Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Netflix Extends "Watch Instantly" To Mac Users

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the instant-grats dept.

Movies 205

CNet is reporting that Netflix has opened up its "Watch Instantly" feature to Mac users (here is Netflix's blog entry). They accomplished this by using Microsoft's Silverlight technology on both platforms, abandoning the Windows Media Player solution that had been employed in the first, Windows-only, version. Silverlight's DRM capabilities meet Netflix's needs, apparently. Netflix warns that this is beta software. Mac users can opt in here, then watch instantly with Safari or Firefox 2+, with the Silverlight plugin in place. Movie selection is somewhat limited.

cancel ×

205 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Taint (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25609539)

Sweet, we can now taint our Macs to watch Netflix streams.

hilarious (-1, Troll)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609543)

I was just arguing with a mac fanatic on a forum about how 99% of software doesn't run on a mac cuz they're kinda specialized and now here comes the best article ever. Netflix has been around for how long? And they only pretty much did it because they found out it works easily with Silverlight in Intel based macs only. Other than that mac users are left out in the cold as usual it seems. I think this is kinda dumb news though cuz I mean if people have a mac, they should be used to pretty much not being to run any appls they find online ever so they usually either dual boot with XP or have a limited purpose mac like for multimedia editing. Mac people, give it up already and either have a single purpose media editing Linux system for a hell of a lot less or just get a damn PC and stop making people occasionally write software for you.

Re:hilarious (4, Insightful)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609679)

And they only pretty much did it because they found out it works easily with Silverlight in Intel based macs only.

Amazing that a company is switching _to_ Silverlight for a cross-platform solution. This is wrong on so many levels.

http://dotancohen.com/heb/wallashops.html [dotancohen.com]

Re:hilarious (4, Informative)

Yold (473518) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609803)

I don't think it is NetFlix's choice to adopt Silverlight. They released a press release to their Mac users before, stating that it is the movie companies (probably MPAA) stipulated which DRM they can use. But, true to their word, they finally are opening Watch Instantly to Mac users. Lets hope that the Linux port of Silverlight gets thrown in the mix too.

I know Microsoft products are unpopular, but sadly, the adage "No one ever got fired for buying (trusting) Microsoft" probably applies here.

Re:hilarious (3, Interesting)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609921)

I know Microsoft products are unpopular, but sadly, the adage "No one ever got fired for buying (trusting) Microsoft" probably applies here.

I counter with no one has ever been prosecuted for using Linux. [wikipedia.org]

Enough with the IBM || Microsoft half-truths.

Re:hilarious (2, Funny)

infaustus (936456) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610765)

That's because Linux users commit more serious crimes. [wikipedia.org]

Re:hilarious (1)

torstenvl (769732) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610843)

You know who ELSE never used Microsoft products? That's right...

How to use it on Linux (1)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611437)

I've been watching Netflix on my Intel (mac) for months now. I just run VirtualBox with windows installed. Works great. Works with Linux too. Of course you have a valid Windows XP or vista Lic but given were talking about a payment service here, the small cost of obtaining any old windows lic if you don't already have one is not really an issue.

Re:hilarious (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25609945)

Well, you would probably be interested to learn that for example imeem is written in C# to be able to run it on both Windows and Linux. Silverlight in my, albeit biased, opinion, is much cleaner and neater than flash. Or WM solution for this case, obviously... MS has too much stigma for what it USED TO do, or what it still does but to significantly lesser extent

Re:hilarious (3, Insightful)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609969)

Well, you would probably be interested to learn that for example imeem is written in C# to be able to run it on both Windows and Linux. Silverlight in my, albeit biased, opinion, is much cleaner and neater than flash. Or WM solution for this case, obviously... MS has too much stigma for what it USED TO do, or what it still does but to significantly lesser extent

I don't see how the imeem reference is relevant. What am I missing?

While I won't go into the pros and cons of Flash, in comparison Silverlight currently runs on less platforms, has lower market market share on the platforms that it does run on, and has no superior DRM model. You can add to that your personal feelings about Microsoft and Adobe.

Re:hilarious (1)

polywaffle (827427) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610023)

It might be because silverlight is already compaitble with all their drm wmv files, not to mention to most companies, Apple and Windows are the most important two platforms.

