29 ms·

Too Many Video Streaming Choices May Drive Users Back To Piracy

• SGJ 7y ago
  I didn't know [we] PC and VPS users went anywhere, if anything the already established and really skilled release groups were solidified while others were extricated, or in some cases and very unfortunate, immured. I would make a partially substantiated and educated guess that a driving force in any potential, acute, theoretical or otherwise increase in freedom of information; The renaissance of the information era, our time, is suddenly presented with a market filled with VPN providers, most of them blatantly crude in their pitch. With promises of hosting end-points in nations unburdened by draconian laws, well outside any jurisdiction legally obligated to abide by federational - european, american or otherwise - demands or requests of private information. They also always make it a big deal to point out that they don't even generate logs of user activities. The latter sounding unlikely since it's crucial for any service providers survival and growth as well as preserving the capability to offer an equally distributed quality of service. Piracy is not a fitting name. There's no rape, murder, malintent or even direct physical, psykological or directly provable damages made by sharing information. The argument that one album downloaded automatically equals the loss of one sell. That is similar to comparing bank-robbers to successful hedge fund managers because they aspire to collect currency or assets in large numbers. Wait.. That actually is comparable.. Well, I digress.
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• _pmf_ 7y ago
  The children at my children's preschool seem to be split into Netflix master race and Prime peasants.
  • e_carra 7y ago
    That sounds terrifying.
  • andrewl-hn 7y ago
    In my surroundings there are a lot of kids and teens who only watch YouTube (and Twitch), while streaming services like Netflix are seen as what "boring older people" would watch. It's very similar to how people in their 30s and 40s perceive cable these days.
    • Neil44 7y ago
      Same here (UK), YT Kids is massively popular, although my daughter does like a lot of the BBC and Netflix shows too.
• lostjohnny 7y ago
  It's gonna end like this: share a netflix account with friends for kids while the adults watch movies and tv shhows on popocorn time.
• rezeroed 7y ago
  My ISP (UK, Sky) has recently started blocking torrent/magnet sites. So I'm not convinced.
  • swebs 7y ago
    ISPs have been doing this since the dawn of time. A VPN will fix it.
  • eitland 7y ago
    Cheap VPNs might not provide much serious security but they might help a lot with availability.
  • bArray 7y ago
    Finding the sites themselves is easy with a VPN, reverse SSH shell or proxy. Make sure all of your torrents are encrypted and it'll be more difficult for them to actively block packets (which is the way it will eventually go).
    • rezeroed 7y ago
      If that is the way it eventually goes, what's the next move for pirates?
      • bArray 7y ago
        When it comes to this stuff, simply look at what China is doing. It seems to be ground zero for future censorship methods. The next approach is probably VPNs, although they won't last forever. Governments could always just pass a law outlawing encryption (China has banned VPNs) or compelling services to allow them to man-in-the-middle for any connection. Once it becomes illegal to hide your online activities, there's very little you can do and remain legal. That said, tricks also exit for hiding data in plain sight (see steganography [1]). Then you end up in this weird territory of illegal numbers and representations of them [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number
• sbarre 7y ago
  "May" drive them back? This has already happened in my circles.. People who had cut the cord but all but walked away from casual piracy and signed up for Netflix and HBO (and probably Prime Video because they had Amazon Prime already) are openly talking about the fact they're definitely not signing up for more streaming services, and are seeking out torrenting again for the stuff that's being pulled from Netflix (especially Disney shows). I feel like there's a business opportunity for a meta-service that automatically manages monthly subscriptions for you on different services. You queue up a catalog of shows you want to watch, and it creates an optimized schedule for you and helps sign up for the individual streaming service on a given month in order to watch the show you want. As long as you don't care about the zeitgeist, this would probably be fine for a lot of people.
  • scarface74 7y ago
    “Your circle” unless it includes families with small kids, isn’t Disney’s primary audience. Most normal middle class people aren’t going to go through the trouble of pirating movies and setting up a Plex server and then worry about setting up their router to get a good connection while they are away from home and even then deal with the abysmally slow upload speed of the typical home network instead of spending $8 a month to just have the convenience of Disney+ to be a glorified babysitter. In 2003, people said that the iTunes music store was going to be a disaster. Who would pay to download music when they could get it for free. That worked out pretty well.
    • coldtea 7y ago
      >Most normal middle class people aren’t going to go through the trouble of pirating movies and setting up a Plex server and then worry about setting up their router to get a good connection while they are away from home and even then deal with the abysmally slow upload speed of the typical home network instead of spending $8 a month to just have the convenience of Disney+ to be a glorified babysitter. Depending on the country, you'd be surprised. I'm not sure why Disney has the hold it has in the US, but in most of Europe I know it's nothing special (to the point of being a "must have" brand). Kids can just sit in front of regular kids TV channels. And normal middle class families can and do pirate all the time...
• toxik 7y ago
  Streaming "choices"? It's fragmentation and rent-seeking behavior. It is simply a case of the supply not meeting the demand at a reasonable price point, when there is an alternative.
  • scarface74 7y ago
    Everyone wanted to get rid of the cable bundle and have channels a la carte. Be careful what you ask for.
    • fron 7y ago
      No. Everyone wanted to get rid of both the cable bundle and channels. People just want on-demand access to whatever shows.
      • jimcsharp 7y ago
        For cheap ^ If someone finds themselves chasing whatever streaming service has The Office, maybe it's worth dropping the $300 or whatever for everything on iTunes.
        • radmarshallb 7y ago
          iTunes regularly has sales on The Office complete series for $30. Someone who chases a single show through streaming services is not doing it right.
        • lostgame 7y ago
          They're still DRM'd. I can't use them in VLC.
          • scarface74 7y ago
            And once again, you aren’t a potential customer. Do you really think that streaming companies are going to live an die by the people who want to use VLC?
• cryptofits 7y ago
  Good point When there are too many options it's becoming too much of an hassle to actually choose something Just think on yourself getting into a restaurant with a massive menu, choosing a dish will be hard on the other hand, a pop up restaurant with 3 dishes will make the dinner much more fun for everyone (that's from my expirience at least)
  • utf985 7y ago
    What if you don't really want any of the 3 dishes?
