Foxtel's Netflix Competitor Fails To Launch - Gizmodo Australia
Back in the wild promising days of September 2013 our good friends at Foxtel announced they were launching an exciting new product and rather strongly hinting that it may well be the Aussie answer to Netflix. If the intervening time has dulled your memory of this then you can always have a quick look at this wonderful analysis of the announcement right here.
Apparently this less than revolutionary service was to be up by the end of 2013, but here we are nearing the end of January and there is still no sign. The Presto website has next to no information but the Australian Financial Review apparently reported it was due to "software issues". I would link it for you but the story is lurking behind a paywall and frankly Foxtel costs too much as it is.
I'm guessing the software issues related to the fact that they could not guarantee a smooth enough service for the rather steep asking price, and potentially couldn't nail down exclusive streaming rights for much of the content.
Really the main purpose of this move by Foxtel is to ensure that Netflix and Hulu are not able to officially provide their services to the ever growing contingent of Australian subscribers. After all, if Foxtel has the all the streaming rights then any new players in the Aussie market would probably have to pay through the nose to access the content or simply will not be able to compete with the selection.
So at the end of the day we are still left with sub par offerings when it comes to on-demand content, a fact that is unlikely to change when Presto finally manages to launch.
From movie reviews to geek news, I aim to cover any subject with a fresh approach and honest opinion Be sure to follow me at www.facebook.com/rufusreviews or twitter.com/RufusReviews to keep up to date!
Showing posts with label netflix. Show all posts
Showing posts with label netflix. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Monday, November 11, 2013
What Can You Watch On Your Xbox One In Australia?
Xbox One Isn't About To Revolutionise TV In Australia - Gizmodo Australia
Ahh, remember the heady days of May 2013 when Xbox One was announced and the focus was rather strong. If not, here is a quick reminder.
So, how about that TV functionality then. Well with the imminent arrival of these shiny new black boxed Microsoft has revealed what each region can expect. So what is in it for us Australians I hear you ask. Well, hold on to your hats people and get ready...
Not much really. We get the following:
- Crackle (I thought this was US only, turns out it is available in Australia with a lot less content of course)
- Machinima (wooo, direct access to a YouTube channel)
- MUZU TV (a music video service to compete with Sony's Vidzone)
- Network 10's Tenplay (Catch up service for the 10 network - has a lot of stuff in it's list, some of which have actual episodes you can watch)
- Quickflix (Like Netflix but double the cost for a tiny fraction of the content)
- SBS On Demand (SBS Catch up, has good stuff occasionally but not much content)
- TED (see Machinima)
- Twitch (good if you like watching other people play games)
And that is it. There has already been quite a stink due to the ABC iView app not making the transition from 360 to the new beast which is quite a shame since that is the best streaming service available in Australia. The Foxtel service for 360 is also a notable omission, but it's Foxtel so who cares.
Of course North America gets over double the content (and probably even more in the near future) mainly because every service is already available there in other formats.
I am sure setting up a VPN and telling Microsoft you live in the US will unlock more content for you, but you'll still be missing out on iView.
Hopefully we'll get details of the PS4 services available at launch pretty soon. As soon as it is available I will do a full comparison.
Ahh, remember the heady days of May 2013 when Xbox One was announced and the focus was rather strong. If not, here is a quick reminder.
So, how about that TV functionality then. Well with the imminent arrival of these shiny new black boxed Microsoft has revealed what each region can expect. So what is in it for us Australians I hear you ask. Well, hold on to your hats people and get ready...
Not much really. We get the following:
- Crackle (I thought this was US only, turns out it is available in Australia with a lot less content of course)
- Machinima (wooo, direct access to a YouTube channel)
- MUZU TV (a music video service to compete with Sony's Vidzone)
- Network 10's Tenplay (Catch up service for the 10 network - has a lot of stuff in it's list, some of which have actual episodes you can watch)
- Quickflix (Like Netflix but double the cost for a tiny fraction of the content)
- SBS On Demand (SBS Catch up, has good stuff occasionally but not much content)
- TED (see Machinima)
- Twitch (good if you like watching other people play games)
And that is it. There has already been quite a stink due to the ABC iView app not making the transition from 360 to the new beast which is quite a shame since that is the best streaming service available in Australia. The Foxtel service for 360 is also a notable omission, but it's Foxtel so who cares.
Of course North America gets over double the content (and probably even more in the near future) mainly because every service is already available there in other formats.