Re:hilarious (1)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610193)

It might be because silverlight is already compaitble with all their drm wmv files, not to mention to most companies, Apple and Windows are the most important two platforms.

Obviously those are considerations. Too bad these short-terms goals won out against the longer term goal of true platform independence, rather than "currently works on the platforms we currently want to support".

Re:hilarious (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610639)

I thought this exactly too, its like "hi, we're not going to lock you into windows media player anymore, but we're still going to lock you completely into proprietary windows. whoops!"

Re:hilarious (1)

beelsebob (529313) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609717)

Hah, specialised -- that's right, the platform that can run all Mac software, pretty much all linux/unix software, and all windows software (virtualised, but hey, it's running it). That's specialized! Wait, no, it's not at all.

Re:hilarious (1, Interesting)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609791)

Mac people, give it up already and either have a single purpose media editing Linux system for a hell of a lot less or just get a damn PC and stop making people occasionally write software for you.

So can you please tell me where I can buy Linux versions of Final Cut Studio, Shake 4, Creative Suite CS, Flix Pro, Sound Studio, Toast, and Sony's XDCAM HD transfer apps please?

Also, which distro will work seamlessly with this Linux version of FCS combined with a Decklink card and breakout box?

To get back to "online apps" pretty much all of them work on my Mac. Only the ones who go out of their way to exclude Macs don't work, and those are getting fewer and fewer as time goes on.

Also, does that 99% of software include viruses, keyloggers and other malware? They are technically software and they only run on Windows, so if it does, then I could see the 99% figure being accurate.

Re:hilarious (3, Informative)

RCL (891376) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609897)

Shake has always been available for Linux - in fact, it has been ported to MacOS/Windows from that OS. Shake 4 for Linux is sold for $4999 right now.

Besides, have you heard about Autodesk Smoke [autodesk.com] ? That's a complete Linux-based online video editing suite.

Re:hilarious (2, Insightful)

The Ultimate Fartkno (756456) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610209)

Does Shake for Linux get delivered by a naked Natalie Portman or come in a solid gold box or something? The OSX version is $499, and a look around the Apple site doesn't mention why the Linux version is for some reason worth an extra $4,500.

Re:hilarious (4, Interesting)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610289)

Both versions, up to Shake 3.0 were $4,999, and originally Shake was a Linux app (hence the very different interface of the OS X version compared to even the esoteric Final Cut Studio apps).

With the release of Shake 4 though, Apple cut the cost of the OS X version to $499, and provided unlimited render licences for that version, while keeping the cost and licence restrictions on the Linux version to "encourage" people to use the OS X version.

They know they can't kill the Linux version off entirely, due to the number of hih end effects houses who are quite happy to have a mixed Linux/Mac environment and don;t want to change out their Shake boxes for Mac Pros, but they want anyone who wants to start up in the field to go all-Mac.

It all may be academic though, since there are whispers of a from-the-ground-up app to replace Shake at some point from inside Apple, to either go alongside Motion, or to replace that too.

Re:hilarious (1)

Briareos (21163) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611173)

They know they can't kill the Linux version off entirely, due to the number of hih end effects houses who are quite happy to have a mixed Linux/Mac environment and don;t want to change out their Shake boxes for Mac Pros, but they want anyone who wants to start up in the field to go all-Mac.

What, like they couldn't kill off the Windows version of Logic [wikipedia.org] ?

I doubt it.

Re:hilarious (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610253)

Aye, it was originally a Linux app in fact, before Apple got hold of it - since the release of Shake 4 though, Apple have been "discouraging" the use of Shake on Linux though, with a huge price cut on the OS X version, and unlimited render licences.

Re:hilarious (4, Insightful)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610875)

So can you please tell me where I can buy Linux versions of Final Cut Studio, Shake 4, Creative Suite CS, Flix Pro, Sound Studio, Toast, and Sony's XDCAM HD transfer apps please?

I cannot believe that you got modded troll for that. It is true, there are not enough commercial apps available for Linux at the moment. What I wouldn't do for Solidworks on my Ubuntu box!

