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!

Hands On With Redbox Instant

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the a-challenger-emerges dept.

Movies 64

adeelarshad82 writes "The three things any streaming service needs in order to be successful are: a good price, a massive content library, and a decent app that is available on as many devices as possible. Unfortunately the only thing Redbox Instant has going for it right now is the price. The digital library that comprises Redbox Instant at the moment is limited to a handful of comedies, budget horror flicks, and one or two blockbuster titles from the last year. However, there is hope that once the final version is launched, Verizon FiOS On Demand's massive libraries of current television shows will be made available on Redbox. As for the app itself: while it's well designed and offers filtering by search, genre and rating, its biggest drawback is that it's only available on iOS and Android devices. You can't even stream from the Redbox website."

cancel ×

64 comments

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

Is it porn? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42607881)

"Hands on with Rebox Instant": Most misleading title ever.

Re:Is it porn? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42609241)

You are thinking of redtube.

Blockbuster titles from last year (1, Troll)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about 2 years ago | (#42607915)

As a Netflix user, I'd be thrilled to have content that fresh.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

crazyjj (2598719) | about 2 years ago | (#42607995)

Would you be thrilled if a handful of those recent titles was the ONLY content you had?

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (2)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about 2 years ago | (#42607999)

That happened to be exactly what I thought, except I believe the reason netflix doesn't have "fresh" content typically is licensing costs I believe. And the current redbox has movies around the time they come out to dvd. Still, even if it was a whole year's wait, it'd be better than never getting the movie with netflix.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (2)

shaitand (626655) | about 2 years ago | (#42608073)

It really doesn't matter what the reason is. There really isn't much worthwhile content on Netflix these days. There was never enough content but it used to be substantially better with their starz content.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (4, Informative)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about 2 years ago | (#42608243)

It really doesn't matter what the reason is. There really isn't much worthwhile content on Netflix these days. There was never enough content but it used to be substantially better with their starz content.

That's entirely a matter of opinion. I still watch far more content on netflix than I do on any other platform (including the cable tv service with several movie channel packages that I pay for). I wish they had even more, but to say there isn't much worthwhile... that's not been my experience.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (4, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 2 years ago | (#42608569)

Especially since the cost of NetFlix is about $8 a month. That's about the cost of 2 movie rentals. Cable on demand movies and other online movie services that do offer blockbuster new releases cost about $5 jut to rent the movie for 24-48 hours. So even if Netflix doesn't have the newest blockbusters, they have quite a good deal for those people who don't have to watch a specific movie. I watch a lot of TV seasons on there. My only complaint is that if you're browsing on the Wii, it's almost impossible to see all the movies they have unless you search for them by name. There's actually quite a bit of content on there, but they make it really hard to find.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (2)

mattack2 (1165421) | about 2 years ago | (#42611299)

$8 is 2 movie rentals? Wow, you rent somewhere way too expensive.

I say this as someone who is admittedly paying too much because I'm on the 1 DVD at a time only plan and lately have been watching approx 1 DVD/week (over December I got a bit more since I had a long vacation). I compare that to thinking "oh I should just use Redbox instead", since personally I don't hate the idea of going to a box, but I personally *like* the "old content" on netflix (DVDs for me), including TV shows.

Though I may cancel again for a few months and then renew again before a year is up (to keep my queue active).

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42613137)

redbox dvd rentals are 1.25 a night - don't have to be back until 9PM the next day.
with their subscription, you get 4 rentals, so that's 5 of the 8 bucks a month - so 3 bucks a month for streaming content... once the number of clients released increases and quality - will be a contender I think

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

shaitand (626655) | about 2 years ago | (#42610175)

If you watch 3-4hrs of content of a day you'll burn through everything worthwhile in a month or two. There really isn't much in terms of quality recent content. It's great for watching an old TV series that you haven't seen or want to catch up on or if you are into old B movies but that only lasts for so long.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about 2 years ago | (#42610873)

who the f watches 3-4 hours of tv every day? the unemployed?

