Netflix claims you don’t really want offline video support

by
in movies on (#M0VY)
story imageNow that Amazon Prime is allowing offline video playback on iOS and Android devices, Netflix needs a better explanation for why it won't do the same. Previously, Netflix has argued that fast, ubiquitous Wi-Fi access would eventually make offline playback irrelevant. But in 2015, on-the-go users still struggle with getting connected, whether it's on a plane with Wi-Fi that's too slow, or in a car where a few hours of streaming on mobile broadband can burn through your data cap.

Unfortunately, Netflix's new excuse is even worse. Speaking to Gizmodo, Netflix Chief Product Officer Neil Hunt argued that offline playback is just too complex for people to handle. He described this as the "Paradox of Choice," explaining that when you give people too many options, they end up not choosing anything at all. Netflix apparently believes offline playback would result in this sort of paralysis. In lieu of crippling users with choice, Hunt said Netflix could install local media servers on airplanes, trains, or hotels, so users can stream without an Internet connection. Can Netflix really install its entire catalog in local servers on every means of public transport? Besides which, Netflix is still talking about things it would like to do in theory, while Amazon is providing a service that's actually useful right now.
Reply 20 comments

Oh I have choices (Score: 0)

by Anonymous Coward on 2015-09-10 14:59 (#M1F3)

Thousands of them. Including music make that hundreds of thousands. What I want is decent access to every tv show, movie and song ever published. I am willing to pay for this. What I currently get is...

Spotify (Score: 1)

by bryan@pipedot.org on 2015-09-10 16:13 (#M1QH)

Spotify allows you to store your favorite music to play when you are offline. The interface to allow offline access is very simplistic and just a simple button in the App - hardly complicated at all.

Re: Spotify (Score: 2, Informative)

by wootery@pipedot.org on 2015-09-14 11:10 (#MCQW)

I believe Spotify also caches whatever you stream, so if you listen to the same song twice, Spotify will only do the download once, saving you (and Spotify, and your ISP) from needless traffic. Google Play Music does the same thing.

I guess even that is just too confusing for Netflix's apparently-moronic customers, huh.

I don't get it (Score: 2, Interesting)

by ticho@pipedot.org on 2015-09-11 12:56 (#M4QQ)

What is it with today's fascination with streaming everything? Few weeks ago, I went on a car trip with some friends, and the music in the car was played entirely from smartphones connected to car audio system via bluetooth, streamed from one music service or another. That is, until the signal got bad, and everyone just sat silently, feeling stupid, because nobody had any music files stored locally.

I know this anecdote calls for a "then I saved the day with my SD card full of mp3s" kind of ending, but there isn't one. I didn't get enough sleep the previous night, and was happy I could doze off without their weird music disturbing me. :)

Re: I don't get it (Score: 3, Insightful)

by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-11 13:19 (#M4TN)

Actually, things have gone backwards in Android land. More and more smartphones are coming WITHOUT microsd card slots. In Android 2.x, a microsd card was necessary for everything. In Android 4.x, the internal storage masquerades as a microsd card, so it's all kinds of hell trying to use your actual microsd card to store apps, app data, and store new files there, the way it seamlessly worked in 2.x. Nothing pisses me off more than telling a program to backup it's setting to microsd card, then having to copy it from internal storage to the actual microsd card, and needing to do the reverse when restoring. Far too much, Android has been going backwards.

This seems to be a result of phone manufacturers wanting to charge through the nose for anyone who wants more than 8GB of internal storage... It's actually difficult to find phones with over 32GB of storage, and a bit difficult to find phones with microsd slots... All too often low-end phones have them (eg. Moto-E), while the more expensive high-end phones do NOT (Moto X), and have less storage space as a result. Meanwhile, a 32GB microsd card costs just $10, far less than the cost of buying a different model of phone with more internal storage space.

Re: I don't get it (Score: 1, Interesting)

by Anonymous Coward on 2015-09-12 13:50 (#M7YJ)

I will not buy a smartphone that does not have an SD card slot. Apple was bad enough charging through the nose for phones, and earlier ipods, based on hard disk size. I would rather buy some chinese knockoff if it comes down to it.

Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 2, Informative)

by wootery@pipedot.org on 2015-09-13 15:57 (#MAKN)

I like that this issue is getting some attention, but there's nothing particularly new here: Netflix have, for some time, given bullshit answers to this question.

And we can be pretty certain that people do want offline playback. Wuaki managed it, and it's now a selling-point for them.