For Creative Suite, write to these folks:
http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/contact.html [adobe.com]

For Flix, write here:
http://www.on2.com/index.php?373 [on2.com]

Write to these folks asking about Sound Studio for Linux:
http://www.freeverse.com/support/ [freeverse.com]

This is the address for the people responsible for Toast:
http://www.roxio.com/enu/company/contact.html [roxio.com]

And the infamous Sony:
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/corporate/contacts.asp [sonycreativesoftware.com]

Please, don't be shy and WRITE TO THEM! If we don't write and let them know that Linux is a viable OS with a strong user base, then they will never port their software to Linux.

Re:hilarious (1)

aplusjimages (939458) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610357)

Or just get an Xbox 360 and stream the movies from Netflix come November 19th. That way they have a gaming machine and a netflix machine rolled into one.

Re:hilarious (2, Insightful)

damnbunni (1215350) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610425)

Except that Xbox 360s will only stream Netflix if you have a pay-per-month Xbox Live account.

On top of your Netflix subscription.

They sell standalone Netflix streaming boxes for about $100. With no extra monthly fee.

Re:hilarious (1)

aplusjimages (939458) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610445)

Xbox live subscription is $50 for 13months. I guess that standalone box will pay for itself in 2 years, but it can't play Gears of War 2.

Re:hilarious (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611537)

Unless the user in question has no desire to play games. Initial Xbox 360 investment at $200 plus $50 per year is gonna come right out of the gate more expensive than a $100 purpose built set top box, and will only grow more expensive over time.

Re:hilarious (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611525)

Or, you can get the PlayOn server for Windows (1x $30 fee) which can stream Netflix, Hulu & YouTube to your 360, PS3 and any other DLNA compliant device (such as XBMC). I'm using the free beta and it works really well!

Ski into a spruce! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25609545)

DRM pushes Silverlight (4, Insightful)

Hannes2000 (1113397) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609557)

I am really afraid of DRM giving Silverlight power and more distribution (and vice versa). While Flash has (or will have?) DRM capabilities too, another "competitor" on the DRM market could really make things even worse than they are.

Re:DRM pushes Silverlight (5, Insightful)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609637)

I am really afraid of DRM giving Silverlight power and more distribution (and vice versa). While Flash has (or will have?) DRM capabilities too, another "competitor" on the DRM market could really make things even worse than they are.

On the contrary, more "competition" in the DRM realm is the best way to make things better than they are.

competing formats == more people frustrated and screaming "why the hell isn't this working" at the top of their lungs.

Of course, base silverlight without the DRM packages will work just fine at doing that. In fact, that's my guess at why it "meets their requirements".

Nothing makes a more "secure" drm than a codec and playback system with arguably the lowest market penetration and adoption rate as of this post. Security by obscurity at its best.

In the mean time, there's a better competitor [thepiratebay.org] to netflix for those who want their full HD movies in a watchable, savable, and compatible format.

Re:DRM pushes Silverlight (1)

Dan541 (1032000) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610271)

All these problems could be solved with .avi

Re:DRM pushes Silverlight (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25610523)

All these problems could be solved with .mkv

Fixed that for you.

Re:DRM pushes Silverlight (2, Informative)

DigDuality (918867) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610925)

i'd prefer theora.

Re:DRM pushes Silverlight (3, Funny)

Gewalt (1200451) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611265)

i'd prefer theora.

That's unique. No, really, I mean it. You're the only one in the world. Literally.

Re:DRM pushes Silverlight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611907)

In the mean time, there's a better competitor [thepiratebay.org] to netflix for those who want their full HD movies in a watchable, savable, and compatible format.

In the mean time, there's a better competitor [thepiratebay.org] to netflix for those who want their full HD movies in a[n] illegal, watchable, savable, and compatible format.

...until it's cracked/broken (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609699)

Which will happen.

Re:DRM pushes Silverlight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25609851)

Doesn't matter how many companies adopt it if the customers don't want it.

Re:DRM pushes Silverlight (1)

Dan541 (1032000) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610281)

I want all my movies to be .avi and thats what I get.

Re:DRM pushes Silverlight (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610559)

News flash! Customers want contents they don't care who made the software.

Re:DRM pushes Silverlight (1)

stephanruby (542433) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610331)

Does this mean netflix/silverlight can play on an iphone? All iphone users, I challenge you.

Firefox FTW (1, Informative)

SwabTheDeck (1030520) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609565)

This also theoretically opens the door to watching movies in Windows WITHOUT having to use IE. I never understood why IE was required to begin with since the current non-beta DRM was Windows Media-based.