I am sure setting up a VPN and telling Microsoft you live in the US will unlock more content for you, but you'll still be missing out on iView.
Hopefully we'll get details of the PS4 services available at launch pretty soon. As soon as it is available I will do a full comparison.
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Arrrr-stralians. Are We Now Hooked On Piracy?
Cheap, legal options wouldn’t stop Australians pirating - Delimiter
A new survey by Essential Research has been conducted on Australians and our filthy downloading habits. The results, which I am surprised haven't been grabbed by the anti-piracy lobby and waved from the nearest mountain top, show that if given cheap and equal access to content 20% of respondents who currently pirate would still continue to download copyright infringing content.
Just think about that for a moment. Look past the attention grabbing headline of the source story and consider that from the sample group 80% would consider using cheaper paid services if they were available. That is impressive and certainly shows quite a shift from what has long been assumed as the norm.
There is no way to guarantee 0% piracy. Even in the USA, home of Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go and a plethora of inexpensive cable TV channels and streaming services there still exists a contingent of dedicated downloaders who will NEVER pay for content. And if they were never going to pay then there is no lost sale because of them.
Another interesting little snippet in the survey is one sentence stating "Downloading from the internet has dropped somewhat since it was last measured in May 2012". A sizeable chunk of this would be because music and games now have the sort of services that can compete with piracy with convenience. iTunes started it all when the music industry was bemoaning lost sales due to services like Napster and Kazaa. Services like Rdio and Spotify now offer millions of songs on demand through free, advertising supported, models. Steam has revolutionised how PC games are sold and helped push acceptance of purchasing of digital content through other services such as Xbox Live and the Playstation Network.
All this has evolved after someone stood up and decided to change the status quo, who decided to provide something to the consumer that offers convenience. If the movie and TV rights holders expect people to stop downloading illicitly then they need someone to step up and provide the services, and then support it!
If you build it, they will come. Just don't expect everyone.
A new survey by Essential Research has been conducted on Australians and our filthy downloading habits. The results, which I am surprised haven't been grabbed by the anti-piracy lobby and waved from the nearest mountain top, show that if given cheap and equal access to content 20% of respondents who currently pirate would still continue to download copyright infringing content.
Just think about that for a moment. Look past the attention grabbing headline of the source story and consider that from the sample group 80% would consider using cheaper paid services if they were available. That is impressive and certainly shows quite a shift from what has long been assumed as the norm.
There is no way to guarantee 0% piracy. Even in the USA, home of Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go and a plethora of inexpensive cable TV channels and streaming services there still exists a contingent of dedicated downloaders who will NEVER pay for content. And if they were never going to pay then there is no lost sale because of them.
Another interesting little snippet in the survey is one sentence stating "Downloading from the internet has dropped somewhat since it was last measured in May 2012". A sizeable chunk of this would be because music and games now have the sort of services that can compete with piracy with convenience. iTunes started it all when the music industry was bemoaning lost sales due to services like Napster and Kazaa. Services like Rdio and Spotify now offer millions of songs on demand through free, advertising supported, models. Steam has revolutionised how PC games are sold and helped push acceptance of purchasing of digital content through other services such as Xbox Live and the Playstation Network.
All this has evolved after someone stood up and decided to change the status quo, who decided to provide something to the consumer that offers convenience. If the movie and TV rights holders expect people to stop downloading illicitly then they need someone to step up and provide the services, and then support it!
If you build it, they will come. Just don't expect everyone.
Monday, September 23, 2013
Foxtel Announces Its Own "Netflix Style" Service
Foxtel Outs Its Own Netflix-Style Movie Streaming Service - Gizmodo Australia
Foxtel today announce a new streaming service called Presto in what appears, at first glance anyways, an attempt to preempt any attempt of services like Netflix to get into the Australian market. So are they going about it the right way?
Hell no!
First up is the cost. The going price is $24.99 a month which will give you access to Foxtel's seven movie channels and on-demand titles. First up it is possible to set up access to Netflix and Hulu through a paid DNS service and still have change from $25 but there are a couple of other items not mentioned in the story above.
According to Tech World the bulk of the streaming will be mirroring the normal Foxtel broadcast, without the benefit of the IQ box, which means if there is a movie you want to watch you better be ready to watch it at the scheduled time. Additionally they mention that the on-demand content will require further cost per movie you want to watch.
So not so much a Netflix style service, more a limited (and still overpriced) Foxtel style service. Yet again Australians are expected to pay more for a vastly inferior service.