• eitland 7y ago
  No surprise. Even we (HN) predicted this the moment the first content company withdrew their content from Netflix. Two reasons: 1. People only have so much money. 2. When people compare it to what they used to payit seems unfair. People complain when gas prices increases by a few percent, no wonder they complain when they suddenly have to pay twice or even three times for the same content they used to pay one low monthly fee from. Oh, and they probably also compare to Spotify. I see three ways this market can work that immediately feels fair to me: - all you can eat/listen/watch (Spotify model) - pay per view but a lot lower than today. (Can work even with multiple streaming sites.) - a hybrid approach where you pay for a number of monthly credits that works (should be somewhat cheaper than the Spotify model)
  • jfim 7y ago
    Pay per view has the drawback of requiring too many decisions, leading to decision fatigue. Subscribing to a service for $20/mo is a one time decision, whereas figuring out if the show you're about to watch is worth $0.30 gets tiring really quickly. Monthly credits works a bit better, but the all you can eat model completely avoids this.
    • bob_theslob646 7y ago
      >Subscribing to a service for $20/mo is a one time decision, whereas figuring out if the show you're about to watch is worth $0.30 gets tiring really quickly. "figuring out if the show you're about to watch is worth $0.30 gets tiring really quickly." This is the biggest problem in the industry that no one wants to talk about. Valuing content aka how much is x show worth. The monthly premiums actually kill or put as strong fixed upper bound on what the content is actually worth. It also brings up another argument on whether or not valuing content ( how much is x show worth) is even worth talking about and talking about how you got your show on x platform because that means 100x more people will see your stuff vs if you are not on x platform.
    • roland35 7y ago
      That is a good point, I have a harder time deciding if I want to spend $3-4 to rent a movie on Amazon than just pulling up Netflix and browsing around! Plus I don't feel like I wasted money if I don't enjoy a movie and stop watching (The Ballad of Buster Scruggs sorry!). On the other hand I don't mind buying music, since I basically know the entire song ahead of time, and I don't think I ever buy more than $10 worth of music a month.
• zanezone 7y ago
  From the diary of "no shit, Sherlock" ...
• iikoolpp 7y ago
  The beauty of the free market. No "no true free market" comments, please.
• Nition 7y ago
  The last remaining video rental stores are closing down just as streaming services become so fragmented that making a short trip to rent any major film or TV series you want for a few dollars is starting to look okay again.
  • scarface74 7y ago
    You’ve never been able to get many of the most popular movies from a streaming service without paying for them individually. Netflix’s streaming catalog of popular movies has never been that great.
  • onychomys 7y ago
    According to wiki, as of 2017 there were about 40k Redbox locations in the US. They recently put one in the exit of my grocery store, and it gets a lot of use. I think it's a pretty good business model, since so many people only want to see relatively new big name movies.
• coldtea 7y ago
  Why don't major services (Netflix, Disney, HULU, etc) come together to build a best of breed shared service, that operates vendor-neutrally, and each gets to keep all the profits from people watching their stuff? Each could still have its own promotions, bundles, etc (e.g. pay X more to watch new movies from Disney), but at least the base proposition can have a single subscription price and some pay as you consume more scheme, single analytics, etc. In my ideal autocratic regime, they'd be forced to work under such a scheme, like power companies are forced to ultimately connect to the same grid (at least in some countries).
  • deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  • larntz 7y ago
    They could create a new company to keep track of who is watching what so each content creator gets paid accordingly. And it would be one company to pay for the per view option you describe. I could see this growing to 100s of different content providers and available to nearly every home! It's interesting that we've come full circle. This seems like an opportunity for the tv streaming services to add streaming content from different providers and eventually we end up with a 150/mo for streaming TV with premium channels like HBO, NETFLIX, DISNEY, ESPN, etc.
  • TeMPOraL 7y ago
    Because no one forced them to :). I think they'll get around to working on that later on, but first they'll ruin the whole streaming space in an attempt to capture all the value they can from their IP directly.
  • deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  • idlemind 7y ago
    I'm guessing they don't do this voluntarily because they've seen how the music industry had its revenues eroded by Spotify/iTunes (where mostly the user can pick one and get pretty much everything). They're probably ignoring the fact that music piracy is presumably lower than ever because of this.
• haywirez 7y ago
  The only ethical pay-per-view system I can think of would be to stream directly from the production source (production house, artist), some sort of a paid RSS-like feed.
  • 0-_-0 7y ago
    Alternatively, pay a fixed monthly fee which gets distributed among production sources depending on what you watched. Cut out the middleman of Netflix, Amazon etc. Could work with the rest of the internet too. Instead of relying on advertisements for revenue, you would pay a monthly fee which would get distributed among the websites you used. Aaaand we reinvented the Brave browser model...
    • count 7y ago
      And the cable television network...
• qaq 7y ago
  That the funny thing I have HBO, Hulu, Netflix, Amazon Prime but sometimes it's easier to watch something on a pirate site than searching for which service has what.
  • kalleboo 7y ago
    It's even worse when a show is split by season among services
  • mhb 7y ago
    I realize this is funny, but doesn't Roku do that for you?
    • jasongill 7y ago
      They didn't say anything about having Roku, and from my experience the "search all platforms" tools on streaming devices like Roku and Apple TV leave much to be desired
  • proaralyst 7y ago
    This helps: https://www.justwatch.com/ https://www.justwatch.com/
  • raydev 7y ago
    My cable provider had an crazy discount on their HBO+OnDemand offering, so I bought it and I had complete access to nearly every HBO show and more for 2 years. I ended up torrenting either entire seasons or torrenting last night's episode because: - The interface was painful to use. If I watched 2 eps of a show one night, and returned the next night, the box didn't remember where I was, so I would have to search up the show using the remote without a keyboard, scroll through an extremely slow UI of giant show posters that looked exactly the same and didn't show the episode number until I selected it. And that list would lead to another list, and every time I selected something, it took approximately 5-10 seconds to load the next page. - It was "HD" meaning it was outputting 1080p to my TV, but there was a ton of color banding, dark scenes had really obvious compression squares, etc. - Newly aired shows would usually not appear until the next day, and sometimes they would appear, then disappear for a few hours, then reappear. The stated goal was to have the shows available right away, but something about the infra prevented them from reliably doing it. - Once in a while I would be going through an old season, and some random episode, like the second episode of the season, would simply disappear from the list for a day or two. - Maybe this is a Canada-only/CTV problem, but there were several CTV shows I tried to watch that had rewind/fastforward COMPLETELY DISABLED, presumably to prevent commercial skipping (because they had commercials in their OnDemand shows). If you watched a show halfway, and decided to come back and watch from that point, CTV said "f* you, watch the whole thing again." In cable company's defense, the interface to all this was very pretty. They were iteratively updating it too and very slowly making the OnDemand menus just a little more easy to use, so it wasn't some old garbage that never changed. But the sheer number of actions I had to take to watch a single episode made me join a private TV tracker, where I reliably got extremely high quality video immediately after airings, and entire seasons neatly packaged in folders.