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

yotto (590067) | about 2 years ago | (#42612111)

Star Trek alone has kept me watching for over a year. I've burned through TOS, Next Gen, and am almost done with DS9 and am about halfway through Voyager. I expect I've got another 9 months to a year of it before I need to find something else.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

shaitand (626655) | about 2 years ago | (#42611365)

There isn't much new content. I don't even mean new new I mean new to Netflix. If you've had a subscription for a couple years and watch any signficant amount of content you've watched the interesting recommendations (which it annoyingly populates with the same crap all the time even after rating it or saying you aren't interested), you've sifted through and watched the old tv shows you wanted to see, you've watched all the older good titles you haven't seen in awhile. Now you are left looking for something good in the new stream of content and it just isn't there.

Netflix has less worthwhile new content than a TV premium channel and you can have all the premium channels and still not have enough new content to get through the month. I know I've got a fully loaded package. Everything comes out on Friday or Sunday, You watch it all by the end of the weekend and then have nothing to watch (on tv or netflix) until the following weekend and that is just during the season.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

mattack2 (1165421) | about 2 years ago | (#42612187)

Bizarre, I tivo far too many shows to watch during the main season (and I watch a LOT of TV), and that's mostly even just on the broadcast networks.. Plus movies on netflix.

Netflix has basically every DVD ever released if you use them for DVDs, so they have WAY more content than any of the premium channels (or redbox).

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

ConceptJunkie (24823) | about 2 years ago | (#42612293)

I agree. Netflix's movie selection is pretty horrible over all (thank the media leviathans who do everything they can to screw over their customers), but there are a lot of old and obscure things that make up for the loss. Futhermore, they have a decent selection of TV shows. I've been watching stuff on Netflix almost every day and do not feel I'll be running out of stuff to watch any time soon.

Nevertheless, I am sick of the stupid games played by the content owners. Stuff comes and goes completely at random and there's no rhyme or reason to it, only the complete capriciousness of the movie studios. It's even worse with Hulu where you get less with a paid account than you get with a free one (assuming you want to use your TV instead of your computer). That's nothing but pure spite.

In a world of 500 channels and the Internet in general, it's a great time to be a long-tailer, and I can only hope that people who want to relive the Bad Old Days by creating an artificial monopoly on distribution will hopefully suffer the painful death they so richly deserve.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

StuartHankins (1020819) | about 2 years ago | (#42617891)

Please mod parent insightful.

I can't even begin to tell you the movies I've searched for on Netflix that just aren't available for streaming now but were available in the past. I've added ones to my instant queue only to see them disappear soon afterward with no warning or notice. Finding movies on the Wii / iPad interface is just awful.

The searching is horrible... although the iPad does show you subgenres you can't for instance filter out all G / PG movies (or vice versa) even on their website. If I want to watch a movie that I can't normally watch because of kids, I shouldn't have to go to a third party site to perform a search. And quit showing me the same crap! If you have thousands and thousands of movies I'd never know because I've already passed over or even rated movies that I don't want to watch again. Leave those in the "play it again" section only. On the Wii / iPad there's no way to see movie viewing history or even to say "I'm not interested" either.

tl;dr: Netflix has a crappy interface, yanks movies from streaming willy-nilly and regularly presents you with movies you don't care about or have already watched. But it's cheap and there aren't any real alternatives I've found. If I had, I would have already switched.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

Cammi (1956130) | about 2 years ago | (#42608665)

When I joined netflix, the Starz "content" only consisted one one TV series, and it was a year old. Spartacus. And nothing else .... that's not content.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

shaitand (626655) | about 2 years ago | (#42610215)

Most of the A list movies came from Starz. Granted those were a couple years old but at least they were there.

