Netflix does it again - UPDATE: Official statement - min. 2 streams per account

[SunnyD]

Update

Update: "No Netflix member is limited to less than two concurrent streams," Netflix spokesman Steve Swasey tells Broadband Reports. "A few Netflix members have heard differently from us, which is an error that we are correcting."

Looks like a half-truth.

 

[slayer202]

yo OP, hope you didn't cancel your sub prematurely for falsely thinking that netflix closed a loophole which technically isn't even supported

I'm sure the current streaming setup works for some, but to really take the market they need to add to their library and increase streaming options. Unfortunately to do this, the price will at least double. I think I'd be a buyer at $19.99 all you can eat movies (new release delay is fine), television (1 week release delay?), and maybe an audio option of some kind.

My opinion.

So if you could basically combine netflix, premium cable, on-demand movies(with a slight delay) and a music service, you think you would be a buyer at $20/month? Come on now, don't you think that's asking for too much?

 

[LookBehindYou]

Even with the clarification, people on here will still bitch that they can't stream to their living room, kids room, bathroom, and the cat's litterbox all at the same time while watching another stream on their phone while driving their minivan that also needs a netflix stream.

Bitches will bitch. Always.

 

[Tobolo]

If you reread the post Netflix clarified the position saying it allows 2 concurrent streams at a time. Some are only getting one now because of a problem and they are fixing it.

 

[AMDZen]

Vote with your wallet and ditch them if you really care so much.

Netflix will flutter and content providers will stop being greedy and charging netflix so much for their content which will in turn lower the price of the media content less no media content will exist.

People complain about everything but as consumers they don't stop. Hollywood movies sucking so hard you can't even watch it but more and more people do. Its never been so successful.

Vote with your wallet and you'll see real change. Accept mediocre content and service and thats what you'll get.

 

[Miramonti]

Vote with your wallet and ditch them if you really care so much.

Netflix will flutter and content providers will stop being greedy and charging netflix so much for their content which will in turn lower the price of the media content less no media content will exist.

People complain about everything but as consumers they don't stop. Hollywood movies sucking so hard you can't even watch it but more and more people do. Its never been so successful.

Vote with your wallet and you'll see real change. Accept mediocre content and service and thats what you'll get.

Absolutely.

 

[sactoking]

This just makes my decision to drop streaming in favor of a disk-only plan at renewal in three weeks that much more prescient.

 

[Oyeve]

I just streamed the same movie to 3 devices, xbox 360, my cell and my tablet. All 3 worked. Dunno what y'all are talking about.

 

[TwiceOver]

So if you could basically combine netflix, premium cable, on-demand movies(with a slight delay) and a music service, you think you would be a buyer at $20/month? Come on now, don't you think that's asking for too much?

Not really. Basically what Netflix *should* be plus Hulu+ and the music service was just an idea. Gotta remember that Netflix doesn't have a massive physical infrastructure to take care of like your cable company does. I'm also not saying that they have to have EVERY television show known to man, but at least TRY to get some of the better ones.

When I had streaming I would spend a ridiculous amount of time just trying to find something to watch. Usually ended up with a documentary because I'd seen everything else or everything was garbage. For the infrequent TV watcher, probably a good solution. Then there was streaming issues for several weeks/months. It's just not primetime IMO. I actually find it hard to believe Netflix's claims that they have more streaming users than "by mail" users. Maybe more content is streamed than mailed out, but I don't really believe customer by customer they have more streamers. And if they really do, I think we'll see that reverse at least once in the future before they get their streaming act together.

EDIT: Then again, when the USPS collapses and finally realizes they need to eliminate 2 delivery days just to break even my whole opinion will change. As of right now, I personally see more value in 8-12 DVD's per month than unlimited garbage streamed.

 

[slag]

Reminds me of this little gem:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4RNb3tt0LM

 

[slayer202]

Not really. Basically what Netflix *should* be plus Hulu+ and the music service was just an idea. Gotta remember that Netflix doesn't have a massive physical infrastructure to take care of like your cable company does. I'm also not saying that they have to have EVERY television show known to man, but at least TRY to get some of the better ones.

When I had streaming I would spend a ridiculous amount of time just trying to find something to watch. Usually ended up with a documentary because I'd seen everything else or everything was garbage. For the infrequent TV watcher, probably a good solution. Then there was streaming issues for several weeks/months. It's just not primetime IMO. I actually find it hard to believe Netflix's claims that they have more streaming users than "by mail" users. Maybe more content is streamed than mailed out, but I don't really believe customer by customer they have more streamers. And if they really do, I think we'll see that reverse at least once in the future before they get their streaming act together.

The streaming isn't for everyone, I think that's what it comes down to. Personally, they have more than enough content for me. I have a huge backlog of stuff to watch, 250+ movies and shows, I doubt I'll ever get through it. If I was done with it all, and I was only looking at newly added content, maybe it would seem a bit thin, but I still think it would be a decent deal.