• dathinab 7y ago
  The problem is not to many streaming choices but the increasing fragmentation of which videos are available on which platforms. IMHO the increasing coupling of video producers and streaming services isn't a good idea at all as it again produces (quasi)monopoles for certain brands/shows (e.g. Disney). Through then IMHO the trend of tech companies increasingly expanding in a way which couples different kind products together is a worrisome trend (e.g. hardware producer couples with os producer coupled with application producer, or content producer coupled with content delivery services, or "shared" online marked places coupled with them starting to sell their own "featured" products, or coupling of ebook store with ebook reader, etc.). My guess is that this will lead to increasingly large companies with increasingly less chances for real competition giving this companies more and more (mainly implicit) power over people and economy and with this also influence in politic. Sure currently for streaming services it looks like it will lead to better competition, but my guess is that this won't be long term and in a view years we will be left with a oligopol of a small number of companies now dominating both production and distribution of high quality video entertainment content, without there being any real chance for any new competition (except if there is some form of interactive video revolution (I don't mean video games) coming from outside the video industry.
• aquova 7y ago
  I was discussing with a friend that in some bizarre alternative universe where things had played out differently, cable would seem like the great alternative to all the streaming services we have now. You only have to pay one monthly fee, and you have thousands of choices available to you! Sure, it's not on demand, but with so many options, and many things on a regular schedule, finding things to watch is easier than ever.
  • TeMPOraL 7y ago
    The cable suffered because of two things: aggressive market segmentation with channel packs, and ads. Without these two, cable TV would be like Twitter for TV - a streaming service with a weird but perhaps adorable limitation that the streaming schedule is set for you.
• baybal2 7y ago
  I'm not seeing how it gonna drive people "back" if one click downloads never ceased to be a prime option even for people in developed countries. When I was studying in college in Canada in 2010-2012, I never ever saw a single student using a paid download site.
• lm28469 7y ago
  I watch movies once a week with a few friends. We have Netflix, Prime and 3 other smaller providers I can't recall the name of. We still have to look for 50% of the movies we want to watch "somewhere else". It's even worse because most providers geo lock their content. So the movie might be available on Netflix US but isn't on Netflix Spain, or it's available on prime but only in _foreign language_. When the movie is available the service is slow, you get intermittent disconnections, the subtitles aren't available, &c. It's a running joke for us now, we have an hassle free movie night once every three month I'd say. It's basically cable TV 2.0, it's such a pain in the ass.
  • blattimwind 7y ago
    > or it's available on prime but only in _foreign language_ or it's only available in a dub.
• minetest2048 7y ago
  Here is my personal movie subscription list: For animes: 1. Crunchyroll 2. Animelab 3. Funimation For movies: 1. Netflix 2. YouTube movies 5 streaming sites and even than not all movies and animes are available to me because of geoblocking. Then when I go back to my home country only Netflix works, and for some weird reason in my country only the first 3 season of Race to the Edge is available, even though it claimed to be Netflix Originals. No wonder piracy is everywhere
• speeder 7y ago
  I am from Brazil and here I am seeing the rise of "IPTV", with many service claiming they have deals with all streaming providers and movie companies, and you can pay them to watch just-released movies or any show on any provider... I am strongly suspecting they saw the proliferation of streaming services (and here also "cable" services) as a opportunity, but are creating their services illegally, for example I know a person that got "IPTV" and I couldn't find anything about the company, and their PC "client" is actually just a modified VLC (that also for some reason only works on Windows).
• ecmascript 7y ago
  My main issue is still that a lot of movies I want to pay for and see is not available, or that subtitles are missing or not working. This has made me stop purchasing movies, stopped subscriptions and instead invest in a smaller fee for a good VPN connection.
• ocdtrekkie 7y ago
  Ugh, I am so sick of the "if all of the content I ever want isn't available for less than a single $10 a month sub, I'll pirate it" nonsense. Netflix was never going to be the be-all, end-all of content and its time our generation grew up a little bit. For the amount of content you could get in a traditional cable package, you should expect to pay about as much as a traditional cable package.
  • ShteiLoups 7y ago
    Woah, free markets balancing themselves... Crazy
    • ocdtrekkie 7y ago
      Piracy isn't a "market", it's theft. The free market isn't "balancing itself" when everyone's using an illegal hole in that market.
      • probably_wrong 7y ago
        But it is an imbalance in the market, though. You just have to add the hidden costs of each alternative. Pirating has costs: financial, legal (chances of getting caught times expected fine), and personal (hassle of hunting down the right torrent). Netflix managed to strike a balance point: you had a higher monetary price, but the legal and personal costs were now gone from the equation. With all the new competitors, both the price and the personal cost of watching the content you like has risen. The return of people to piracy is then a previsible result of this imbalance.
        • Freak_NL 7y ago
          Quite. Legality is really not that relevant when you look at the problem from pure market theory. The legality aspect does mean the piracy as a competitor has a weakness that can be exploited by other competitors — e.g., by lobbying for stricter laws or suing individuals, or by appealing to morality — but it is a competitor nonetheless, and acts as one.
• neuronic 7y ago
  Germans/Europeans might feel with me: I had the pleasure of using Sky to watch Game of Thrones and a few movies and it was the most abysmal experience I have ever had. Your account is an email combined with a 4-digit NUMERIC-ONLY (!) "password" and once you are hyper-securely logged in the amount of usability pain a single piece of software can cause will immediately become apparent. How can anything paid by a big corporation be anywhere near as bad as the Sky apps is completely beyond me. Their iOS app is somewhat usable and I was happy I could just cast GoT using my Google Chrome until I noticed that casting can only be done in German. The English original version wasn't available for casting but perfectly accessible on PS4 app, Mac app and web app.
  • deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  • denvrede 7y ago
    Thanks for the reminder to cancel the Sky Ticket subscription. I feel you. The most frustrating thing are their SmartTV and AppleTV apps. If you watched an episode or a movie you can't start it again because it will start, jump to the end and will either recommend to start the next episode (in the case of a show) or do nothing (in case of a movie). You have to "reset" the content in you iOS app and can then watch it on your other devices. Sky is cancer.
  • thirdsun 7y ago
    Sky used to have a web client. Now you have to use their apps, even on the desktop, which come with a suite of monitoring services (Cisco Videoguard) to prevent people from streaming their content. On my Mac Mini the video player takes up easily 80-100% of the 6-core/12-threads i7. It's almost unwatchable. Unfortuantely it's a requirement if you're into german soccer.
    • neuronic 7y ago
      Not really in the spin, but what about DAZN?