Re: Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

skitchen8 (1832190) | about 2 years ago | (#42611121)

For $8 a month my kid gets access to a whole bunch of PBS programming on demand, and all of the Power Rangers you can shake a stick at (seriously, there are seven lifetimes worth of the various Power Rangers, he never runs out, it is terrible). I get the first 15 seasons of Top Gear. I watched all of Weeds. The family watched the Lorax this past weekend. Me and the girlfriend watched Craigslist Joe the other day, which I thought was a pretty cool film. It is purely down to a matter of taste, for me there is tons of content on Netflix, and it is well worth my money.

Re: Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

shaitand (626655) | about 2 years ago | (#42611319)

Sure it's a question of taste. But that is all old content. If you've had Netflix for a few months you've seen all of that and they aren't really getting anything new.

I've seen the old episodes of series that interest me. I want the episodes that are on now. I want the movies that are in the new release section now. Hell, if I'm going to watch old movies I want the A list old movies that still run on premium channels.

The only interesting titles I see on Netflix aren't listed as new but in my previously seen list.

Re: Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

skitchen8 (1832190) | about 2 years ago | (#42621385)

I did, at one point have the same problem (I've had Netflix for a couple years) but then I discovered that watching things that I may not watch based on the short description or picture has netted some good results. I only really watch TV if I'm pretty bored, so it isn't as if I've lost anything by watching 10 minutes and then turning it off, and I've stumbled over quite a few things I ended up liking. Hell, occasionally the girlfriend and I have a few drinks and purposely watch random shit we wouldn't normally watch, sometimes you find that movie that is so bad it is absolutely hilarious, and then have fun making fun of it, a la MST3K. To me it is something worth $8 a month, plus I am not willing to pay $70/month for cable. I can see how for others it wouldn't be as great though. There's definitely a lot of content, you just have to like the content it has. I also pay for the DVD service as well, which isn't really worth it to me because I never remember to send the DVDs back and average maybe 2/month. However I keep it because sometimes I want newer content.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42608033)

same shit as always, considering that it's windowed. It may be thrilling as a minute improvement, but it's not an actual improvement in the situation for anyone.

Why should you have to have a netflix, blockbuster, redbox and hulu subscription to get everything you want? Let alone the fact that you will have limiting content even with all 4.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

l0ungeb0y (442022) | about 2 years ago | (#42608805)

Check out Amazon Instant Video. The have most all the free content Netflix does AND blockbusters like the Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises for reasonable prices, plus a "buy" option.

I might just cut Netflix loose in a couple months since I'm watching it less and less in favor of Amazon. But I'll wait till their Disney contract kicks in before making that decision.

Re:Blockbuster titles from last year (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | about 2 years ago | (#42609053)

No non-kindle video app for Android...

When will the MPAA learn? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42607931)

Full 1080p (or 4320p-3D in the near future.) drm free videos for just 0.99c will stop 99.9% of piracy. Also Blockbuster just gone into administration in the UK [guardian.co.uk]

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42608011)

drm free videos for just 0.99c will stop 99.9% of piracy

Yeah, it will also stop 99% of all big-budget movies from ever getting made. Which could actually be a good thing, since it would finally end Michael Bay's career at least.

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (1)

shaitand (626655) | about 2 years ago | (#42609489)

$5 a movie, the studios collaborate to build the distribution service and stop caring about rental places and put tv networks in second tier. DRM free files, no renting, no expiration, just buy. I'd expect this would generate more revenue than the studios get now and eliminate pretty much all piracy.

Toss in a monthly fee to have streaming access to the movies you've bought and sweeten the monthly with free access to stream TV shows. Nobody is in a better position to establish cross-licensing content agreements with the major TV content producers like HBO, Showtime, etc than the studios they license all their movie content from. This is a much better model than the lame attempts to try to charge $2-3 per episode you see now from places like Amazon and Vudu.

