« New York Times & Rotten Tomatoes Add Netflix "Add" & "Watch" Links | Main | Netflix New Releases for February 24th, 2009 »

Comments

Jeff from Knowzy

No. Not with their current selection.

Every time I'm in a streaming mood (usually when I'm on the road) I have trouble finding something I want to watch. I usually settle on sitcom reruns and only rarely find a movie I'm interested in.

Without new releases, Watch Now is a nice bonus that I use occasionally but not something I would pay extra for or subscribe to on a standalone basis.

MCW

The "Starz Play Only" plan costs $7.99 a month, which I think is overpriced due to how much of the streams available are not Starz branded.

If there was an "All Streaming Plan" that included Starz Play, then I would expect it to cost $7.99 a month. That seems reasonable to me.

I wouldn't want to be on that plan only, because there are times when the streams just do not cooperate (Watch the Back to the Future streams - especially the 3rd film... pieces of crap), and I would be extremely angry to be paying for that crap.

Netflix just doesn't do a good enough job of testing their stuff, so I don't trust them enough to say they should start a stream only plan. It will only make people mad.

susan dennis

I would absolutely subscribe to a streaming only plan. Right now I only have 5 movies in my non-streaming Q and really don't care that much about any of them. I had the cheapest possible plan until they offered streaming and I had to upgrade. At this point I consider the DVD in the mail an unnecessary expense.


MCW

Oh, and I meant to watch the BTTF 3rd film on your Roku player, and you'll instantly see what I'm referring to.

banter

Not yet. Netflix streaming isn't there yet altho I have dropped from 3 at a time to 1. I love my Roku player.

Chad

No. First and foremost, they need to concentrate on making all the streaming titles available in their original aspect ratio. I've noticed quite a few widescreen films (such as "March of the Penguins" and "Misery") that only have the pan & scan version available. Not acceptable.

Darin

I would absolutely subscribe to a streaming only plan, even in its current form. I find plenty of older titles that I enjoy and several TV programs sans commercials. We watch our netflix/dvs on our computer as we don't have a TV or cable/satellite, etc.

As a side note, we have found Redbox much more convenient for our non-streaming needs (read: new releases) than waiting for a Netflix dvd to arrive in the mail. Often we receive our Netflix dvd in the mail and it sits on the counter for two weeks before we have time to watch it. Thus, Redbox is better suited to our impulsive watching habits when it comes to new releases. Also, on long roadtrips we can grab a Redbox before we take off and drop it off in a Redbox anywhere along our route. Can't do that with Netflix!

Robert

I would swap to a streaming only account TODAY. My DVDs tend to sit unwatched for a few months, then I send them back. My Roku, on the other hand, gets used several times every week. The flaw of ordering DVDs for me is that if you aren't in the mood to watch the movie you have, it may sit for a long time before I get in the mood to watch it. WIth streaming, I can watch something else in the mean time.

Jax Maxton

I would pay for a streaming only service, but it would have to at least be competitivly priced compared to the 1 out at a time, about $5-$6. Otherwise, the streaming only is a downgrade from what I have now.

K

I would NOT pay for a streaming only service.

I have great difficulty watching streaming content from Netflix. There are frequent buffering problems.

Not an issue w/ Hulu, etc.....so I presume it is a Netflix issue.

Tino

The Starz quality over a computer is garbage, almost unwatchable compared to a DVD. No thanks to an all-streaming plan.

As long as they are available on DVD, I'd give up the streaming entirely. I'll wait a day to receive something rather than watch it in low-res.

Andrew

I have a Roku. It is odd that I want to watch the movies in my instant queue less than those in my mail queue, but it seems like I often get more excited for the instant movies and sometimes watch them more often. This may have something to do with finding the movie you are in the mood to watch. (This has been a downside of Netflix vs Blockbuster from the start.)
I think I would pay for an instant only subscription in its current form for maybe $5-$10 / month.

Becky

No. I like DVD features, like optional captions, picture clarity, frame-by-frame rewind and fast-forward, freeze-frame, zoom, and slo-mo.

I like my Roku for days when a DVD doesn't come, titles that are not on DVD yet, or TV shows.

Steve

The main problem I have with the Roku box is buffering issues during peak internet usage times in my area (5-9pm). This is clearly an issue with my internet provider (Time Warner) and not Netflix, but if I'm going to consider paying for a streaming service it can't have major buffering issues, period. I'm not sure how Netflix can solve this aside from continual development of more efficient streaming tech.

What I would pay for is a Netflix box/software that lets you download full DVD/Blu-Ray quality files for local playback. Run it just like the mail service (3-out plan lets you download 3 movies for playback at once) and have the boxes use a Bittorrent client to spread out the bandwidth cost. Removes snail mail from the equation entirely. Plus, when your internet goes down you've got access to your local downloads.