      • 7y ago
• LoSboccacc 7y ago
  it's not the "choices" it's having to pay each one of their monthly fee
• xfitm3 7y ago
  I will always pirate shows. I cut the cord 11 years ago due to my objection of cable company billing practices. The entire industry is greedy. I was a netflix subscriber for awhile but I burned thru all the good stuff and left.
  • commandlinefan 7y ago
    I don’t even know if I’m “pirating” or not. There’s pretty much nothing on Netflix anymore, and I can’t even figure out how to sign up for HBO streaming (I think I have to get a code from cable provider first?) if I even cared enough to do so. I have found a few ad-supported/free streaming sites like Tubi and Popcornflix, plus some public domain streaming sites like publicdomainflix and archive.org. Are they legitimate? I don’t know - I have no way of even finding out.
    • thedaemon 7y ago
      HBO has 2 streaming apps. 1 for cable / satellite owners and 1 for HBO's own streaming service. You should look for HBO Now!
  • robertoandred 7y ago
    YOU are greedy. You're not entitled to free things. Do you skip out on restaurant bills, too?
    • guitarbill 7y ago
      Yeah, no, I don't buy this facile argument. Closest I can come up with is either an all-you-can-eat buffet you have a membership to, or Costco, and turning up one day and there's no pasta or burgers. And they say "sorry, Olive Garden/McDonalds bought the rights to that food and we can no longer serve it". It's absurd. Rights-holders absolutely deserve to get paid. But weaponizing that? Sorry, they lost me.
      • robertoandred 7y ago
        That doesn't mean you're entitled to getting Olive Garden and McDonalds for free.
• lucasverra 7y ago
  bundling - unbundling - bundling TPB (mirror) here we come
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• danielovichdk 7y ago
  So many good things streaming can't serve you. Eg. The Last of the Mohicans. Wanted to watch it last night. Had to do some tricks...
• danielovichdk 7y ago
  Oh yeah. Simpsons is a prime example. As a european i can't watch it anywhere
• cjslep 7y ago
  This is a tragedy of the commons scenario. Instead of (all numbers illustrative): Group A: 100% group B gets jealous and does: Group A: 25%, Group B: 25%, Piracy: 50% As long as B's shareholders are happy (0->25%) then "who cares".
  • TeMPOraL 7y ago
    It's worse than that. Netflix does pay for the IP it streams, and there's more players involved. The end result is, each of them will get even less, and some pirates can even make money off this - all they need to do is to collect and curate links to pirate media sources, and charge a tiny amount for ad-free streaming. And they are already doing it.
• tyingq 7y ago
  Hasn't driven me to piracy. It has, however, driven me to subscribe/unsubscribe as needed. Paid for a month of HBO, for example, mostly for the Chernobyl series, watched that and a few movies, unsubscribed. I think that pattern might hurt these services more than piracy.
  • kedean 7y ago
    There's also the option of refusing the new services. When I think on what I'll do as content keeps fragmenting across services, I keep coming back to one answer...watch less video content. The time before easy streaming wasn't that long ago, and if the content makers and distributors aren't going to play ball, then I can entertain myself in plenty of other ways. The bigger losers are going to be parents that have a harder time convincing theirs kids that they don't need, e.g., Disney+.
    • tyingq 7y ago
      That's a good point. I'm almost ready to drop Netflix, as the overall quality of the content has dropped substantially in the last 2 years.
      • nickjj 7y ago
        Same. Also recently for whatever reason they started to drop my login session on a pretty regular basis (~twice a week for the last month). After a long day sometimes you just want to flip Netflix on and watch that movie you added to your list a few nights ago. But getting greeted with the login screen on your non-smart TV (I use a smart DVD player) is sometimes enough to avoid Netflix completely because it's so annoying having to type a 20+ character email address and a 20+ character password on a TV remote.
  • commandlinefan 7y ago
    > subscribe/unsubscribe as needed … if you remember to unsubscribe. I wonder how many of these monthly streaming services rely on the gym model where they hope that it’s more trouble to unsubscribe than it is to just pay for the service month after month.
• apexalpha 7y ago
  People forget you don't need to pay for all of them yourself. About 5 people share the Netflix I use. I suppose someone else will get Disney and give me access.
  • TeMPOraL 7y ago
    That's true. But streaming services are also heavily underutilized. My Netflix subscription is used by 5 to 6 people - that's why I actually pay for the highest tier, to minimize the chance that somebody will be locked out because others wanted to watch something else at the same time. Even 5-6 people, I doubt my Netflix account is used for more than 10-15 hours a week in total.
    • mrlala 7y ago
      >But streaming services are also heavily underutilized ? >Even 5-6 people, I doubt my Netflix account is used for more than 10-15 hours a week in total. Err, you seem to be under the impression that 2 hours/person/week is the norm for someone with a streaming service.. Narrator: It's not.
      • TeMPOraL 7y ago
        Maybe it isn't. But I can't imagine that people with a job, household chores and/or a degree to finish spend significantly more than that when averaged over longer periods of time. Sure, I sometimes did binge-watch a whole TV show in two weeks. But then I didn't open Netflix for another two months, so it averages out.
• flamtap 7y ago
  There's something to be said for the cord-cutting software ecosystem supporting more-than-casual piracy experiencing huge improvements. If you have the hardware, you can host your own media using Plex as a server, and Sonarr to manage your library and automate acquisition of new TV episodes. Plex is one of the best pieces of software I've ever used. It Just Works™. You need a decent internet pipeline to support remote streaming, but LAN is a breeze to setup. It's so feature-rich I don't know where to begin. I honestly prefer it to any other streaming service. Apps on just about every platform you can think of (they had yet to release apps for Nintendo consoles last I checked). I have my whole family set up on my server, and it doesn't cost them a dime. The primary drawbacks from their perspective are that they need to request shows and movies to be added, and I naturally don't have Netflix-level availability, but hey. Shit's free. So when a cord-cutter with enough savvy to pirate video can actually replicate the services rendered by Netflix et al. on their own, why would they pay five times for something centralized that they can get for free[1]? [1] Plex has $7 month premium features, with the option for a lifetime pass equal to about 2.5 years of subscription.
  • Cyph0n 7y ago
    > The primary drawbacks from their perspective are that they need to request shows and movies to be added Have you heard of Ombi? I've never tried it, but sounds like it could help with this issue. https://ombi.io/ https://ombi.io/
    • flamtap 7y ago
      I haven't! Thanks for the tip. I must take this for a spin! Sure looks like it would work better than them just texting me what they'd like added to the server, heh.
  • robertoandred 7y ago
    Everything's free when you steal. Lame argument.