Re:Firefox FTW (4, Informative)

TiberSeptm (889423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609629)

Not just theoretical. I'm doing it on Firefox 3 right now.

Re:Firefox FTW (5, Funny)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609759)

I'm doing it on Firefox 3 right now.

You've got me beat. I've done it on the kitchen table once or twice, and once _almost_ did it on a bus.

Re:Firefox FTW (0, Offtopic)

XLR8DST8 (994744) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610365)

i once got busy in a burger king bathroom..

Re:Firefox FTW (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611069)

You mean you once got busy in a BLEEP bathroom.

Re:Firefox FTW (1)

ben0207 (845105) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610375)

I've done it on a pile of PowerMacs, so I've sort of done it on OS X.

Not quite Firefox though...

Re:Firefox FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25610835)

Pfft.

Server room. I win.

Morro Rock (0, Offtopic)

WK2 (1072560) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611295)

I did it at Morro Rock. It was the middle of the night, and my girlfriend kept getting scared every time a car turned around in the parking lot, because their headlights would shine on us for a split second. Good times.

Re:Morro Rock (0, Offtopic)

TiberSeptm (889423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611353)

Haha, wow- I never expected my poorly worded sentence to spawn such a long list of amusing replies. There's something to be said for the misuse of the English language- unfortunately it's probably not said very well.

Re:Firefox FTW (1, Insightful)

stephanruby (542433) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610235)

You mean you're doing it in the "IE Tab" extension inside Firefox?

Re:Firefox FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25610821)

You mean you're doing it in the "IE Tab" extension inside Firefox?

No, he means he's doing it in Firefox 3 using the Silverlight plugin which allows Silverlight to run natively in Firefox.

Re:Firefox FTW (3, Informative)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610831)

You mean you're doing it in the "IE Tab" extension inside Firefox?

Noooo. He means he installed the Silverlight plugin and is watching it natively in Firefox. Y'know, basically what this whole article is about.

Re:Firefox FTW (1)

TiberSeptm (889423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611445)

I also probably should have emphasized that I was doing it on a windows machine. If only MS would release silverlight for linux like they say they plan to. Silverlight for Linux Announced [asp.net] MS and Novell Collaberation [tirania.org]

Re:Firefox FTW (1)

Gewalt (1200451) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611323)

Why was this modded insightful? Unless you were too lazy to even read the comment he was replying to let alone TFS, let alone TFA, its patently clear that the parents "correction" is incorrect.

Re:Firefox FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25609879)

Yep, I only use ie for the netflix, and until now I've never used silverlight (or even installed it).

Netflix's "watch instantly" could be _the_ killer app for silverlight -- or should I say Trojan Horse.

Re:Firefox FTW (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610817)

System requirements clearly state IE6 or FF2+. There's no theory about it.

http://www.netflix.com/WiMessage?msg=51 [netflix.com]

"Movie Selection is Limited"? (5, Informative)

TiberSeptm (889423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609617)

It doesn't seem to differ from the normal instant watch selection. Obviously that selection is limited in that it does not encompass the entire Netflix library- that would be infeasible regardless of the player being used.
As far as I can tell, the beta allows access to the full instant watch selection that IE users would see. The player loads and buffers much quicker than the player in IE7- allowing for much faster skipping forwards and backwards on the old P-IV in my living room. The performance difference is fairly pronounced on my relatively new laptop. Under Firefox it is consistently 15 seconds from clicking "play" while browsing instant-watch to the actual start of the video. In IE7 it will take between 30 seconds 45 seconds. Video quality is indistinguishable in terms of clarity, but I noticed much less stuttering in the silverlight player.
On the old pentium IV machine in my livingroom, the time to play drops from about 1 minute to 25 seconds. While this is half the time, it was never a big deal when compared to the convenience. What is a big deal is the impressive drop in stuttering compared to the player in IE7. On my dinosaur of a living room computer, the video for all netflix movies would stutter every few seconds or so until the movie was fully buffered. In the silverlight player, there is no noticeable stuttering.
I did this totally subjective, non-scientific, arbitrary, and slightly drunk comparison on the following two machines:


Older-than-dirt desktop-
-2.4 GHz Pentium IV
-1GB DDR 333 RAM
-Windows XP Home SP3
-Ati Radeon 9800 Pro (256MB VRAM)

Slightly Newer Laptop-
-2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo
-2GB DDR2 RAM
-Windows XP Pro SP3
-Ati Radeon Mobility x1400 (god awful)

Comparing IE7 and Silverlight players, cont. (4, Informative)

TiberSeptm (889423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609731)

Sadly, I titled the first post really poorly. After playing around with the "beta" player on a couple machines for a little while longer I found a few other things worth noting.