The strangest thing about all this is the way it's happening now. As our Internet connections get faster and faster, and data-caps go up, the question of offline playback is of ever-decreasing importance. This would've meant a lot more to me five years ago than now.

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 1)

by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-14 00:57 (#MBJ5)

As our Internet connections get faster and faster, and data-caps go up, the question of offline playback is of ever-decreasing importance. This would've meant a lot more to me five years ago than now.
Ironically, 5 years ago you could still get an "Unlimited Data" plan from AT&T and Verizon... Today, you can't.
- http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/2013/05/05/pegoraro-unlimited-data-plans/2132895/

And it was only last year that Boost/Virgin quietly switched from unlimited data, to throttled after 2.5GB.
- http://www.phonearena.com/news/Report-Virgin-Mobile-and-Boost-Mobile-to-lower-throttled-data-speeds-starting-in-May_id54094

And T-Mobile just announced they're dropping their heaviest use customers from their unlimited plan.
- http://pipedot.org/K8AY

It seems that prices on mobile data are going UP, not down. That being the case, I've gone with the flow and downgraded to just 500MB and I stay well under that, thanks to wifi. I pay about 30% less, too.

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 1)

by wootery@pipedot.org on 2015-09-14 11:07 (#MCQV)

That's a good point, the 'Unlimited data' plans seem generally to be getting less and less common.

Here in the UK, Three still offer unlimited data, but tethering is forbidden (unlike with their capped plan).

If we ignore the unlimited plans, I think the price-per-gig is generally going down. £30/month can buy you 25GB of 4G (tethering is permitted) with EE. Not a bad broadband substitute if you're travelling or moving house.

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 0)

by Anonymous Coward on 2015-09-18 08:44 (#MTP1)

How do they detect tethering? Use a vpn to bypass dpi?

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 1)

by wootery@pipedot.org on 2015-09-21 23:12 (#N561)

Good question - I'm afraid I have no idea, nor do I know how well it works.

Of course, for some applications, you could avoid tethering by other means. For Netflix, say: play Netflix on your phone using the Android app, point a camera at the phone, and upsize it across to your TV. You'll lose some quality, sure, but I suspect it could be made to work pretty well.

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 2, Informative)

by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-21 23:49 (#N59C)

There are a decent number of phones with microHDMI output.

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 1)

by wootery@pipedot.org on 2015-09-29 16:48 (#NY4A)

True, but as I understand it, not all apps work with HDMI output, especially ones for playing 'premium' (DRM-encumbered) content.

Also, any idea why I can't see your comment when looking at my parent comment?

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 1)

by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-29 19:51 (#NYTN)

Pipecode has always worked that way with direct links. You have to link the last/bottom comment to see the whole chain. It's the polar opposite of /code but it works.

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 1)

by wootery@pipedot.org on 2015-09-29 22:21 (#NZ7M)

Is there any way to change this behaviour?

Pipedot isn't exactly bursting with comments. I have no need to filter any out.

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 1)

by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-29 22:45 (#NZ8J)

How about just linking to the story like #M0VY (with all the comments), instead of directly to a single comment like #MBJ5 ?

Notifications include links to both for easy click-through.

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 0)

by Anonymous Coward on 2015-10-03 11:44 (#PBBY)

Actually, a link next to would be nice. Especially for copy/pasting directly to a comment.

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 0)

by Anonymous Coward on 2015-09-14 10:06 (#MCK1)

It's a way to differentiate

I rarely listen to music at home, just radio stations (which play music)

However on the move I often listen. On today's train the signal is poor and intermittent. Tonight's boat will have wifi apparently, not convinced it will be much good off shore. Tomorrow I'll be data roaming in the Netherlands in the morning before a flight to Denmark in the evening which will have wifi albeit with in air caveats. Tuesday night I'm on a flight to Doha and then onto Singapore, which sometimes has phone signal but nothing stream able.

Through this it means a lot of playing from my own local music library and a couple of downloaded films. We do have Netflix - was watching it last night at home, but being able to watch a film on a plane is an important feature.

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 1)

by wootery@pipedot.org on 2015-09-14 11:11 (#MCQX)

Sure. I'm not sure if you're supporting my points or disagreeing, but yes, you've given some good examples of when offline playback is (and, for the foreseeable future, will continue to be) the only real option.

Re: Good to see coverage, but nothing really new (Score: 0)

by Anonymous Coward on 2015-09-30 10:11 (#P0NJ)

Important? Try essential. If you have to take regular 3hr bus trips it just makes the time fly. Imagine streaming content on a bus trip. I would blow my mobile data plan in no time flat.