Kasz216 said:
Which if true wouldn't mean anything, since by law he couldn't be involved in any decisions between the two companies. (to my knowledge anyway.) |
It is true. And could be involved, if they own stock either way.
Kasz216 said:
Netflix has it's own standalone box for $99 that lets you stream netflix content. All Netflix is doing is using the 360 inplace of that box. I was considering getting it. http://gizmodo.com/389698/first-netflix-streaming-box-review-100-and-unlimited-downloads |
last i checked netflix didn't have 10000 movies available for downloading, like was stated by MS at E3.
Like i said this is a better feature for 360 than it is for netflix. Albeit netflix won't have to sell these people 99$ players, but Ms has stated already that the renting will go through MS, and netflix will only be a side option. Which again makes me wonder whose servers they are using if these 10000 movies on netflix are supposed to be an "OPTION"
BTW: I don't mean to sound rude, but if you are going to provide a response to a post, respond to the whole thing, not just a small part of it.
There are 10,000 pieces of content(tv shows, movies, etc) to stream(not download and play later). It will just use Netflix's existing instant watch infrastructure.
theprof00 said:
last i checked netflix didn't have 10000 movies available for downloading, like was stated by MS at E3. Like i said this is a better feature for 360 than it is for netflix. Albeit netflix won't have to sell these people 99$ players, but Ms has stated already that the renting will go through MS, and netflix will only be a side option. Which again makes me wonder whose servers they are using if these 10000 movies on netflix are supposed to be an "OPTION" BTW: I don't mean to sound rude, but if you are going to provide a response to a post, respond to the whole thing, not just a small part of it.
|
A. It's not download. it's streaming.
B.From the article i quoted.
"It's fanless and quiet; has HDMI and optical outputs; and is about the size of five CD cases stacked together. Any Netflix disc mailing plan over $9 gets you unlimited streaming of almost 10,000 titles. Unlimited! 10K titles!"
What else is there to mention?
Why would this sell consoles? Why would someone buy a 360 to pay for gold membership and a netflix membership? When they could just pay a straight $99?
Isn't it more likely this is going to get more current gold members to pay for Netflix? All this is doing for microsoft is making sure people with Gold members keep up with their service.
I mean sure. it might help 360 a bit... it's going to help Netflix WAY more as suddenly their service will be in WAY more homes.
Netflix is pulling a PS3 here. To gain marketshare over Apple TV and Vhudu in large ways.
Netflix is doing this to win their format war.
There are rumors of a Sony deal too... likely though Sony wanted a cut from Netflix directly since PS3 online is free... and why comproise their own download and blu-ray services to let Net-Flix set up shop for free?
| BengaBenga said: Really I'm getting tired of the assumptions that Microsoft buys everything. Doesn't it occur to anyone that the 360 is the leading console+entertainment sytem in the most important market: the US? And that it therfore is a ver valuable partner? Square even said it was THEIR decision to bring FF13 to 360 as well, not very strange considering 360's userbase in the US. For Netflix this partnership opens a whole lot of opportunities. |
Thank You so much! MS is the pure evil for some people right here. If they got somethin valuable, there must be money involved. They just offers a great service for the US with a win/win situation. It's all good!
Imagine not having GamePass on your console...
Kasz216 said:
Which if true wouldn't mean anything, since by law he couldn't be involved in any decisions between the two companies. (to my knowledge anyway.) |
As a CEO of one company and director on another. I don't think he would be involved in any transactions but he could broker relationships by telling a member of one MS department to call someone in this department at Netflix.
XGamer0611 said:
As a CEO of one company and director on another. I don't think he would be involved in any transactions but he could broker relationships by telling a member of one MS department to call someone in this department at Netflix. |
Maybe, they were in negotiation with Sony for this as well however. I'd guess the difference was that Sony wanted money from netflix for each person who uses the feature and Microsoft didn't seeing it as enough that people will keep up their gold memeberships.
As stated above Sony probably didn't want to hurt their blu-ray and download service money though.