The Silverlight player does not require nearly as much free space as the IE7/WMP player for the "high quality" video to play. I've checked and the library is the same as that availible for the PC as far as the 182 items in my instant queue go.

While that doesn't cover the thousands upon thousands of items they stream, it does cover a wide range of properties. So far as I can tell, the Starz! content, the CBS current series content, the NBC current series content, and all the showtime content is still there. Other than that, well who cares if "Santa Clause Conquers the Martians" isn't availible in Firefox. Oh wait, it looks like it is.

Re:"Movie Selection is Limited"? (1)

TheStonepedo (885845) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610735)

Dirt is at least twice as old as a Pentium 4. Come back when you have 286 results.

Re:"Movie Selection is Limited"? (1)

TiberSeptm (889423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611269)

I was thinking I'd pull out my Tandy TSR-80 if I really wanted to suffer.

Re:"Movie Selection is Limited"? (1)

jfengel (409917) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610887)

It doesn't seem to differ from the normal instant watch selection. Obviously that selection is limited in that it does not encompass the entire Netflix library- that would be infeasible regardless of the player being used.

It doesn't even come close. Of the 100+ films in my (admittedly nonrepresentative) queue, only 4 are available for instant play.

A lot of studios are clearly waiting for something, but I can't imagine what. All of your films end up on BitTorrent, whether you make them available for online play or not.

I understand it taking time to get the back catalog ready, but they're not rushing to get the new stuff out, either. Perhaps they just haven't been offered the deal they want.

Re:"Movie Selection is Limited"? (1)

rmadmin (532701) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611041)

You've got something wrong with your P4 then. My main machine is an Athlon 1.8Ghz with 1G ram and a Geforce Ti3@1680x1050... and I get no stuttering problems at all. Infact, I've never had a problem running netflix on here.

Re:"Movie Selection is Limited"? (1)

TiberSeptm (889423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611257)

Your Athlon performs better than a 3.0ghz P4 in most benchmarks- particularly streaming. Perhaps you forget how bad the old net burst architecture was. Also, yours is likely an X2 (dual core) while the pentium 4 I have is not. It's not even hyperthreading (not that that actually helped.)

Re:"Movie Selection is Limited"? (1)

rmadmin (532701) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611423)

Mine is single core. Probably time to upgrade. =)

impressive (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609657)

say what you want but if you've used silver light it's actually a pretty impressive platform. my only beef is it's download size vs flash. flash is what, 800kb? silver light is 8megs. not really a huge deal i guess but a bit of a wtf considering they do the same thing.

Re:impressive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25611583)

You don't say which version of Silverlight that you downloaded but if it is the newest version (2.0) then it includes a subset of the .Net framework. Microsoft's intent is that users will be able to run Silverlight apps without having to have a full install of the framework.

Still not open availability? (1)

XaXXon (202882) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609665)

This was somewhere (digg?) a couple days ago and it was in limited release to new users only. I still can't use it:

Our apologies -- instant watching is currently not supported for Macintosh.

We are working on a solution for Mac users and expect to have it available by the end of 2008.

Not open? (1)

TiberSeptm (889423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609735)

Odd, I've been a Netflix user for about 2 years and my roommate has it running on his Mac right now. I'd call their customer service and ask. Did you follow the link in the CNet article? Do you have silverlight installed?

Fail. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25609777)

I'm a huge fan of Netflix's DVD rental. I'm on the 8-at-a-time plan and with the exception of the attempt to drop profiles, they've never given me anything other than fantastic service. When it comes to this watch instantly stuff they completely fail, though.

1. Selection is horrid. Even where they have quality content, it's something like season 2 of some TV series, with season 1 nowhere to be found. If they are going to use DRM, I expect some quality content. Otherwise, I'm fine with It's a Wonderful Life. No need for Titillating Monster/Sci-Fi Movie Du Jour, thanks.