Del

I want them both, even though I have three times as much in WIN queue than my DVD queue.

banter

"This is clearly an issue with my internet provider (Time Warner)"

Interesting...I have TW in Dallas and its perfectly fine, 4 dots. Maybe its just the area?

PLB

I'm not the average NetFlix customer. I subscribe to NetFlix largely for its library of opera DVDs. If I only wanted new releases I would just use RedBox - indeed I often do use RedBox for the latest Batman or Hulk movies. But RedBox will never have a copy of Ernani, nor will Watch Instantly I suspect. So I will always subscribe to NetFlix - the power of the big library.

I just got a new 720 HD projector. I tried it on a NetFlix/Roku HD feature (Heroes). The picture is really, really good. It is better than that of any DVD I have ever seen. If NetFlix recodes their Watch Instantly library to HD, then the offerings on streaming will be of higher quality than their offerings in mail out DVDs. That is except for sound of course.

Blu-ray presumably will be better yet for those with 1080 projectors. But my 720 HD projector (the biggest seller at 720) cost $670. The biggest selling 1080 project is about $2,300 - nearly three and a half times as much. That price difference will likely continue.

I went with the cheaper 720 projector because it should be better than a 1080 projector on NetFlix 720 HD.

I will always want NetFlix mailed DVDs (for the opera) but let's face it, DVDs are an old fashion format. They are: analog and 480i. Broadcasters are converting to digital this year and the majority of new broadcast network shows are in 1080i HD or 720p HD.

Kenny

Depends on price and selection. With their current selection, I might if it was $5/mo. I use the Instant Watch more than the DVD service (I have 1 at a time now).

If their selection was better (more current shows, better movie selection, etc), I'd be willing to pay as much as $10 (if new releases were there, I'd go $15 or more).


It'll never work

Hell no! Quality and choice of streaming content sucks. Who knows, streaming over the wire may *NEVER* work.

Jake Coughlin

The only way I'd pay for a streaming-only subscription is if their streaming titles were SIGNIFICANTLY improved. They need to add some popular titles to Watch Instantly and FAST!

Kenny

For those who say they need to improve their selection quality... are you only interested in New Release? I have nearly 400 titles in my Instant Queue.


Wayno

Since Microsoft's "Silverlight" software is discriminatory against those of us hard-of-hearing/deaf folks (i.e. they DELIBERATELY strip off the closed captioning) I'd not pay a dime.

I am sorry I have the ROKU box. It is absolutely worthless to me.

Wayno

dAVe

Right now for my DVDsByMail I depend on two groups of people, NetFlix Shipping Center & USPostOffice, and the time it takes to physically pass the media back and forth.

The internet streaming method is much more complicated and convoluted. I love the Roku and I really enjoy the HD content streams but there is no way in the long term foreseeable future I'd even entertain the thought of depending on CDNs,Level3,ISPs to deliver the 8-12 hours per week of video viewing.

Also, I second my vote not wanting to lose of all the DVD extra content & commentary as well as the flexibility the machines have at playback.

Jared

No, I would want HiDef Quality. A cheaper plan, and some sort of guarantee that if my Xbox burns out from over use that they would reimburse me for any damages. They keep changing things and it just confuses everyone. I'd rather just drop Netflix and go to my local Red Box.

kh

I'd pay them $50 a month if they'd also provide me with a broadband internet connection so I wouldn't have to do business with Comcast any more.

deaf dude

I need the closed captioning

Jeremy Church

I have thought about picking up a Roku so I can watch some of the streaming stuff. My bluray movies haven't been making it to the house in a watchable state since december so I am thinking about another way to get good content. I wouldn't pay extra or anything though.

Kris

Only if I can get captions or subtitles on the Roku.

We live in a small apartment, and I need them when I watch "schlock" horror and suspense movies late at night after my husband goes to bed. (B movies aren't his cup of tea.)

All the screaming and monster noises and car crashes and suspense music would wake him up if I couldn't keep the sound turned down and use captions or subtitles, as I do with DVDs or movies I've recorded on the DVR.

Who needs a grumpy husband?

Nick

I've already downgraded to the unlimited one-dvd-at-a-time plan at $8.99 ($9.01 after tax). This includes the ENTIRE streaming Netflix catalogue.

Unless there was a huge majority of Netflix's DVD catalogue available for streaming, I can't justify spending even half ($4.99) if I want least one "new" or "hard to find" during the month ($4.99 at the blockbuster).

KH,

I would switch to a Verizon drop loop DSL (29.99 for 3Mbps - good enough for Netflix streaming) and stick with the rabit ears. Between Netflix streaming
TV shows, Hulu and Joost (plus the occasional iTunes purchase) that's plenty of content to consume for FREE.

Edward R Murrow

"Between Netflix streaming TV shows, Hulu and Joost (plus the occasional iTunes purchase) that's plenty of content to consume for FREE."