It makes logical sense why 360 has it and PS3 doesn't but people just want to run around shouting "OMG MS is buying everything that's why I can't enjoy anything!"
| theprof00 said: "People seem to be very confused about MS's stake in HD-DVD. They owned the rights to a few codecs and would have profited somewhat from those had the format succeeded... Other than that, they were just looking to be a thorn in Sony's (and Blu-ray's) side. They had very little financial stake in the format, nor would they have profited much from its success." ok rP i'm sorry, you're a nice guy, but try not being so sure about a subject like this one. It makes you look bad. MS helped finance toshiba's sub 100$ HDdvd players, MS accepted responsibility for selling a now defunct player to it's customers on toshibas behalf. Right there I see more than enough investment to be called "invested". Putting your name on the line is a big thing, and ms has taken a lot of brush about the HDDVD player and their marketing "techniques". MS desperately wanted Sony out of the race with an extinct console. They would have profited by income from codecs, from increased sales of 360, from developers who would have switched to 360, found a great start on the next console generation, and many other benefits. MS lost a great potential "gamble". On one hand they really didn't want HDDVD to win either, but they let their competitor stay in the game. And you know what, they really couldn't do anything about it short of having literal "dumping" sales of 360 players and financing the sometimes free HDDVD players. |
You're right on some fronts but Microsoft isn't just the X360 division and there were reasons much larger reaching then a home video game console that fueled their "support". At the time there was many a post on the AVS forum about why Microsoft sided with HD DVD during the format war. And from the MS VP in charge of that division no less. If you want to educate yourself it's all there for you to read.
Regardless of Bluray's victory and extraordinare video specs when it lauched it was an incomplete buggy mess. It was obviously rushed to market and a far cry from what it is today. It's funny how quick history fades from people's preception of things.
 |
 |
Completed X360:  |
|
| High Def Movie Collection |
| theprof00 said: "People seem to be very confused about MS's stake in HD-DVD. They owned the rights to a few codecs and would have profited somewhat from those had the format succeeded... Other than that, they were just looking to be a thorn in Sony's (and Blu-ray's) side. They had very little financial stake in the format, nor would they have profited much from its success." ok rP i'm sorry, you're a nice guy, but try not being so sure about a subject like this one. It makes you look bad. MS helped finance toshiba's sub 100$ HDdvd players, MS accepted responsibility for selling a now defunct player to it's customers on toshibas behalf. Right there I see more than enough investment to be called "invested". Putting your name on the line is a big thing, and ms has taken a lot of brush about the HDDVD player and their marketing "techniques". MS desperately wanted Sony out of the race with an extinct console. They would have profited by income from codecs, from increased sales of 360, from developers who would have switched to 360, found a great start on the next console generation, and many other benefits. MS lost a great potential "gamble". On one hand they really didn't want HDDVD to win either, but they let their competitor stay in the game. And you know what, they really couldn't do anything about it short of having literal "dumping" sales of 360 players and financing the sometimes free HDDVD players. |
I should clarify:
MS would have not have profited much from HD-DVD itself. They would have profited from the downfall of Blu-ray with other products (like the 360).
Other than that, you're not contradicting me much. I said MS had little financial stake in HD-DVD... And that's the truth. They didn't stand to gain or lose much money directly from its success or failure.
Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/
| theprof00 said: cmon rocketpig you do have to admit these facts. It is an amazing service. And it will sell consoles. Do you think netflix does not know this? I'm sure netflix also knows that this is pretty much the first large scale digital distribution by mS as a test for future potential. I'm sure this is worth something. Which servers are holding 10,000 movies? Is it netflix servers? who is paying for that? The key will be to find out with they have an exclusivity contract, or whether 360 is simply the only one to carry it. That is where you find out if it was paid or not. |
Hey, I'm not knocking the NetFlix deal at all. I think it's a great idea and when I first heard rumors about it late last year, I was excited at the idea of downloading movies through the 360.
Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
