Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


ajw



1447 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 138


Topic # 242363 24-Oct-2018 17:02
Send private message quote this post

Two new streaming services launching before Christmas.

 

https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/108014564/two-new-streaming-services-set-for-new-zealand-debut-later-this-year


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
 1 | 2
711 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 159


  Reply # 2113439 24-Oct-2018 19:47
Send private message quote this post

I'm sure dozens of people will join them, will be interesting to see how big the catalogue of either is.


13912 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2532

Trusted

  Reply # 2113471 24-Oct-2018 20:43
Send private message quote this post

Looks interesting. Sign of the times methinks. I used to have a wallet to hold lots of notes, now I have one to hold lots of cards. Now I need one to hold lots of SVOD details.

 
 
 
 


IcI

824 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 174

Trusted

  Reply # 2113547 24-Oct-2018 23:05
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

For those who prefer not t endure the Stuff website:

 

AMC Networks have announced that they are bringing their Sundance Now and Shudder platforms to our shores.

 

Sundance Now focuses on independent dramas, documentaries and foreign-language titles, while Shudder is aimed at fans of thriller, suspense and horror content. 

 

Currently available in the US, Canada, the UK, Ireland, Germany and Austria, Sundance Now's slate includes Australian drama Dead Lucky(featuring New Zealand-based Mulan actor Yoson An), as well as cult movies like HeathersHoly Rollers and Blue is the Warmest Colour, while Shudder features films like Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds and Psycho, the original Halloween and much-talked about 2017 horror Revenge


897 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 340

Subscriber

  Reply # 2113588 25-Oct-2018 08:36
8 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

The media giants still don't seem to get it - by continuing to fracture the streaming eco-system and force people back to requiring multiple providers and dedicated services just to get the 3-4 programs they actually want to watch, we will see a return to rife piracy again. The statistics already seem to show that this is happening.

 

 

 

We are seeing the old Cable TV model distributed via the internet. Companies need to accept that for most people, most of their content is filler and if they want to combat piracy and ensure people are paying for their content it needs to be available as widely and as easily as possible and not locked to yet another specific streaming service.

 

 





.

5110 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1224

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2113594 25-Oct-2018 08:44
Send private message quote this post

It's going to depend on their original content.  I tend to join a service to watch something specifically available on that service.  Once that's finished I don't tend to stick around.  


13912 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2532

Trusted

  Reply # 2113595 25-Oct-2018 08:45
Send private message quote this post

Item:

 

The media giants still don't seem to get it - by continuing to fracture the streaming eco-system and force people back to requiring multiple providers and dedicated services just to get the 3-4 programs they actually want to watch, we will see a return to rife piracy again. The statistics already seem to show that this is happening.

 

 

 

We are seeing the old Cable TV model distributed via the internet. Companies need to accept that for most people, most of their content is filler and if they want to combat piracy and ensure people are paying for their content it needs to be available as widely and as easily as possible and not locked to yet another specific streaming service.

 

 

 

 

What do you suggest?. If the source was only the media giants, there will only be a couple or three services. No Netflix, no Lightbox, nothing else. Would they charge the same as Netflix per month? That would be cheap if it had everything that media giant owned, so you would expect it will be more like $25, $35, $45. There are two or three media giants, so double or triple that, and still a great buy given the content size, and all of the older content.

 

Then look at sports. Rugbypass, F1Pass, Tennispass and so on

 

The theme was boo to Sky's "monopoly". We want competition and get with the times tech wise. That has happened, here we are


5110 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1224

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2113598 25-Oct-2018 08:51
Send private message quote this post

Item:

 

The statistics already seem to show that this is happening.

 

 

Source?

 

Item:

 

force people back to requiring multiple providers and dedicated services just to get the 3-4 programs they actually want to watch

 

 

Personally I don't mind having multiple services as long as my device is capable of running all those services, and can switch between them quickly.  That's part of why I went with an LG TV running WebOS.  The WebOS interface is much faster to navigate and switch between apps than Android TV (in my experience) or any other proprietary smart TV OS I've used.  In a normal evening I switch between Netflix/Lightbox/YouTube several times and it feels no different/slower than just flicking the channel up/down button on Live TV.  

 

Again a service needs to have something specific that I want in order to subscribe to it, but once I'm subscribed I am fine with having 3, 4, 5+ services as long as I can get around them quickly.  What Apple has done with their "SSO" (which is really just cached credentials from what I can tell) is a great step in solving the multi-service model, but again locks you into a specific platform.  


897 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 340

Subscriber

  Reply # 2113602 25-Oct-2018 09:02
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

 

 

 

What do you suggest?. If the source was only the media giants, there will only be a couple or three services. No Netflix, no Lightbox, nothing else. Would they charge the same as Netflix per month? That would be cheap if it had everything that media giant owned, so you would expect it will be more like $25, $35, $45. There are two or three media giants, so double or triple that, and still a great buy given the content size, and all of the older content.

 

Then look at sports. Rugbypass, F1Pass, Tennispass and so on

 

The theme was boo to Sky's "monopoly". We want competition and get with the times tech wise. That has happened, here we are

 

 

 

 

In order to stop piracy being more attractive, I guess the end goal would be:

 

1) Abolishment of GeoBlocking - all content available on the same platform/provider/"channel" at roughly the same time (technical logistics notwithstanding)

 

2) Content producers more willing to provide their content through leading partners rather than trying to lock people in to their own channel

 

3) Greater granularity of service/ability to stream "bite-size": I don't want to sign up to a specific streamer to watch say, 3 episodes of 1 show: You should be able to pay for individual episodes where it makes financial sense to do so.