In other words content distribution has become easy and cheap. Content producers no longer need the entrenched and expensive content distribution networks of the past they can offer better pricing, more convenient access for consumers, and stop wasting money on the losing DRM battle altogether. Embrace technology, don't fight it or try to use it to enforce anti-consumer controls.

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42608017)

Full 1080p (or 4320p-3D in the near future.) drm free videos for just 0.99c will stop 99.9% of piracy. Also Blockbuster just gone into administration in the UK [guardian.co.uk]

For just under one penny, you can't even afford the bandwidth to distribute the content. That being said, yes I suspect that .99 cent downloads would stop piracy.

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (4, Insightful)

hawguy (1600213) | about 2 years ago | (#42608163)

Full 1080p (or 4320p-3D in the near future.) drm free videos for just 0.99c will stop 99.9% of piracy. Also Blockbuster just gone into administration in the UK [guardian.co.uk]

For just under one penny, you can't even afford the bandwidth to distribute the content. That being said, yes I suspect that .99 cent downloads would stop piracy.

I think he was using Verizon Math [blogspot.com] and really meant $.99 or 99 cents.

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42608197)

Ha ha! Good one!

Seems to me that in the late 90's/early 00's we heard 'If the RIAA would just sell us one song for $0.99, instead of making us buy a whole album, it would eliminate 99% of piracy.' Then iTunes came along and sold songs for $0.99, and the pirates said "but it has DRM! If they would just eliminate the DRM it would stop 99% of piracy!' Then iTunes and other services removed the DRM, and now of course music piracy has been wiped out, right?

Pirates are going to pirate no matter what. The stupid excuses they offer up as to why they do it (or what it would take to eliminate it) are nothing but rationalizations to themselves.

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 years ago | (#42608839)

If the old model had been kept, I would have gone my entire life never paying for a song again. AS it is now, if there is a song i want, i fire up itunes on my pocket computer, purchase and download. Its DRM free, I can download it as many times as I want and I can back it up and play it back on any capable device, even non-Apple ones. Until movies cross this bar, i wont be buying them.

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#42609191)

The piracy of music isn't nearly as pervasive as the piracy of movies now. I don't know people that pirate music. It's too easy to just buy it. There are a few I know who pirate music they own, getting the WAVes of FLAC of something they paid for the MP3 of, but people now, from my circle of friends, don't pirate music anymore. The news keeps it up, just like MADD will never stop their crusade, even if there were 0 driving deaths in a year.

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (1)

N0Man74 (1620447) | about 2 years ago | (#42616283)

just like MADD will never stop their crusade, even if there were 0 driving deaths in a year.

0 Deaths is still too many!

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#42619607)

There could be one next year, if we don't restrict it this year.

Though with MADD, there are more DUI incidents now than when they started. You'd think that would make someone think about it, but apparently thinking about DUI is the same as running over a group of elementary school children, so no thinking allowed.

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | about 2 years ago | (#42610027)

Once iTunes was available, within about 2-3 years, most music piracy was gone... Between Amazon, and Apple I'd be surprised of most people (more than 99.99%) didn't buy their music.

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (1)

Rougement (975188) | about 2 years ago | (#42608251)

Well maybe not 99c. I just checked iTunes, The Avengers is mine to own for only $19.99! That's the reason I have spent exactly $0 on buying movies for the past several years. I guess some people are ponying up $20 per movie, I'll never be one of them.

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (1)

hawguy (1600213) | about 2 years ago | (#42608323)

Well maybe not 99c.

I just checked iTunes, The Avengers is mine to own for only $19.99! That's the reason I have spent exactly $0 on buying movies for the past several years.

I guess some people are ponying up $20 per movie, I'll never be one of them.

This is why I buy used DVD's, then rip them into DRM free digital copies that I can play at home, on my tablet, etc.

I'd probably do the same with CD's, since used CD's tend to cost a fraction of a digital download, but I haven't bought any music at all in years.