    • nickthegreek 7y ago
• itscrapthatswhy 7y ago
  It's not just that there is too many. They also all try to shove stuff down your throat in an Amazon like manner while providing a rather crappy service. They've been accumulating bad PR for a couple of years now. I mean - Netflix knows that they have a lot of shit content that no one in their right mind wants to watch. They also won't allow you to hide that stuff in any real way. Their search is also rather hostile and definitely not aimed at helping you find what you want. And HBO - I literally subscribed just for John Oliver. And now I can watch it within minutes of it airing on YT, but have to wait days for it to show up in their service. Used to be the same with GoT. Thanks, but no thanks.
• jadams5 7y ago
  10'ish years ago I remember people being mad at the cable companies for bundling all the channels together into all-or-nothing options. Why did I have to pay for ESPN when I just want the SciFi channel? Here we are today with lots of options where you only pay for what you want and now people want them all bundled back together again!
  • TeMPOraL 7y ago
    People are still complaining about the same thing. Instead of "why do I have to pay for ESPN when I just want the SciFi channel?", it's now "why do I have to pay for the whole catalogue of yet another streaming service, and deal with its idiosyncraticly broken UI, when I just want to watch that one show that one time?". People still want the same thing: to have all they want to watch available in a single place, through a single interface, and for a flat price. Without ads, market segmentation, or other exploitative trickery.
  • DHPersonal 7y ago
    That's why I don't really believe people who claim that having to pick a streaming service is a burden too great to bear and can only be resolved through piracy. I don't think the issue is too little choice, too much choice, too much cost, or two much mental overhead—I think they just want to pirate and find a reason to use for the moment.
    • TeMPOraL 7y ago
      Because you think exposing yourself to higher risk of malware, financial punishment and possibly jail time is something thrilling that people like to do for fun? Truth is, because of greed of the IP holders, the existing legal avenues of getting media are garbage and, on top of that, subscribing to several services costs more money than reasonable - all that starts to outweigh the aforementioned risk. And the risk is going down now that pirates run streaming sites too, which shield viewers from liability. See also Steam, and how game piracy dwindled down thanks to cutting out the bullshit. And wrt. mental overhead, just look at how unhappy gamers are now that more companies are trying to compete with Steam by launching exclusives, making it necessary to install additional game launchers (which are almost universally garbage). People are not lying in their complaints.
• mratzloff 7y ago
  Some of my favorite HN threads are when highly-paid software engineers complain about paying a few bucks for original content.
• x1ph0z 7y ago
  I already started buying used DVD's & Blu-Rays for use on Plex. Too much fragmentation and the risk of having your favourite shows and movies pulled for some other service.
• ozim 7y ago
  Just fix your FOMO and you don't have to pay for all crap you will never use. I did not watched any episode of GoT and I don't feel like I missed something in my life. Occasionally I don't get some reference. I also don't run into people who are "omg you really did not watched any of it? so great series", even if I would run into this kind, I could not care less about it anyway.
  • magashna 7y ago
    It seems like everyone hated the last season so I feel justified in not watching now
  • slothtrop 7y ago
    There's something to this. Of course it's a convenience to have better pickings for shows we want to watch, but seeing it all means spending an inordinate amount of time watching tv. Most of it is dull filler. People think too much of it. A lot of people seemed to enjoy GoT in the earlier years, and the barriers to watching it are ridiculous. It's cheaper to shell out $100+ for the dvd set even for a single watch. There's a reason it's the most pirated show of all time.
• cftorres 7y ago
  It would be nice if this trend to fragmentation uses more segmentation based on ages and interests. For example: I never watch kids shows or action movies but my money is also invested on that kind of content.
• AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
  No shit. Valve worked out the key to combating piracy in the early 2000s. To quote Gaben himself: "We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem. If a pirate offers a product anywhere in the world, 24 x 7, purchasable from the convenience of your personal computer, and the legal provider says the product is region-locked, will come to your country 3 months after the US release, and can only be purchased at a brick and mortar store, then the pirate's service is more valuable." People pirate media more for convenience than to save money.
  • jdc0589 7y ago
    there's a cliff though. I pay for prime and Netflix, and once or twice a month I'll rent a movie from Google Play if it's something I really want to see. however, in my mind paying any more than that approximate monthly total is unreasonable, and not an option. And to the article's credit, I think about booting my Plex setup back up pretty frequently now.
    • proverbialbunny 7y ago
      There absolutely is a cliff. Every general rule of thumb has a limit. However, what you're describing is not the financial limit. We once paid quite a bit more for cable tv than streaming services. Paying for the big streaming services combined comes to about the same or less than previous cable subscriptions. In this case it's not about cost but convenience. These companies need to provide an api that allows for services like plex (or similar) to pipe all of the streaming services into one platform, with one auto buy if you watch and stop paying if you haven't watched anything from that network within x months.
  • draugadrotten 7y ago
    Valve is right. I haven't pirated a single game since I started using Steam, and I have spent dollars on games I will never ever have time to play. There is no way I will subscribe to 10 different movie streaming services. I want it all in one client. If they want to charge me 50 dollars for the latest movies, so be it. I just want the convenience of one single source available 24x7 wherever I am. Until then, /r/usenet. Apple TV, I know this is where you are going. Netflix, I know you tried and failed.
• jpetrucc 7y ago
  Is this the final state of attempting to maximize profits? It feels like it's converging back towards the cable model [0]. Especially now with ad-supported streaming plans on Hulu [1] and increasingly more and more service exclusives [2] (same site as OP). Streaming services are slowly but surely becoming cable "Channels"/"Packages" now, and of course that's going to increase piracy - we've seen it happen before. If you make something people want, but make it overly expensive or inconvenient to consume, piracy is an attractive (albeit morally grey) alternative for many. Sure you can buy the disk set for whatever shows you like and skip out on the streaming services, but that in itself comes with a level of inconvenience (and cost) - why use physical disks when you can just download the content, share on a NAS/Plex server, and have it on any device? Once you've made it more inconvenient than people are used to, you've again made piracy an option. I wonder when we'll start seeing bundles of streaming services for a single price! [0]: https://www.itproportal.com/features/is-streaming-in-danger-of-repeating-the-fate-of-cable/ https://www.itproportal.com/features/is-streaming-in-danger-... [1]: https://help.hulu.com/s/article/how-much-does-hulu-cost?language=en_US https://help.hulu.com/s/article/how-much-does-hulu-cost?lang... [2]: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190627/11202942488/streaming-tv-sector-still-doesnt-realize-exclusives-will-drive-users-back-to-piracy.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190627/11202942488/strea...