2. They've gone from Windows only to Silverlight only. That's great for my media box, which runs Myth. Linux may be a minority on the desktop, but is it really so among media boxes?

3. I have a huge amount of bandwidth, am just a few hops away, and they stream me a postage stamp.

Re:Fail. (2, Interesting)

Yold (473518) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609827)

Watch Instantly has progressively gotten better. You should check out the new Starz Play selection. There are some quality titles. I'm actually watching Natural Born Killers right now on my 32inch 720p, fullscreen is approximately the quality of a 1 gig XVID. Certainly not DVD quality... more like a VHS.

Now if only they'd add more Crime Documentaries... (COPS anyone?)

I've also heard rumors that NetFlix watch instantly is coming to XBOX 360... so the move to silverlight is less than suprising.

Re:Fail. (1)

TiberSeptm (889423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609835)

Yeah sorry, I was replying to the post above but clicked on the reply to article button instead of the reply to post one.

Re:Fail. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25610763)

1. Selection is horrid.

Now that Mac users are onboard, Brokeback Mountain is being made available ASAP.

Awesome (2)

trawg (308495) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609799)

Another annoying, proprietary bullshit extension I'm going to need to watch video in my browser that people are going to end up building entire websites in.

Re:Awesome (2, Funny)

powerspike (729889) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609905)

ya it'll be great when they port all the codec's over to run in javascript realtime....

Re:Awesome (1)

trawg (308495) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610173)

If Mozilla and webkit and co keep improving the performance of Javascript this might be a real option soon :)

Re:Awesome (1)

powerspike (729889) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610273)

but then the real problem will kick in, they won't be able to protect their source code, so they'll never release it. If they can't make a profit (no matter the size) and protect their assets, they won't do it.

Re:Awesome (2, Funny)

trawg (308495) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610395)

Yep. This is why i'm hanging out for HTML's video tag and the Theora/Ogg online revolution!

Re:Awesome (2, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610317)

There are video CODECs written in Smalltalk running on Squeak. I was at a presentation by Alan Kay a couple of years ago where he gave the entire presentation from within Squeak, including video. Squeak isn't a particularly fast implementation of Smalltalk - it's a bytecode interpreter with no JIT capabilities. A modern JavaScript environment should be faster.

The main reason JavaScript would be slow for writing a video CODEC is that it only has one kind of numerical object, a double-precision float. Implementations try to work around this, but it's not always possible.

goddamnit. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25609819)

As if I wasn't ADD already. Now they just h

No DRM for me, bye bye! (-1, Offtopic)

mmu_man (107529) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609849)

Yeah it's funny how they switch from a crappy proprietary solution, to yet another, even heavier.
No silverlight here, has it been ported to BeOS yet ? What about *BSD, AROS, Haiku ?

I still can't understand why one needs a whole VM to play a video, be it flash or whatever. There is absolutely no point... Damn, "the net was so much better, simpler before". They wouldn't have any problem using the EMBED tag if they didn't insist on using DRM. And this works on all platform, using whatever player is installed, instead of enforcing an ugly and slooooow player on everyone that doesn't always work.
http://revolf.free.fr/img/why_I_banned_flash.png
http://revolf.free.fr/img/why_flash_sux_even_on_linux.png

And I've yet to find someone who can show me formal proof of work of DRMs. They are inherently ... http://www.defectivebydesign.org/

DRM Free Alternative to Netfix (3, Interesting)

fluch (126140) | more than 5 years ago | (#25609985)

I guess we all know it: https://thepiratebay.org/ [thepiratebay.org] And it doesn't require any Silverlight.

People will pay Netflix for the convenience (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25610087)

When you come home from the pub at night after a few beers you don't want to wait for BitTorrent, you want it NOW!

If they can get it working on Xbox instead of PCs they could even have a hit on their hands.

Re:People will pay Netflix for the convenience (4, Funny)

jcuervo (715139) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610869)

When you come home from the pub at night after a few beers you don't want to wait for BitTorrent, you want it NOW!

After a few beers, I'm streaming a whole different kind of torrent.