All that stuff is cool for us computer experts. It's a complete niche market for 99% of the world. Can you imagine a 'civilian' trying to get Netflix streaming, Hulu and Joost content to their big screen?

Like Ray Arnold (Samuel L. Jackson) says in Jurassic Park, "PLEASE! GODAMMIT! I hate this hacker crap!"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107290/quotes

kh

Nick - I'd love to, but a couple problems with that - I live in Maine, Fairpoint has taken over so I can't get anything wired from Verizon. I can actually get a fiber optic connection where I live (used to be FIOS when it was Verizon), but only if I also get phone service from Fairpoint which I don't need, so it would end up costing probably $80 a month.

Kodai

Since my ISP caps the amount I can d/l I wouldn't even consider a streaming only service.

I signed up so I could get DVDs in the mail even before teh streaming service started. That's the service I want.

ZeroCorpse

I love the quality on my Roku player (not so much the 360 and Laptop, but they're passable). However, I would not pay for streaming-only, because I like a wide variety of films and it's just not likely that we'll see EVERYTHING end up in the streaming video library in a timely manner.

I love Netflix because they get the job done, they're fast, and they're reasonably-priced. Maybe I'd consider Redbox, but since they don't exist within 300 miles of where I live, it's not an option (it doesn't sound like as good a deal, either... Plus I'd have to drive to and from the location of the vending machine, and that's something Netflix saves me from having to do.)

Really, anyone considering streaming-only is smart to just get the one DVD + unlimited streaming plan. It's a good price and you get that DVD in the mail, so you can grab a new release or hard-to-find title.

bill

i would subscribe to an all instant account if all of your movies/programs were instantly available

CopaceticOpus

I think the real trouble is that offering a full catalog of new releases and popular films over streaming would cost Netflix as much or more than their current offerings. Piggybacking streaming onto the mail service is not a long term solution if they expect the streaming service to eventually become dominant.

If they separated out the cost of streaming, 90% of their customers would drop it, and they could no longer afford to do it. Despite Reed Hasting's positive public face, I bet they are very concerned about this.

The biggest danger for the long term to Netflix is they become irrelevant. Why does Sony, for example, need to use Netflix, if they can stream movies on their own, and if players such as Roku can connect directly to Sony? The only thing Netflix could offer would be simplified billing and a common interface for various video providers. Will that be enough? Or will Netflix's gateway to streaming become as pointless as AOL's gateway to the web?

Mr Nethead

I never use Watch Instantly because the movies don't have captions/subtitles. I know Netflix is working on that, but I wish they'd hurry up. :P

Based on some of the other comments, it seems like I'm not alone. It's pretty sad how most streaming services and TV networks have completely ignored the needs of the deaf and hard of hearing when it comes to online content.

I've had people ask me why I don't just turn up the volume. (I'm hard of hearing, not deaf.) Well, the music in movies and shows is waaaaay louder than the dialog so cranking the volume would make for some rather uncomfortable viewing.

Anyway, there are a lot of people out there just like me and we need our captions!

Tyler

On my Xbox, I've found Netflix to be an infinitely valuable service. Most of my favorite movies are available in their Play Instantly library, which is extremely convenient. Besides, all the movies I want them to mail to me have several weeks of wait before I get them.

If there was even a slight decrease in price, I would definitely pay for a streaming only account.

Peyton

I agree with Steve (posted Feb. 20) that my biggest problem with streaming is buffering issues during peak viewing time (evenings)and I too hope someday Netflix (or some company) can come up with a way around this...in fact the company that comes up with a way to pre-download content for peak viewing would be the one I would pay for. Perhaps some of the partnerships need to be between content providers and content delivery methods, or storage devices. In the meantime I value the DVD's as much as the streaming.

Daryl

We use our Roku box all the time. ALL the time. However, the selection is very limited. The combination of having new releases mailed to us, plus having lots of back catalog available on streaming is good.

Hopefully NetFlix could get all their DVDs onto the stream. If then, I could see using streaming only. Otherwise, I'd still straddle the two services.

And price? I would think the streaming service by itself (with the existing streaming catalog) should be around $5 a month. With the full catalog, I'd definitely pay $18 (what I pay now for both).

Also a quick note: HD streaming on the Roku works surprisingly well. How is this possible? Our connection is just a regular DSL, but we can stream HD with no breaks in the movie.

Discostar

I would sign up for a streaming only plan if they had more new releases. Actually, if they just had MORE or everything on streaming. Right now, there are a lot of titles that NetFlix just doesn't stream, for one reason or another. I think they would greatly have to step up the streaming content library before they can even think about offering a streaming only plan.

Maybe a 60% - 70% library conversion with more new releases.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Sponsors

Third-Party Netflix Sites