Net Neutrality is Live
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
I think you are missing the bigger picture. Private cable and satellite connections are going to go away soon. It's already been happening they are losing business like crazy. AT&T keeps lowering their prices and offering $150 visa gift cards to get people to sign up and people still aren't signing up.
Let's hope so. Other than live things like sports, news or the rare other live show, what purpose is there to the "channel" concept?
Reality shows for interactive bits etc. Voting. Twitter conversations and other PR stuff they can only get from the set/time channel concept rather than on demand.
I'd rather watch a channel when I actually watch something so I don't have to chose exactly what I want to watch. There's be no point of it on netflix as it would always be re-runs as people would see the newest on-demand content.
-
Good point @scottalanmiller hadn't really thought about it that way before.
So in the future the content creators will just skip the distributors altogether and publish direct to the web via subscription or single pay to view choices. Couple that with their ability to embed ads into the stream like modern day ads, this could be pretty cool.
The draw back is that not all content providers are going to want to have their own internet hosting solution to provide content to end users. I'm guessing that many/most of them will team up with something like Hulu/Netflix, etc to publish their content to the web.
-
@Dashrender said:
Good point @scottalanmiller hadn't really thought about it that way before.
So in the future the content creators will just skip the distributors altogether and publish direct to the web via subscription or single pay to view choices.
There's always going to be a distributor of some sort unless it's just a Youtube show or something. You get so much more with a distributor as you bring the content where people are rather than making people come to each individual thing.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
I'd rather watch a channel when I actually watch something so I don't have to chose exactly what I want to watch. There's be no point of it on netflix as it would always be re-runs as people would see the newest on-demand content.
Say what? You want to watch whatever they are force feeding you than watch something you want to watch?
Sure I've time where I just wanted to kill some time and didn't care what I was watching, but I could just as easily pop on Netflix and choose a Dog Fights episode I haven't watched, or any number of other things that have been recommended to me.
Really what this sounds like to me is the possible end to re-runs.
-
@Dashrender Re-runs are watched by choice since youtube's very start. There is enough content on there already for 100 lifetimes and that's probably a very conservative estimate. Quality wise, ok, you got me there but it's not re-runs
-
How would a netflix channel end re-runs? They only have so many episodes that are new.
main stream shows generally only make 15 or so episodes a year.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Dashrender said:
Good point @scottalanmiller hadn't really thought about it that way before.
So in the future the content creators will just skip the distributors altogether and publish direct to the web via subscription or single pay to view choices.
There's always going to be a distributor of some sort unless it's just a Youtube show or something. You get so much more with a distributor as you bring the content where people are rather than making people come to each individual thing.
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Dashrender said:
Good point @scottalanmiller hadn't really thought about it that way before.
So in the future the content creators will just skip the distributors altogether and publish direct to the web via subscription or single pay to view choices.
There's always going to be a distributor of some sort unless it's just a Youtube show or something. You get so much more with a distributor as you bring the content where people are rather than making people come to each individual thing.
YouTube is a distributor just like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon VOD, etc.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
Reality shows for interactive bits etc. Voting. Twitter conversations and other PR stuff they can only get from the set/time channel concept rather than on demand.
Is that needed in real time?
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
I'd rather watch a channel when I actually watch something so I don't have to chose exactly what I want to watch. There's be no point of it on netflix as it would always be re-runs as people would see the newest on-demand content.
No channels needed for that. Simple algorithm to play out of order, unrelated Netflix programs in no particular order is all that is needed. It only doesn't exist because there isn't enough demand in the universe for anyone to have put the five minutes into making it
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Dashrender said:
Good point @scottalanmiller hadn't really thought about it that way before.
So in the future the content creators will just skip the distributors altogether and publish direct to the web via subscription or single pay to view choices.
There's always going to be a distributor of some sort unless it's just a Youtube show or something. You get so much more with a distributor as you bring the content where people are rather than making people come to each individual thing.
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Dashrender said:
Good point @scottalanmiller hadn't really thought about it that way before.
So in the future the content creators will just skip the distributors altogether and publish direct to the web via subscription or single pay to view choices.
There's always going to be a distributor of some sort unless it's just a Youtube show or something. You get so much more with a distributor as you bring the content where people are rather than making people come to each individual thing.
YouTube is a distributor just like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon VOD, etc.
Yeah, but they don't choose the content/quality so people have to sift through it much more so it's not quite the same.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
Yeah, but they don't choose the content/quality so people have to sift through it much more so it's not quite the same.
Sort of. But still, no need for a channel for that. Just because they "do", and that is arguable as it is, doesn't mean that a non-channel format can't do that too.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
I am not exactly sure how Netflix pays for their shows, but It seems like they could just make their own channels with shows they already have. Although I believe that traditional channels are obsolete in this day and age.
What would be the purpose of a channel?
The reason for channel is to get you to watch something you wouldn't normally chose. There are decent shows on Netflix that may not appeal to you when you see the title and description, but if you actually watched 5-10 minutes of the show or movie then you might actually find something you like.