  • pmiller2 7y ago
    Considering the average streaming service cost is a $12-15 subscription, once you start subscribing to 2-4+ of those, the cost becomes comparable to basic cable. Welcome to a la carte cable. More precisely, I would say it's the balkanization of streaming services that's the real problem. If I could sign up for one service that offered everything I wanted to watch, on demand, for $50, I'd consider that. Now, Disney stuff is on the Disney service, some shows are on Netflix, others on Hulu, and a few on Amazon. On top of that, you have to consider that all the major TV streaming services also produce their own content, which is exclusive to their services and not licensed elsewhere. Even keeping track of what's on what service is a chore. My personal compromise has been to use Prime Video and Netflix, because I already subscribe to Amazon Prime, anyway, and Netflix is a good incremental add. But, I don't want 5 subscription services and to have to keep track of what's on what service. It's bad enough with 2.
• iwalton3 7y ago
  One thing that hasn't been mentioned is some users might consider subscribing to a more expensive (like $20-$70/mo) streaming service if it has content-sharing deals and a promise of no ads or availability windows. There is definitely an enthusiast market out there that wants the best quality and experience, and having to use several different streaming services that may not have what you want to watch when you want to watch it is not a great experience when compared to some of the less legitimate options.
• devbofh 7y ago
  I've been saying this for 3 years now. People were good with it was just a Netflix subscription. Now it's Netflix, Hulu, Spotify, Apple Music, Prime Video, Prime Music, Apple TV+, Apple News+, Disney+, HBO Go, and on and on.
• jaimex2 7y ago
  Yup, I can tell you right now the only subscriptions I have are to Netflix and Real Debrid.
• gremlinsinc 7y ago
  I'd say many never stopped.. to feel legit they maybe bought netflix and hulu, but still pirated HBO or network tv. I can see people maybe getting Netflix and Disney+ and maybe Apple ...and then streaming from tv show sites anything they're missing.... They need to have a bundled app like $60 gets you Amazon, Netflix, Disney, Apple, HBO, and Sling/Philo ... Make it so each provider can sell the bundle and they get 30% more of the total sale... If I had money and connections I'd love to start this startup... If you only took 6% to make it lucrative for the companies involved, then split it x ways with the bundled providers Better yet philo or sling should do this since they already have the live tv parts, it would be a natural replacement for Cable. Or they could all just join forces and create a unified platform. Added bonus is there's only one bill.
• jasonkester 7y ago
  Another factor in the mix is how poor a job a lot of the streaming services do at the mechanics of running their business. I, for instance, pay for streaming packages from both the NFL and Formula 1, but more often than not the best way to watch the actual events is to download a torrent that some random guy recorded, edited, and posted. The video quality is just plain better. It's not missing the pre-event buildup coverage. And it doesn't randomly cut out and drop down to 160p all the time. Now I say I pay for these services, but actually as of a couple months ago I can't even convince Formula 1 to take my money anymore. I live in France and first signed up using a US credit card. Now they won't let me put my card back in to renew, because it's not to a French address. And they won't let me buy the US or UK version of the service (as I have cards and mailing addresses in both), because my history shows I previously bought the French one. But then really, it's not that much of a pain, since even for the couple years I paid for it I don't think I actually streamed more than a couple races. The product itself was just that awful, but still it'd be nice to be able to give them some money...
  • rolltiide 7y ago
    Thats because there is more competition amongst pirates than rights holders Turns out complaining about free things is actually an effective strategy for improving quality
    • vanderZwan 7y ago
      Not that surprising since the "currency" is basically pride and appreciation for your work (insofar as you can really apply that kind of thinking to these social situations)
• notTyler 7y ago
  On the one hand, I believe it's definitively a good thing that these services will be allowing for creation of niche content. I have long believed that your broadcast networks / USA / TNT just straight up cannot make good content because their expectations viewers wise are so high they end up trying to please everyone and make really, really generic television. So yeah. I like that. But what's the endgame? Is this high profile Battlestar reboot supposed to generate enough subscriptions to cover the cost or is it just getting people involved in the NBC / Peacock ecosystem? Like, this is the same company that routinely cancels (nearly) every good show on SyFy (where, you know, I would kind of expect a Battlestar reboot to actually be) because they aren't getting enough viewers. Now that it's a streaming service and their collecting the money directly from the viewer rather than going through Comcast does it make that much of a difference?
• JaimeThompson 7y ago
  Something else that is really annoying is how the various services have different controls. It is really necessary to change how fast forward / rewind work in each app?
• Shivetya 7y ago
  which means what? nothing, people who pirate stuff will always have an excuse to do so. don't kid yourself into believing they are paying for content out of the goodness of their heart. they are paying only because they don't have a consistent free means to get the same content. so the next big fight will probably be someone trying to sell a service combining/bundling feeds and running into copy right issues and such. it might lead to an association of services but that depends on how fragmented the industry becomes. if anything with many players it should drive sub costs down especially for players who have little to offer themselves. if not there will be a lot of industry suffering until they sort it out. consumers will likely stick with one or two providers at most
• cabaalis 7y ago
  So far, my go-to has been Vudu. Sure, you have to rent/buy. But $3 to watch that movie you're itching to watch, or $9 to own is very reasonable. When I was a teenager and Napster was huge, casual piracy was a thing. Now that I make digital things that I ask people to pay me for, I think differently.
• Cyph0n 7y ago
  This is precisely why I recently decided to setup a home streaming box/NAS. Currently, I have an RPi 4 running Sonarr/Radarr, NZBGet, Transmission, and Emby, with a reverse proxy on top so I can access it all remotely[1]. But an RPi is not enough when it comes to transcoding and larger storage, so I'll be upgrading to a custom-built microATX server. The estimated total cost for parts is ~$600, including 6TB of storage. Monthly recurring cost is about $7, not counting energy consumption. I'm also starting to use Kodi + RD to make it easier to stream stuff without downloading it. [1]: My config is available on my GH profile.
• voidwtf 7y ago
  I hope it does, and I hope it signals that they're going too far with their segmentation of subscription services. I subscribe to HBO. A subscription service that I have to pay for. Now they're going to introduce another subscription service called HBO Max which is going to cost more and may overlap with, but may not entirely include, content from HBO Go/NOW. Does this mean I have to buy into another subscription from the same company to access their 'new'/'original' content? Honestly, I'm maintaining the services I currently have but not adding anything new. I have subscription fatigue. A cable subscription, HBO, Showtime, Netflix, and Prime are enough to fulfill my moral quota. Plex/Radarr/Sonarr will manage the rest of my television entertainment needs.
• greenpizza13 7y ago
  It certainly will. With the Office and P&R going to "Peacock" my wife's first command to me was "...get them...".