 

4) No ads on any "premium" paid streaming service. Ever.

 

 

 

I agree with you and your examples - we have been making excellent progress. That said, the way we seem to be heading now (as indicated by the above) is towards more and more specific and exclusive streaming services.

 

It won't be long before a provider offers their Movie stream for $15, their Sci-Fi Stream for $10, their Indie Stream for $5, Baseball and Water Polo live for $12 and suddenly you have 5-6 services with 2-3 "channels" each and you are paying $100+ a month again to watch 2-3 hours of specific content a week. Then the un-skippable ads creep back in and suddenly everyone is up in arms about the "filthy pirates" once more...

 

I always like Gabe Newell's take from way back in 2011:

 

"We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem," he said. "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."





.

897 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 340

Subscriber

  Reply # 2113604 25-Oct-2018 09:05
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post
5110 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1224

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2113606 25-Oct-2018 09:07
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

Item:

 

I always like Gabe Newell's take from way back in 2011:

 

"We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem," he said. "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."

 

 

Maybe in America or somewhere else wherethe media is reasonably priced and we don't pay a stupid location tax like we do in NZ - for no reason at all.  If I had the choice of a $20 USD 4K Blu-ray and a 4K MKV I'd go with the Blu-ray.  If I have the choice of a $50NZD 4K Blu-ray and a 4K MKV I'm going with the MKV.  


13912 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2532

Trusted

  Reply # 2113609 25-Oct-2018 09:16
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

Item:

 

 

 

 

 

In order to stop piracy being more attractive, I guess the end goal would be:

 

1) Abolishment of GeoBlocking - all content available on the same platform/provider/"channel" at roughly the same time (technical logistics notwithstanding)

 

2) Content producers more willing to provide their content through leading partners rather than trying to lock people in to their own channel

 

3) Greater granularity of service/ability to stream "bite-size": I don't want to sign up to a specific streamer to watch say, 3 episodes of 1 show: You should be able to pay for individual episodes where it makes financial sense to do so.

 

4) No ads on any "premium" paid streaming service. Ever.

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Good idea, but the owner needs to be recieving the same revenue as they do now. That should be ok.

 

2. The issue is there are already leading partners. Netflix, Amazon, Sky, Hulu and so on. If I wanted to watch two series, and each is on a different leading partner, thats what we have now

 

3. Bite size is good, but many who will pay $20 for unlimited won't pay $1-95 for one EP

 

4. Good idea


3690 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1393

Subscriber

  Reply # 2113624 25-Oct-2018 09:48
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

Urgh.... yawn!!

 

Until all the providers allow me to:

 

- consume content through a single platform of my choosing

 

- centralise account management through some sort of standard

 

- remove stupid device limits and such that limit playback

 

- remove stupid geo-restrictions

 

- and allow offline media to be stored

 

...Sickrage & Radarr will continue to be where I get my media from.


897 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 340

Subscriber

  Reply # 2116805 30-Oct-2018 13:21
Send private message quote this post

A new article on Engadget which covers my points above in more detail:

 

 

 

https://www.engadget.com/2018/10/29/streaming-exclusives-netflix-pray-for-my-wallet/

 

 





.

5270 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1143

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 2116859 30-Oct-2018 14:16
2 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

Item:

 

The media giants still don't seem to get it - by continuing to fracture the streaming eco-system and force people back to requiring multiple providers and dedicated services just to get the 3-4 programs they actually want to watch, we will see a return to rife piracy again. The statistics already seem to show that this is happening.

 

We are seeing the old Cable TV model distributed via the internet. Companies need to accept that for most people, most of their content is filler and if they want to combat piracy and ensure people are paying for their content it needs to be available as widely and as easily as possible and not locked to yet another specific streaming service.

 



True! This goes right back to downloading songs.....or recording songs onto tape and giving them to friends....like back in the 70s.

No one likes to pay money for "filler".....and I wish I had $1 for every $20 album I bought back in the day where there were only one or two good songs and the rest never got more than one hearing.

In the end, MP3 files solved that problem. Bit torrent did the same for TV - overcoming geographic marketing blockages and aggregating content into one convenient location for access.

This is one example where "the market" fails. People don't want to have to sift through loads of stuff they don't want to get to the stuff they do want. They just won'[t do it. Paying isn't the issue. It's the TIME you could waste having to find it all. You don't get paid anything for wasting time on that scale.





____________________________________________________
I'm on a high fibre diet. 

 

High fibre diet


1422 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 232


  Reply # 2116929 30-Oct-2018 15:50
Send private message quote this post

I’ll just change providers every month.

If something’s weekly, wait until I know last one will play month of subscription, and watch series in a month.

So will be no greater cost then before, just more limited choices in a month.

I see Disney is pulling Marvel, etc from Netflix, they can use current characters but no new ones.
Disney is going to hold onto their content for their own service.

If. CBS goes same way hope can still get Star Trek in HDR.

 1 | 2
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Geekzone Live »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.