Foxtel today announce a new streaming service called Presto in what appears, at first glance anyways, an attempt to preempt any attempt of services like Netflix to get into the Australian market. So are they going about it the right way?
Hell no!
First up is the cost. The going price is $24.99 a month which will give you access to Foxtel's seven movie channels and on-demand titles. First up it is possible to set up access to Netflix and Hulu through a paid DNS service and still have change from $25 but there are a couple of other items not mentioned in the story above.
According to Tech World the bulk of the streaming will be mirroring the normal Foxtel broadcast, without the benefit of the IQ box, which means if there is a movie you want to watch you better be ready to watch it at the scheduled time. Additionally they mention that the on-demand content will require further cost per movie you want to watch.
So not so much a Netflix style service, more a limited (and still overpriced) Foxtel style service. Yet again Australians are expected to pay more for a vastly inferior service.
Monday, September 16, 2013
Netflix Is More Popular Than Piracy Because Piracy
For a while now Netflix traffic has been exceeding bittorrent traffic in North America and showing it is possible to compete with free. A principle reason is that it provides a service at a decent price that is easier than piracy, but could there be something else.
At the launch of Netflix Netherlands the head of content acquisition Kelly Merryman has come right out and said they look at the most popular targets for piracy and then see if they can acquire the rights. Obviously there are some shows that the current right holders don't want to share with anybody else *cough* Game Of Thrones *\cough * but the sheer popularity of the service and its impact on piracy on its home turf shows they are onto something.
Of course for markets where Netflix is not available it really is a moot point, hence why shows like the aforementioned Game Of Thrones and Breaking Bad are downloaded mercilessly in Australia.
With content for Australia being either locked up in exclusivity deals or simply not being made available what can you do?
I'll just leave this here.
Labels:
australia,
breaking bad,
game of thrones,
netflix,
news,
opinion,
piracy
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
Telstra Wants To Filter Out Pirates, Needs Pirates To Test It's System
Telstra Kicking Off Voluntary Filter Trials, Seeking Volunteers - Gizmodo Australia
Telstra is kicking off trials of its new deep packet inspection set up aimed at throttling bittorrent traffic through its network to combat piracy. I guess it sounds great to commercial partners however there may just be a few points they haven't fully considered...
Not all bittorrent style traffic is piracy.
Bittorrent uses a peer to peer (p2p) network which means that large files can be shared with a large number of people in such a way that you can download parts of the file from anybody else connected to it. The knock on effect means that money can be saved by reducing, or even eliminating, the need to have a large server setup to host files and send them out on demand. While this makes it a very efficient way to share the latest hollywood blockbuster it also means that a number of companies use this same technique to send out large updates and even to communicate between clients. Prime examples include Blizzard with World of Warcraft and the Call of Duty franchise.
The Humble Indie Bundle, a very popular charity service, also prefers users to make use of bittorrent links since that saves them considerable amounts of server space meaning more money can go to charity.
Open source and freeware programs are also big on p2p distribution. Alternative operating system Linux is arguably the most shared legal download via bittorrent and there are many other applications and games where the developer is not getting any income from their work for the pure reason that they want to share their software with the world. Does Telstra expect these developers to pay for server space so they can continue to distribute their software?
Most bittorrent clients have an option to encrypt traffic.
Simply this means with a click of a tick box the p2p traffic being sent by your client looks like normal internet data. You see this isn't the first time an ISP has tried to limit bittorrent traffic so, funnily enough, there are quite sophisticated methods that can get around this kind of filtering which ultimately make this kind of restriction a pointless exercise and a waste of money.
Not all piracy is via bittorrent.
With all the focus bittorrent receives you'd be hard pressed to think anything else existed. The ease of use has made it a very popular method for piracy, but it has also made it the biggest target. It is also the easiest to monitor. Of course prior to the rise of p2p there were private networks, TOR, cloud storage, direct downloads and usenet and, guess what, these options are still in use and, much like p2p, they also have legitimate legal uses.
The only way to effectively test this system is to encourage piracy.
To see if their fancy deep packet inspection will effectively limit p2p traffic on their network Telstra needs a large number of volunteers to actively use p2p and as the aim is to stop piracy then, by extension, they need people who will try to pirate as much as possible. Now if you are a heavy p2p user on the Telstra network, whether for legitimate or copyright infringing purposes, it seems very unlikely that you would actively volunteer to have your internet experience crippled. And if Telstra does manage to get a large contingent of merry pirates testing the limits then they may get in trouble with copyright holders for "encouraging illicit activity" during the trial.