• 40acres 7y ago
  I don't think this is as big a threat as these comments make it seem. For the tech savvy, setting up a Plex server or whatever can be done in an afternoon's time. The majority of consumers won't go through the "hassle" of setting up their own infrastructure and will make judgement calls on what platforms align with their interests. I'd bet on Netflix (incumbency), Prime (bundling), Apple (integration with iPhone) and Disney (best back catalog) being the leaders in this space for the next 5 years. Despite major networks getting into the game its hard to see them going all in and cannablizing their TV business just yet
  • laumars 7y ago
    You don't need a dedicate Plex server to pirate. Any bittorrent client will do and people might just be happy using a built in media client. Plus often people are happy to buy systems pre-built (remember the "Kodi Box" craze?). Piracy is a service problem not a price problem so people are willing to pay for systems like this if it's easier than managing subscriptions to multiple services (and the fact it usually works out cheaper to pirate is an added bonus).
• stillwater56 7y ago
  In 2018, there was a report published by Sandvine saying that BitTorrent traffic had increased on their network for the first time in years (Engadget link: https://www.engadget.com/2018/10/03/streaming-exclusives-may-have-revived-piracy https://www.engadget.com/2018/10/03/streaming-exclusives-may...) It seems perfectly rational to me. Streaming platforms' competitive advantage vs piracy is convenience (being legal and easier to use). As their convenience declines, users who are not averse to piracy will naturally gravitate back towards it.
• wnevets 7y ago
  I've been trying to avoid it but the current streaming landscape is making it pretty hard to stay legit without spending a large sum of money
• ryandrake 7y ago
  Here are my product requirements for a viable alternative to piracy: 1. Availability of any movie or TV show ever made from one service 2. Quality/resolution comparable to what was available when it originally aired (I’m not demanding 4K Seinfeld) 3. No DRM 4. No restriction on downloading/timeshifting 5. Playable on all my devices including Linux and iOS, using my choice of playback software 6. Playable no matter what “region” I happen to be in 7. Original language audio + subs. Dubs are a nice bonus 8. Streaming not an important or necessary feature 9. Slick UI not important or necessary Provide that and let’s talk price. Note none of the above are technical challenges or areas of active research. They are already all solved by the pirates.
• Qwertystop 7y ago
  > “Consumers want choice — but only up to a point,” said Kevin Westcott, Deloitte vice chairman and U.S. telecom and media and entertainment leader, who oversees the study. “We may be entering a time of ‘subscription fatigue.'” Missing the point hard here. To the degree that "consumers want choice", I would expect the choice they want is the choice of media, not the choice of subscription services. People don't subscribe to Netflix for its own sake, they subscribe because it lets them watch something they want to see.
  • guitarbill 7y ago
    Right. It isn't a choice if I can only watch/play/listen to/consume <x> in one place.
  • vmchale 7y ago
    > We may be entering a time of ‘subscription fatigue.'” Also know as... not wanting to spend three times as much? lol.
  • pmiller2 7y ago
    Bingo. I don't want to keep track of what's on what platform, or pay $12-15/month for 5 different services. I would much rather pay ~$50/month for one service that had everything I wanted to watch on it, alongside some kind of good mechanism for content discovery (both recommendations, and search).
• rblion 7y ago
  For me, I've realized that 80% of media is not worth my time. Unless it's something that is 'can't miss' like Martin Scorsese's movie that is debuting on Netflix or Planet Earth II, I can skip it. I use my family's Netflix account, I don't have my own. I've tried to keep up with the Marvel universe but it's next to impossible at this point. All my favorite shows (Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Sopranos, Game of Thrones) are completed now too. I go to the movies once or twice a year now, at most.
• oliwarner 7y ago
  "Choice" here is just a euphemism for "yet another $10.99/month subscription". The more services, the less content I want each has. The more services/apps/etc I have to engage with, the less I want to engage with any of them. That is to say, it's not just as expensive as corded packages, it's harder to actually use. It's the opposite of what it should be. Content needs F/RAND licensing, possibly with a temporary block on creators self-distributing to try and right the market and get some competition going. If you think it's getting bad, just wait until Disney starts flexing.
  • durnygbur 7y ago
    > just wait until Disney starts flexing. They will savage or at least sue everyone alive until no other service will remain in the internet of the Western world, all these while hired actresses making cute faces will be throwing pink glitter at everyone involved.
• aranw 7y ago
  Need to change "May" for "Will"
  • lostgame 7y ago
    Or 'has driven'.
• nerpderp82 7y ago
  There should be an open standard for streaming/accessing videos I have purchased that is independent of the platform. I should have a single pane of glass to view netflix/amazon/etc w/o having to use a specific application.
• segmondy 7y ago
  I'm sticking to Netflix. I get Prime video because I have Amazon prime, the moment they charge a penny more for it. I'll drop it. I have Hulu because I got promotion from Spotify, I might keep it if it's less than $10. That's really it. Everything else has to be either free youtube/online videos or DVD, but I'm not subscribing to anymore streaming services.
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• macspoofing 7y ago
  If you want to steal, you're going to steal. In terms of video streaming choices ... yeah, it's going to be the case there will be a few of those. What's the alternative? Netflix gets a monopoly?
• tbpforevAr 7y ago
  never left >:D
• MisterTea 7y ago
  Perfect example. I have Netflix, Prime and Hulu. Thats already too many as most have a bunch of crap and a few shows I like, some have duplicate content. I watched One Punch man on Netflix and can also watch on Hulu. Season Two was released on Hulu. Well that works for me but what about people who had Netflix, Like OPM and now want to watch season 2? I've been binging Star Trek. I'd also like to watch the new series on CBS. Of course CBS had the bright odea of starting their own streaming service. The cost is $5.99/mo with commercials or 9.99/mo without commercials. No. So all the idiots taking their toys home and starting their own streaming biz are driving piracy. I used to download TV shows all the time but streaming made that unnecessary as I could pay a little money to have legal access to plenty of things I want to watch. No one wants to juggle multiple streaming services just to watch a few shows. People don't want to go back to spending $200 on TV and internet. I'd rather spend no more than $25/mo on tv and $50 for >=100mbit internet. Thats an ideal number considering I spend less on electricity each month.
  • fucking_tragedy 7y ago
    > I'd rather spend no more than $25/mo on tv and $50 for >=100mbit internet. Thats an ideal number considering I spend less on electricity each month. Agreed. Other countries are able to do it, but cable companies and ISPs have monopolies in different regions of the US.