But most people only want new movies. Netflix isn't for those people, and some people don't realize that. There's nothing wrong with that though, not everyone can be happy. I rather them keep the level on content the same if they can avoid bigger fee increases, as opposed to paying even more to get overpriced stuff like mad men

 

[zinfamous]

They are about to eat a shitstorm come end of 2012, 2013 when their licenses to stream major studio content is up for renewal.

They are currently paying out, maybe, 20% of the actual value of those license.

This is only expected.

 

[Wyndru]

The users who saw/heard that they could only have one stream were experiencing an error which Netflix is fixing.

Hmm, I wonder if it was really a glitch, or if they are backpedaling due to the negative responses from it's users.

 

[Nik]

Vote with your wallet and ditch them if you really care so much.

Netflix will flutter and content providers will stop being greedy and charging netflix so much for their content which will in turn lower the price of the media content less no media content will exist.

People complain about everything but as consumers they don't stop. Hollywood movies sucking so hard you can't even watch it but more and more people do. Its never been so successful.

Vote with your wallet and you'll see real change. Accept mediocre content and service and thats what you'll get.

That's not what'll happen. Starz is actually pulling their content from Netflix next year instead of pay the lower prices.

 

[Nik]

Hmm, I wonder if it was really a glitch, or if they are backpedaling due to the negative responses from it's users.

Who gives a shit?

 

[AMDZen]

That's not what'll happen. Starz is actually pulling their content from Netflix next year instead of pay the lower prices.

What does Starz have other than "Spartacus" that anyone will give two shits about any way?

Nothing for me, so they are more than welcome.

 

[SunnyD]

What does Starz have other than "Spartacus" that anyone will give two shits about any way?

Nothing for me, so they are more than welcome.

They usually offer semi-current movies (usually releases that are 3-6 months old) via streaming that you can't otherwise get anywhere else unless you go DVD.

 

[911paramedic]

Makes sense to me.

Why would they let Farmer Bob have an account and watch Field of Dreams at his farm, while Jr. is off at college trying to stream Debbie Does Dallas. That's essentially two accounts if you are watching two movies, whether it's upstairs/downstairs or different locations.

 

[Ns1]

Makes sense to me.

Why would they let Farmer Bob have an account and watch Field of Dreams at his farm, while Jr. is off at college trying to stream Debbie Does Dallas. That's essentially two accounts if you are watching two movies, whether it's upstairs/downstairs or different locations.

seems logical.

 

[cirrrocco]

they could be running the iPad factory in China at that age!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPMVGuT0O7I

 

[Fingolfin269]

Now that this has been called a bug can we get a thread title update?

 

[sactoking]

What does Starz have other than "Spartacus" that anyone will give two shits about any way?

Nothing for me, so they are more than welcome.

Starz doesn't have TV content other than Spartacus, really, but pretty much any movie that's <1 year old and is available for streaming is part of the StarzPLAY package and will no longer be available. If that license isn't renewed Netflix will have no source for semi-current releases.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Makes sense to me.

Why would they let Farmer Bob have an account and watch Field of Dreams at his farm, while Jr. is off at college trying to stream Debbie Does Dallas. That's essentially two accounts if you are watching two movies, whether it's upstairs/downstairs or different locations.

No. It's a single account per location. Upstairs, downstairs, doesn't make a difference. My problem with this is two fold:

1. This rule has always been around with Netflix, they just didn't care until now.
2. There should be a way to stream to multiple devices without having to purchase/manage two different accounts, and not have to purchase the 2-disc plan as well. In my previous posts, I offered a solution of charging a few extra bucks ($5) for each additional device you want to simultaneously stream to.

I'm having a hard time believing that Netflix can't come up with a feasible solution to this problem.

 

[Bacstar]

No worries with this change. I'm the only one using my account in my house. However, Starz being dropped will be a concern in February, and lately I've been going through their Anime's. I wonder if their selection will disappear with Starz?

 

[JackBurton]

IP is unreliable. Not in that it can be spoofed for more streams as much as it can switch mid-stream.

It can be switched mid stream with the way they have it setup now. The point is, as long as the request is being sourced from the same IP, it should be able to support multiple streams. If someone tries to access a video stream from a mobile device, they'd get the same error message as they would if they limited it to one stream per account. Once the stream from the "other" IP (it could be any IP) is terminated, the mobile device would then be able to access the video on-demand service. I think that is a fair limitation to impose. It lets people share the access in their own home while keeping the scammers out.

But either way I really don't care, I don't use NetFlix. I just buy my movies. If they go out of business tomorrow, it really won't affect me. It will affect the studios though. The people will most likely turn to torrents again, and they will get $0 instead of the "reasonable" fees Netflix was paying them.