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (1)

alen (225700) | about 2 years ago | (#42608371)

to be fair with itunes you can at least get a file that will play on any idevice and on the apple TV. you can even download the file to stream from a home computer if the internet is down

as far as i can tell with google play you either stream or download on demand only. same with vudu and other digital lockers

but then that's why i just buy a blu ray if i want to own the movie. $20-$30 gets you a blu ray/DVD/Digital copy package

Re:When will the MPAA learn? (1)

omnichad (1198475) | about 2 years ago | (#42609717)

8K in the near future? Or do you mean 4K x 2 eyes? Neither is in the near future.

an App ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42607937)

So we have now come to the point were an "App", the epitome of a badly designed concept and a customer abuse device, is now considered to be critical for succes ? And that was written down without given it a second thought. What a sad state we're in.

Not true, you can stream from the website (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42607967)

If you have a valid code and go to redboxinstant.com you can stream the movies in the browser. Requires silverlight like netflix....

Call me when they ... (1)

Infernal Device (865066) | about 2 years ago | (#42607969)

Call me when they actually have some compelling content and can be viewed on a device that doesn't guarantee eyestrain trying to pick out details.

Re:Call me when they ... (1)

omnichad (1198475) | about 2 years ago | (#42609743)

There's plenty of Android devices with MHL ports (to be used with Micro-USB to HDMI adapter cables). For $40, you can do the same for iPhone. You can hook that up to a 52" TV. How's that for eyestrain?

I agree you're not likely to be pulling down 1080p on an iPhone, but that's only a short-term CPU limitation.

don't the (1)

ozduo (2043408) | about 2 years ago | (#42608023)

Chinese bury people in red boxes?

Pricing (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | about 2 years ago | (#42608045)

Is this going to be another "unlimited" service like Netflix that only has low-budget TV movies from 1982, or will this have a-la-carte options like Amazon with movies people might want to watch?

Re:Pricing (1)

hawguy (1600213) | about 2 years ago | (#42608199)

Is this going to be another "unlimited" service like Netflix that only has low-budget TV movies from 1982, or will this have a-la-carte options like Amazon with movies people might want to watch?

The movie industry will make sure that this service has a few choice movies that everyone wants to see and a lot of crap, but the "good" content won't overlap with Netflix's "good" content - they wouldn't want to get into a position where any content provider has enough market share to have leverage to negotiate good deals for content.

They'd rather have a fragmented market where no single player has much power.

Re:Pricing (1)

JackieBrown (987087) | about 2 years ago | (#42610817)

The problem I have with Amazon is the opposite (but I mostly watch TV shows.) Just about every show (save some PBS, Discovery stuff,) that is on Amazon is on Netflix.

The only reason I even keep Amazon is because I can stream it on my linux xbmc.

Re:Pricing (1)

Cammi (1956130) | about 2 years ago | (#42608741)

Wait ... Amazon has both low budget tv movies from 1982, a-la-carte options, as well as severely over priced episode options (homeland, all hbo series, etc)

so far a dissapointment (1)

genericmk (2767843) | about 2 years ago | (#42608047)

So far Redbox Instant has been a big bummer. I got my beta access, waited until a Friday night to activate it and watch something recent and voila! Fish Called Wanda was the best they had to offer. I just logged into my Netflix and got some other stale title rolling. At least Netflix has a selection of stale.

massive content library (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42608067)

The content library is a joke. Its filled with stuff that people turn there TV off for.

Only If (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42608129)

The only way I would be on board would be if they can combine what I can get on Netflix and Hulu, be commercial free and display it on my apple tv or blu-ray player. Currently I'm using Netflix to catch up on old shows, Hulu to stay up to date on new shows, and I visit a redbox for when a new movie comes out. 9 bucks a month for Netflix, free for hulu but dealing with commercials, and 1.30 per movie rental. Pretty cheap so far, it needs to stay that way.