Re:People will pay Netflix for the convenience (1)

rdnetto (955205) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611877)

1) If it's new, some torrents are *really* fast - as in ~15 minutes fast (assuming your connection is fast enough).

2) What makes you think that people won't think ahead and set it to download before they leave? I think that anyone smart enough to use BT would be be able to do that much

Reason #1 this is useless to me (2, Informative)

hansoloaf (668609) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610127)

From Netflix help section:

Can I see subtitles or closed captions while watching movies instantly on my PC?
A:
Foreign-language movies watched instantly on your PC will have subtitles. We don't currently provide Closed Captioning, nor subtitling of English language movies, but you'll find those on most of our DVDs.

arrghh

Re:Reason #1 this is useless to me (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610897)

What, no pirate subtitles???

Silverlight?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25610131)

Yes, that's a great solution to an incompatible horse-and-buggy problem. Let's switch to a donkey-and-buggy!

It works well - NOT (-1, Redundant)

smartin (942) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610381)

I tried it on my Intel machine running 10.5.4 and the installer says that it will not run on a power pc. So i then installed the package using pacifist and it crashes safari every time i try to view a movie.

Another quality M$ product.

Re:It works well - NOT (1)

Shados (741919) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610667)

Well, considering its officially stated not to be supported on Power PC, what do you expect exactly? What are you going to try next? Install Mac software on a Windows machine?

Re:It works well - NOT (1)

TheStonepedo (885845) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610745)

The parent poster stated clearly that he or she was installing on an Intel-based mac. I didn't even have to RTFA to catch that part.

Re:It works well - NOT (1)

Shados (741919) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611807)

Thats what I get for replying to a post when I just woke up... I had reread it like 5 times originally, and saw "power pc" everytime in the grandparent's post.

All I can say right now is... whoops.

Re:It works well - NOT (1)

IL-CSIXTY4 (801087) | more than 5 years ago | (#25610783)

It crashes all the time in Safari for me too. Works great in Firefox.

Re:It works well - NOT (1)

Shados (741919) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611867)

Ignore my other post, since it seems like I can't read in the morning. That said, do you have Adblock installed?

Mac vs PC (1)

DuctTape (101304) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611299)

I've watched instantly on both PC, the "original" MSIE version, and Mac with Silverlight. On the PC, it's very watchable, especially in full-screen, and this is on a 2GHz P4. On Silverlight on the Mac it's like watching YouTube: massive pixellation on fast cuts and pans, and pretty fuzzy borders otherwise. And this is on a 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo MBP. Unless this is a result of it being beta or a Silverlight fault, I'd have to say that on a Mac it pretty well, to use a scientific term, sucks.

DT

Re:Mac vs PC (1)

papasui (567265) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611587)

I'm using it in Camino right now to watch Superbad.. Looks pretty good to me, quality wise I wouldn't say it's DVD but it's definetly better than youtube.

Moonlight? (1)

AusIV (950840) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611593)

Anyone tried it on Moonlight? I've tried a few other Silverlight applications on Moonlight with varying degrees of success. I might consider restarting my Netflix subscription if Moonlight could play the "Watch Instantly" features.

Will it help, though? (1)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611625)

This is obviously quite the coup for Microsoft and the Silverlight platform, which has up to now been a "nobody cares" platform [today.com] . The main effect of their previous big user, NBC for the Olympics, was to drive people to BitTorrent.

I fully understand that NetFlix wouldn't be allowed to make Hollywood movies available without some sort of DRM. But do they remember they're competing not with DVDs by mail or DVD rental, but with unlocked BitTorrent downloads?

How usable is NetFlix via Silverlight? Does the DRM have little enough pain-in-the-butt factor to compete with free?

Opera works as well... (1)

bigbigbison (104532) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611731)

I couldn't get Silverlight to install in Firefox for some reason so I tried Opera. If you tell it to identify as Firefox then you can use watch instantly with Opera.

Does this mean I actually use it on windows now? (1)

Shaitan Apistos (1104613) | more than 5 years ago | (#25611747)

The DRM on the Windows Media Player plugin for Netflix doesn't work because my monitor is too big. I shit you not. It took a lot off googling to figure out the problem, but the player won't play when I have my 24" widescreen hooked up, but will with my 19".

Does the silverlight plugin have this same restriction? Either way it'll be nice that I can play these on my Macbook Pro now.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>