• tbpforevAr 7y ago
  may drive HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH .onion tpb is easier to use and much clearner than ever
• bluetidepro 7y ago
  I'm personally fine with paying for them all, just hate that they are all separate apps with wildly difference experiences. I LOVE how I can get HBO as an add-on for Hulu, and have it all in one place to manage my "watch-list", ratings, tastes, etc. It's super frustrating you won't be able to get Disney+ as an add-on (for ad-free Hulu), as well. In the future, if there is just a universal app where I could get Netflix, Hulu, HBO, Disney+, and Amazon Prime, that would be the most superior experience. Obviously I doubt such an app would ever exist, but what they don't get is that it's more about convenience/hassle than the cost.
• anilakar 7y ago
  In other news: Here deregulation of taxi services made people use taxi services less. Competition does not always mean more accessible or affordable consumer options.
• kalessin 7y ago
  Could a global license system be implemented to solve that problem?
• durnygbur 7y ago
  So instead of owning the video files and having them on my hard drive, I should pay subscription fee as long as I want to watch it? Ok, that's a compromise I can agree to. Now, there are unskippable ads at the beginning and in the middle of the video? Hmmm, that's not what we agreed for. Wait, TWO UNSKIPPABLE ADS at the begginning? Fuck no, fuck never again I'm using any of these services.
• raslah 7y ago
  I was never patient enough for piracy as it takes diligence to find reliable sources. One thing that does irritate me is this general antipiracy attitude on the web today. It's like the entire population works for Big Tech. It used to be if you did enough searching, you could find pretty much anything you wanted, but now everyone acts like the piracy police and gets all offended if you even insinuate piracy. Probably sounds rather antisocial, but I think that attitude is dangerous as it gives corporations way too much influence, beyond what we've yielded them already. Maybe it's just the places I frequent.
  • izzydata 7y ago
    I suspect they are a tad annoyed that you are potentially getting something for free that they payed for.
• jesbickhart 7y ago
  People want aggregation, it will come back in some form. The new streaming landscape is much too fragmented...kind of like the Airline industry.
• Gene5ive 7y ago
  I had just written a note to myself yesterday: "Piracy occurs because the economics of content distribution is broken, not because people inherently want to steal." And then saw this.
• VikingCoder 7y ago
  I want a device like a Roku. I don't want to think in terms of channels (streaming choices like Amazon Prime, Netflix, Google Play, CBS, Disney+, etc.) I'd like to think in terms of content and suggestions. I want the Roku to completely hide the channel (streaming provider) from me. In addition to paying membership to Netflix, I want to be able to purchase content, too. I really appreciate Movies Anywhere. I hope more content can fall under umbrellas like that.
• bitslayer 7y ago
  Ironically, in the old days everyone used to complain that they couldn't pay for just the cable channels they watch, you had to accept the whole bundle. Now you pay for the channels separately. Yay?
• josteink 7y ago
  > given the effort it took to migrate users away from piracy and toward legitimate services in the first place. The primary lesson learned during that experience is you need to compete with . It's not really a choice. It's real, it's impossible to stop. This lesson seems utterly forgotten. The fatigue is real, and more often than not I’m not finding anything I’m looking for on any of the subscription-based streaming services I’m paying for. So I’m cancelling all of them. My fallback: iTunes on my AppleTV has good choice in movies I can buy, and I usually find what I’m looking for there. What’s not quickly meets the Plex.
• CivilianZero 7y ago
  I really have to ask: Is everyone in the comments apart of an organized troll? Because I feel like I’ve lost my mind reading most of these comments. It seems like everyone here thinks torrenting is as easy and simple as using streaming services actually is, and that streaming is as complicated as torrenting actually is. I used to torrent stuff all the time. Constantly. I have several HDs laying around filled with torrented movies and tv shows. Why? Because I was in college and couldn’t afford them. The day I started making enough money to just sign up to services and buy copies of the movies I wanted I stopped torrenting forever. It’s easy and I’m not stealing.
  • zzzcpan 7y ago
    > It seems like everyone here thinks torrenting is as easy and simple as using streaming services actually is, and that streaming is as complicated as torrenting actually is. Would be weird if people here didn't find torrenting easy and simple. And depending where you get your torrents from, it could be significantly easier than streaming.
    • CivilianZero 7y ago
      I don't think that follows. I'm technically savvy and am fully capable of torrenting files, but the amount of effort I have to exert to get it done problem free (and the amount I have in the past) means it is not easy or simple. Just because you have the ability to perform an action, even if you find it easy to do, does not mean it is intrinsically easy or simple. And it definitely is never easier than opening an app on your smart tv/console/etc and clicking play.
      • zzzcpan 7y ago
        > And it definitely is never easier than opening an app on your smart tv/console/etc and clicking play. It is. For everyone who cares about privacy, security implications of using an app on a smart tv, for everyone who doesn't want to own a smart tv or a console, for everyone who already knows how to do it with torrents. And so on. Easiness is subjective. Simplicity isn't, but streaming apps are not simpler in any way.
• gnator 7y ago
  The problem is not too many choices. It's actually the lack of choice. Each series is going to a different streaming platform which means we have to pick up more stream services
• dwighttk 7y ago
  I've been buying my shows on iTunes to avoid both paying for 10 different streaming services and piracy.
• zeruch 7y ago
  May?
• Shido 7y ago
  First time commenting so excuse me if I say something wrong, I believe there should be something similar to cable for these streaming platforms like a company that pays the companies to stream their content on their service for a smaller price for the consumers that way we won't be forced to pay for some many services all at once, the cable concept is starting to make sense.
• tomaskafka 7y ago
  Well this is how the 'economically optimal' Netflix looks like - the Netflix everyone loved was an unsustainable customer acquisition campaign.
• HeavyStorm 7y ago
  I think the article doesn't tackle it from the correct perspective. There aren't _many_ choices at all, because we don't hire the service for the service itself, instead, for the content, and content here is exclusive. For instance, you have competition on the PC market: you can buy Dell, you can buy Lenovo, and while the outside may differ, inside, you have the same thing. You also have choices of Burger joints, because although we may prefer one to the other, whenever we want a burger, we can choose from anyplace. This kind of content, TV shows and movies, however, is different. There's more uniqueness to each piece than a burger or a PC have. You can't interchange Game Of Thrones with Vikings and be really satisfied, worse, you'll probably want both. So, right now, what we have is little choice - recent shows and movies are on a single platform, and just a few are on two or three different ones. So to have all content you want, you might need to subscribe to many different platforms.
• sunstone 7y ago
  I wonder how many people subscribe to Netflix but torrent want the want from HBO?
• paggle 7y ago
  Where does most video piracy happen these days, post-Pirate Bay?