums with which to watch their content.

That said, i recognize that it _is_ their content, and i don't think that
their methods here make them "bad" or "evil". I think they're dinosaurs who
are slow to change and afraid of losing money.

I don't think this is a moral issue, nor do i believe that we have an
inaliable right to watch Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones.

~~~
teacup50
You don't think that rent seeking is an ethical issue?

~~~
EpicEng
I do, but I think it goes a level up. It's the political system that needs to
change. I fully expect companies to use what means they have available to them
in order to improve their business (to a point). I'n also not saying that they
don't do anything unethical, I was speaking to the general idea of protecting
their investment as it applies to DRM in your browser.

------
LukeB_UK
They announced the retirement 5 months ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7891171](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7891171)

~~~
johns
Announced 18 months ago:
[http://developer.netflix.com/blog/read/Changes_to_the_Public...](http://developer.netflix.com/blog/read/Changes_to_the_Public_API_Program)

------
mynegation
At least these news reminded me that I wanted to pull the plug on the
membership for a long time, so I just did that. Not in the protest but because
selection (in Canada at least) is abysmal. I wonder how many people relied on
3rd party software to manage and view their Netflix and whether it causeS
number of cancellations to be big enough for them to notice.

------
jellicle
Too bad, since there's basically no way to find what good content Netflix has
using their inferior tools. From accounts which are permanently contaminated
by kid shows (let your kid watch a few shows, you'll never get anything except
cartoons recommended ever again, irreversible, no way to edit or start over)
to discovery algorithms that just give you the same five shows (that you've
already watched, on Netflix) over and over...

~~~
jaredsohn
> irreversible, no way to edit or start over

As of a few months ago, you can now remove titles from your viewing history.

[http://lifehacker.com/netflix-now-lets-you-delete-films-
or-s...](http://lifehacker.com/netflix-now-lets-you-delete-films-or-shows-
from-your-ac-1633561640)

------
joshuak
So now sort by recommendation ranking is truly gone even via other websites,
along with Netflix being eliminated from data search such as apps that help
you find where a show is available to watch (legally) across all services?

Wow. I do not get this at all.

I can't quite understand why so many big services avoid obvious features
related to ranking and discovery. Is it because they've found that people just
burn through their top 10% of recommended content, and then quit the service?
This seems hard to believe. Is there some other reason I'm missing?

I've been calling this "value evasion" to refer to obvious features that are
consistently avoided by many top web services, and working to understand what
the point of hiding that functionality is for a while now. There must be
really clear reasoning as to why it's a bad idea, but I have to admit I'm
stumped.

------
SpaceTacos
Does this effect apps on things like smart TVs? I would think there is still a
private api for licensed apps?

~~~
giancarlostoro
I don't think they use the API in question here. Also I think those might be
developed / maintained by Netflix themselves.

~~~
mkawia
They have special SDKs

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StCrm572aEs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StCrm572aEs)

------
JaredCubilla
I was planning on using the Netflix API as a movie database for an upcoming
webapp of mine. Anyone know any alternative movie database APIs?

~~~
johns
[http://www.omdbapi.com/](http://www.omdbapi.com/)

[http://developer.rottentomatoes.com/](http://developer.rottentomatoes.com/)

~~~
hayksaakian
+1 on rottentomatoes. easy to get an API key with reasonable rate limits for
free, and the API has a decent fuzzy search. (you might have to do some
fiddling with the results, but what you're looking for is usually there)

------
notastartup
This is why I see the trouble with the semantic web. If even large guys like
Netflix are unwilling to share their API publicly then semantic web becomes
something like a really expensive toy that people with very large pockets can
afford or you end up scraping everyone to death. This is why I think
strategies like Kimono and Import.io will fail.

~~~
walterbell
Unless we move to open public metadata for common needs, with optional private
annotations for those who can afford toys.

A possible role model is Apple's support of OpenStreetMap as a defensive
response to Google Maps, which has improved the quality of open GIS data.