It won't make any difference.
Ultimately should the trial be considered a success and all Telstra users get their packets deeply inspected those who want to download will still download. Any filtering can be bypassed and a quick Google search will give even inexperienced users easy to follow step by step instructions. Data encryption, Virtual Private Networks, even swapping to the freely available Google DNS service can bypass all sorts of restrictions and that is just the tip of the iceberg.
So what can be done?
The fact that the focus of this trial is anti-piracy can easily lead us to the conclusion that it has come at the insistence of copyright owners. These companies need to stop expecting everyone else to police their content and actually have a look at the real problem. The fact that Netflix now accounts for more traffic in North America than bittorrent while other areas without access to cheap content filled services (such as the Asia-Pacific region) show three times as much p2p traffic should be a pretty strong indication of where they should be focusing their efforts. Instead they continue to try to lock content away to maximise profit in multiple markets and expect the consumer to pay hugely varied prices depending on where in the world they live.
Instead of trying to limit the internet try making the content accessible and affordable. It won't stop piracy but it will significantly reduce it.
Telstra is kicking off trials of its new deep packet inspection set up aimed at throttling bittorrent traffic through its network to combat piracy. I guess it sounds great to commercial partners however there may just be a few points they haven't fully considered...
Not all bittorrent style traffic is piracy.
Bittorrent uses a peer to peer (p2p) network which means that large files can be shared with a large number of people in such a way that you can download parts of the file from anybody else connected to it. The knock on effect means that money can be saved by reducing, or even eliminating, the need to have a large server setup to host files and send them out on demand. While this makes it a very efficient way to share the latest hollywood blockbuster it also means that a number of companies use this same technique to send out large updates and even to communicate between clients. Prime examples include Blizzard with World of Warcraft and the Call of Duty franchise.
The Humble Indie Bundle, a very popular charity service, also prefers users to make use of bittorrent links since that saves them considerable amounts of server space meaning more money can go to charity.
Open source and freeware programs are also big on p2p distribution. Alternative operating system Linux is arguably the most shared legal download via bittorrent and there are many other applications and games where the developer is not getting any income from their work for the pure reason that they want to share their software with the world. Does Telstra expect these developers to pay for server space so they can continue to distribute their software?
Most bittorrent clients have an option to encrypt traffic.
Simply this means with a click of a tick box the p2p traffic being sent by your client looks like normal internet data. You see this isn't the first time an ISP has tried to limit bittorrent traffic so, funnily enough, there are quite sophisticated methods that can get around this kind of filtering which ultimately make this kind of restriction a pointless exercise and a waste of money.
Not all piracy is via bittorrent.
With all the focus bittorrent receives you'd be hard pressed to think anything else existed. The ease of use has made it a very popular method for piracy, but it has also made it the biggest target. It is also the easiest to monitor. Of course prior to the rise of p2p there were private networks, TOR, cloud storage, direct downloads and usenet and, guess what, these options are still in use and, much like p2p, they also have legitimate legal uses.
The only way to effectively test this system is to encourage piracy.
To see if their fancy deep packet inspection will effectively limit p2p traffic on their network Telstra needs a large number of volunteers to actively use p2p and as the aim is to stop piracy then, by extension, they need people who will try to pirate as much as possible. Now if you are a heavy p2p user on the Telstra network, whether for legitimate or copyright infringing purposes, it seems very unlikely that you would actively volunteer to have your internet experience crippled. And if Telstra does manage to get a large contingent of merry pirates testing the limits then they may get in trouble with copyright holders for "encouraging illicit activity" during the trial.
It won't make any difference.
Ultimately should the trial be considered a success and all Telstra users get their packets deeply inspected those who want to download will still download. Any filtering can be bypassed and a quick Google search will give even inexperienced users easy to follow step by step instructions. Data encryption, Virtual Private Networks, even swapping to the freely available Google DNS service can bypass all sorts of restrictions and that is just the tip of the iceberg.
So what can be done?
The fact that the focus of this trial is anti-piracy can easily lead us to the conclusion that it has come at the insistence of copyright owners. These companies need to stop expecting everyone else to police their content and actually have a look at the real problem. The fact that Netflix now accounts for more traffic in North America than bittorrent while other areas without access to cheap content filled services (such as the Asia-Pacific region) show three times as much p2p traffic should be a pretty strong indication of where they should be focusing their efforts. Instead they continue to try to lock content away to maximise profit in multiple markets and expect the consumer to pay hugely varied prices depending on where in the world they live.