In reality it is really playlists that run all the time and you can peek whenever you like and maybe you will see something you like.
They could have channels for:
Reality TV
Outdoor and Nature TV
Comedy TV
Drama TV
and etc. -
@IRJ said:
The reason for channel is to get you to watch something you wouldn't normally chose.
I dont' understand, though. A channel only "forces" you to do this, it doesn't enable it. You can easily do that without a channel.
-
@IRJ said:
In reality it is really playlists that run all the time and you can peek whenever you like and maybe you will see something you like.
Exactly, no need to move away from on demand to do this. You could even make a playlist that starts shows in the middle if the desire truly is to just make it such like old channels did.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
How would a netflix channel end re-runs? They only have so many episodes that are new.
main stream shows generally only make 15 or so episodes a year.
Where is that? Mainstream non speciality seem to be closer to 25, though lately it's probably closer to 20 per season.
-
I thought that 22 was the US standard. UK is much lower.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I thought that 22 was the US standard. UK is much lower.
Yeah I thought I recalled hearing he was from the UK, and that would explain when he was going with 15.
I know channels like HBO and Showtime and AMC are making shorter season series, I think Breaking Bad was like 12-15 per season.
-
@IRJ said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
I am not exactly sure how Netflix pays for their shows, but It seems like they could just make their own channels with shows they already have. Although I believe that traditional channels are obsolete in this day and age.
What would be the purpose of a channel?
The reason for channel is to get you to watch something you wouldn't normally chose. There are decent shows on Netflix that may not appeal to you when you see the title and description, but if you actually watched 5-10 minutes of the show or movie then you might actually find something you like.
In reality it is really playlists that run all the time and you can peek whenever you like and maybe you will see something you like.
They could have channels for:
Reality TV
Outdoor and Nature TV
Comedy TV
Drama TV
and etc.There is a valid point here, but as @scottalanmiller said you don't need a channel that can't be changed to do that. You can subscribe to a curated feed that would show you like minded things to your normal choices.
I hate the fact that I know there are things I want to watch but can't simply because the station isn't showing them when I want to watch them. Of course the DVR has solve a lot of that by allowing me to record things when I'm busy so I can watch them on my own schedule. But cord cutters and youngsters today don't want to hassle with that (and frankly neither do I). I would love to be able to bring up the Science Channel (man they are going to have to come up with a new name for that, maybe) and then I just the show they own I want to watch and go to town.
-
@Dashrender said:
@IRJ said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
I am not exactly sure how Netflix pays for their shows, but It seems like they could just make their own channels with shows they already have. Although I believe that traditional channels are obsolete in this day and age.
What would be the purpose of a channel?
The reason for channel is to get you to watch something you wouldn't normally chose. There are decent shows on Netflix that may not appeal to you when you see the title and description, but if you actually watched 5-10 minutes of the show or movie then you might actually find something you like.
In reality it is really playlists that run all the time and you can peek whenever you like and maybe you will see something you like.
They could have channels for:
Reality TV
Outdoor and Nature TV
Comedy TV
Drama TV
and etc.There is a valid point here, but as @scottalanmiller said you don't need a channel that can't be changed to do that. You can subscribe to a curated feed that would show you like minded things to your normal choices.
I agree that you don't need it, but it would sure be convenient. My fiancee and I will sometimes spend 30 minutes going through various on demand content. Sometimes I recommend something and she says I don't want to watch that or vice versa. We go back and forth and sometimes we end up watching the same crap we always watch.
What if Netflix took all the guesswork out of this? We both want to watch new shows, but we don't know what to watch,. Hey honey, just flip to the comedy channel...nah, lets try a drama or maybe an action movie. We would really welcome something like this because otherwise it is very difficult to make up our minds.
@Dashrender and @scottalanmiller seem to be spending alot of energy on saying you don't need this. You are absolutely right. It's a feature of convenience and for me and many other couples that dont't exactly agree on TV preferences it would make things so much easier.
@Dashrender the recommend channel thing just doesn't work because you have to make a commitment to actually start the show. Before you start to watch the show, either the title, description, picture or whatever could turn you off on even getting that far. Then you have to watch the dumb intro and it takes you a good 5 minutes to get to any decent content within the show.
When you have a constant playlist going, you can get hooked into something. For example you may never consciously start an old Arnold movie from the beginning. When you switch to the action channel, you are the middle of an awesome gun fight. Who isn't going to get hooked into that for 10 minutes and maybe even finish the movie?
-
@IRJ said:
@Dashrender and @scottalanmiller seem to be spending alot of energy on saying you don't need this. You are absolutely right. It's a feature of convenience and for me and many other couples that dont't exactly agree on TV preferences it would make things so much easier.
You are missing what we are saying. It's not even more convenient. Channels literally offer nothing. Every feature you mention is a feature we are do as well or better without a non-on-demand channel. If you want shows to start in mid-stream, even that can be replicated.
