4 ms·
Reminds one of the 90s and Akamai It's a good move for netflix because - side step net neutrality rules. If it's likely a tier one carrier will screw over yo
by lifeisstillgood 7y ago
Reminds one of the 90s and Akamai
It's a good move for netflix because
- side step net neutrality rules. If it's likely a tier one carrier will screw over your traffic, just store the important stuff with the tier two carriers...
- AWS is pricey what we way you look at it, and network costs can only go up. Amazon is a prime (!) competitor for streaming and it's a bad idea to put all
your eggs in your competitors basket
- Disney is coming over the hill. They have great content - i mean insanely great. But I bet Disney sucks rocks at hiring network SREs. They will get there eventually but if you want a huge differentiator between you and the House of Mouse, being the one without a spinning egg timer is pretty good - especially as there is no chance you can match their content.
- lkbm 7y ago> and network costs can only go up I would assume they'll go down. Do you mean because traffic will increase, or do you think cost per byte will increase?
- lifeisstillgood 7y agoThe expensive part of any hosted service is the bandwidth out - and at Netflix levels it must be stupid expensive. Even with the sort of deals they must have cut with Amazon, off loading to local caches is going to reduce someone's costs by a helkuva lot And yes. Amazon will happily squeeze them till the pips squeak, so their network costs will only go up. (Even if routers etc push the theoretical price downward)
- mosselman 7y agoWhat Disney content are you referring to? In my mind Disney has Star Wars and movies for children. The only great thing that comes to mind is Pixar, but I am not going to pay monthly for two handfuls of movies. But seeing as you are so enthusiastic about their content, it must be my ignorance. So, again and from a place of interest, what content are you referring to?
- 19870213 7y agoA lot of Marvel content I would presume.
- mosselman 7y agoWhich is also not great.
- jkeuhlen 7y agoI mean, you might not like them but they are among the highest grossing movies of all time.
- mosselman 7y agoI get what you are saying, but I'd find it stupid to pay a set amount per month to see the same movies over and over. Do you really think people will pay to see all of the Avengers movies every month? If yes, then fine, good for Disney. I just find the 'they have better content' line a bit much. I'd rather watch Master of None, Fargo, The Crown and many more quality Netflix than some action here movie that has been cut from the same comic book cloth as the previous one. But that is just a matter of preferences, but to say their content is better based on how good they do in the box office is nonsense.
- stingraycharles 7y agoI think we can all agree here that this segregation of content feels like a step back, and the grandparent asserting that Disney has great content that warrants paying for is controversial in this light. It’s besides the point OP wanted to make.
- lifeisstillgood 7y agoI am sorry that you don't like their content, but for what, 95 years Disney has produced decade after decade films that are popular, profitable and proven to be rewatched (and re-paid) decade after decade - films that were made 80 years ago are still bringing in millions - that's what you want for a steaming service.