Instead of trying to limit the internet try making the content accessible and affordable. It won't stop piracy but it will significantly reduce it.
Monday, August 26, 2013
Could We Be Seeing An Aussie Netflix Rival? Probably Not
Aussie TV Networks Reportedly Working On A Netflix Rival - Gizmodo Australia
A new report has come out stating that Australia's Channel 7 and Channel 9 are working on a joint online TV service to allow them to lock their premium Australian content (I almost kept a straight face there) so that should interlopers like Netflix or Hulu actually launch here they won't be able to pick up the content that us Aussie's love so much without paying a significant price.
The only show confirmed so far is Channel 7's most popular choice with it's own catch up service... Home and Away... I'm speechless.
Incidentally I have checked the Plus7 service and out of approximately 50 shows that are available, about 6 of them are Australian and Home and Away is the only one that is not a lifestyle show or a local version of a US reality show.
No news yet on whether this will be a full on subscription service with full seasons, or just a snazzier version of the current catch up services already available. There is no doubt that Australian online viewing options need to be drastically improved, but to compare this to Netflix is simply ludicrous.
I'll keep an eye out for any updates to this story, but in the meantime... does anyone want me to write up a guide on accessing Netflix and Hulu in Australia?
A new report has come out stating that Australia's Channel 7 and Channel 9 are working on a joint online TV service to allow them to lock their premium Australian content (I almost kept a straight face there) so that should interlopers like Netflix or Hulu actually launch here they won't be able to pick up the content that us Aussie's love so much without paying a significant price.
The only show confirmed so far is Channel 7's most popular choice with it's own catch up service... Home and Away... I'm speechless.
Incidentally I have checked the Plus7 service and out of approximately 50 shows that are available, about 6 of them are Australian and Home and Away is the only one that is not a lifestyle show or a local version of a US reality show.
No news yet on whether this will be a full on subscription service with full seasons, or just a snazzier version of the current catch up services already available. There is no doubt that Australian online viewing options need to be drastically improved, but to compare this to Netflix is simply ludicrous.
I'll keep an eye out for any updates to this story, but in the meantime... does anyone want me to write up a guide on accessing Netflix and Hulu in Australia?
Thursday, June 27, 2013
New Zealand ISP opens up access to US only services
Kiwi ISP Slingshot lets users bypass copyright geo-blocking - BRW
Slingshot, a New Zealand ISP, is offering it's users "Global Mode" which, on paper, would allow international visitors to NZ to access the content they would be used to at home.
As a result, local users of the ISP can use the same service which means ISP based bypassing of geo-blocked services like Netflix and Hulu.
Now the above headline is little contentious. There are no actual laws, criminal or civil based, that ban bypassing the artificial barriers erected to lock internet based content to particular countries. What we do have however are entertainment companies charging huge sums of money to dish out content piecemeal around the globe who certainly do not want various markets having the same access to the same content.
It will be interesting to see how long this lasts. Back in May 2012 another NZ ISP, Fyx, offered a similar service. The only difference was they explicitly marketed it as a way for NZ residents to access normally blocked services. About a week later they withdrew the service for less than clear reasons.
So will Slingshot's offering focusing on international visitors make a difference this time around or are we just counting the days until "Global Mode" is again removed from the face of the Earth?
Slingshot, a New Zealand ISP, is offering it's users "Global Mode" which, on paper, would allow international visitors to NZ to access the content they would be used to at home.
As a result, local users of the ISP can use the same service which means ISP based bypassing of geo-blocked services like Netflix and Hulu.
Now the above headline is little contentious. There are no actual laws, criminal or civil based, that ban bypassing the artificial barriers erected to lock internet based content to particular countries. What we do have however are entertainment companies charging huge sums of money to dish out content piecemeal around the globe who certainly do not want various markets having the same access to the same content.
It will be interesting to see how long this lasts. Back in May 2012 another NZ ISP, Fyx, offered a similar service. The only difference was they explicitly marketed it as a way for NZ residents to access normally blocked services. About a week later they withdrew the service for less than clear reasons.
So will Slingshot's offering focusing on international visitors make a difference this time around or are we just counting the days until "Global Mode" is again removed from the face of the Earth?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