Only TWO things any streaming service needs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42608213)

In my opinion, lots of content and a good UI are really the only 2 factors. In fact, I think what the market is really missing is a *higher* priced service, with the extra income used to secure content deals and provide newer, higher-quality content. I'm hooked on instant, commercial-free streaming, but I'd happily pay $60-$80 (what I used to pay for cable) to get the equivalent of, say, Netflix's DVD library.

Verizon FiOS On Demand's massive libraries?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42608521)

As some who has had FiOS TV for a few years, I have to wonder what scale of "massive" this is. There is bugger all available with FiOS on demand, just the same shows and films across multiple channels in very low quality (upscaled DVD for pseudo HD most of the time). If you think Netflix has a crap selection, Verizon makes it look like it archives everything ever made.

Missing basic features (3, Informative)

Cammi (1956130) | about 2 years ago | (#42608649)

When I was notified on facebook that I could sign up for the beta. I checked the website and confirmed via facebook that they currently support xbox 360. With that in mind, I signed up, and got the entry on Monday. Come to find out ... they lied. There is no xbox 360 support. Not only that, they removed the statement from the website. (but did not remove the facebook reference). So ... what happened? I cannot test. I can see all the pretty movies (perhaps 0.01% of the netflix/amazon/hulu/vudu libraries) listed, but it's no good. Plus it is $6 a month for the streaming (for some reason Redbox setups isnt available in Alaska). But with a library smaller then all other services, and all the same movies/shows are available, the service is really worth about 10 cents.

Re:Missing basic features (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#42609301)

Plus it is $6 a month for the streaming (for some reason Redbox setups isnt available in Alaska).

http://www.redbox.com/locations/alaska/anchorage/ and there are a selection there. Or were you referring to something else?

Re:Missing basic features (1)

Cammi (1956130) | about 2 years ago | (#42611783)

Juneau, Alaska I meant to say.

Re:Missing basic features (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#42613769)

Juneau wasn't on the list. Nor was Bethel, Kodiak or Anaktuvuk Pass. Though even Palmer has two.

run at startup??? (2)

Rick Richardson (87058) | about 2 years ago | (#42609021)

System tools
run at startup
Allows the app to have itself started as soon as the system has finished booting. This can make it take longer to start the tablet and allow the app to slow down the overall tablet by always running. Allows the app to have itself started as soon as the system has finished booting. This can make it take longer to start the phone and allow the app to slow down the overall phone by always running.

Silverlight? They use that? (2)

Animats (122034) | about 2 years ago | (#42609027)

Microsoft discontinued support for Silverlight last year. Why are they using it?

I'm underwhelmed with streaming video. Yesterday, CBS's streaming video kept stalling because one of the anal-probe tracking systems, "adobetag.com", was not responding reliably. Video playback would stall with "Waiting for adobetag.com" in the browser status.

Re:Silverlight? They use that? (1)

omnichad (1198475) | about 2 years ago | (#42609811)

Microsoft discontinued support for Silverlight last year. Why are they using it?

Proper DRM support that Flash lacks. Whether you agree with their choice or not, that's the reason.

Netflix is superior. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42609429)

Netflix is everywhere, the price per month is dirt cheap, they have a really wide selection of stuff.

My only complaint is that they dont get new stuff quick enough but thats still not a big deal.

If more people would go with netflix they would get more exclusive deals and better timing and everyone who would be scrambling to get their content on netflix. So instead of going with yet another streaming service Ill stay with the best.

International (0)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 2 years ago | (#42609779)

Netflix is available in Canada, Redbox isn't. Netflix wins. Case closed.

Why haven't Netflix and Redbox merged yet? (1)

n7ytd (230708) | about 2 years ago | (#42617663)

Let Netflix handle the streaming, and merge Netflix's huge DVD library with the ability to exchange discs at the local Redbox.
The problem would be that the redboxes would fill up with old movies that need to be shipped back to Netflix, but certainly that's not unsolvable.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?