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!

Hulu "Kicking Back Into Action" Says CEO, Adding New Content

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the back-to-life dept.

Businesses 169

cagraham writes "While rival Netflix dominated the news this summer with original programming and content deals, the only news from Hulu was a July announcement that they might be sold off. Parent companies Disney, 21st Century Fox, and Comcast seem to have decided against that now, and acting CEO Andy Forssell says they're 'kicking back into action.' The main take is that they've signed an agreement with the BBC to add show like Sherlock, MI-5, and Doctor Who, although the deal isn't exclusive, and the shows are already on other streaming services."

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

As a US-only service (5, Interesting)

msobkow (48369) | about a year ago | (#44889391)

Hulu can rot in hell.

I am so tired of seeing "not supported in your region" messages from US companies.

Re:As a US-only service (5, Informative)

cheater512 (783349) | about a year ago | (#44889501)

Tip: thepiratebay.sx is one service which doesn't have those messages.
Works well for me in Australia.

Re:As a US-only service (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44889597)

Also streamallthis.me

Re:As a US-only service (-1)

OhANameWhatName (2688401) | about a year ago | (#44890375)

Piracy is stealing. Think of the artists!!

Re:As a US-only service (5, Funny)

chihowa (366380) | about a year ago | (#44890707)

I'm sorry, but that sentiment is not supported in your region.

Re:As a US-only service (5, Funny)

oodaloop (1229816) | about a year ago | (#44889641)

That's what you get for living in the outer rim territories.

Re:As a US-only service (5, Funny)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year ago | (#44889787)

Shouldn't you be thankful that your pristine country is protected from Yankee cultural rot and contamination?

Re:As a US-only service (-1)

TheGoodNamesWereGone (1844118) | about a year ago | (#44890213)

Shouldn't you be thankful that your pristine country is protected from Yankee cultural rot and contamination?

I'd mod this up but I already posted, dammit

Re:As a US-only service (5, Informative)

Rude Turnip (49495) | about a year ago | (#44889797)

It's worse than you think. Even if you're in the US, you can't watch certain shows on certain devices, such as XBox 360 or Roku. Their management lives in this 20 year old fantasy land where I'm going to go sit at my desk and watch something in my web browser. It's an incredibly backwards-thinking company.

Re:As a US-only service (1)

CTU (1844100) | about a year ago | (#44889919)

This is the reason why I would never use their service. I got a big screen tv with myPS3 and a smaller laptop screen, so which would I want to use? What am I not allowed to use?...yeah screw off Hulu

Re:As a US-only service (2)

hedwards (940851) | about a year ago | (#44890045)

That was my thought, premium still has ads and not everything can be shown on the TV screen. I'm still trying to figure out precisely what it is that they're charging for.

The thing that pissed me off the most though was the waiting period on programming.

Re:As a US-only service (1, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | about a year ago | (#44890065)

I use HULU on my PS#..and Xbox...and well..everything.

Or do you mean they wont give you a service for free?

Cheap ass bastard.

Re:As a US-only service (3, Insightful)

Joe Tie. (567096) | about a year ago | (#44890217)

It's ad supported, we're already paying for it by watching. The issue isn't paying for it, it's paying for it twice. It'd be fine if by paying money we didn't get commercials, but they still push those.

Re: As a US-only service (2)

Damarkus13 (1000963) | about a year ago | (#44890241)

It makes them no worse than cable, and about $50 cheaper where I am.

Re: As a US-only service (2)

Osgeld (1900440) | about a year ago | (#44890391)

agreed

even their ad's are not that bad, 1 or 2, occasionally 3 during a few moments of an "hour long" show vs the 4-6 every 10 min of normal tv

Re:As a US-only service (2)

Rude Turnip (49495) | about a year ago | (#44890637)

I was paying $8/month for Hulu. I don't like getting the "free" version of things and insist upon being a paying customer whenever possible. In fact, to use Hulu on a streaming device, you *must* be a paying customer. And even if you are a paying customer using a streaming device such as XBox or Roku, they will not let you watch certain programs on your devices.

You have a laptop. Use it as your HTPC. (2)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#44890447)

Does your laptop have HDMI, DVI-D, or VGA out? Does your HDTV have HDMI or VGA in? If so, you can use your laptop as your home theater PC. The only people missing out are those who have only a single desktop PC in a separate room.

Re:You have a laptop. Use it as your HTPC. (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about a year ago | (#44890785)

Are you really suggesting that someone deal with hooking and unhooking a laptop to a TV so that they can watch a show when the TV already has a Hulu App built in? While I do have a Windows 7 HTPC, there is no way in hell, I would use my laptop to do it. Having to hook up a computer every time you want to watch TV is worse than watching it on a 17" monitor at your desk.

Re:As a US-only service (1)

x_t0ken_407 (2716535) | about a year ago | (#44890987)

I purchased their Plus service (for about a month) and the PS3 client simply would not play audio. What a joke.

Re:As a US-only service (2)

symbolset (646467) | about a year ago | (#44889945)

Look who owns it. That explains everything.

Re:As a US-only service (1)

geekoid (135745) | about a year ago | (#44890055)

Are you high or stupid? or maybe a troll?
Hulu is supported on Roku:
http://www.hulu.com/support/article/332610 [hulu.com]
and Xbox:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/partners/hulu-plus [xbox.com]

or do you mean you don't like them becasue they cost money to bring entertainment to you?

Re:As a US-only service (3, Informative)

Tr3vin (1220548) | about a year ago | (#44890331)

No, he means exactly what he says. While there are Hulu apps for Roku and the Xbox 360, not all of the content is available to stream to those devices. It comes down to licensing but it is still very annoying. http://www.hulu.com/support/article/20116158 [hulu.com]

Re:As a US-only service (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about a year ago | (#44890787)

Try watching The Simpsons on Hulu's Xbox or Roku app.

Re:As a US-only service (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890171)

the reason for the restrictions is likely that hulu pays less in licensing fees for titles that are restricted to pc viewing only (or cost extra to watch on mobile or tv) or can only get pc-streaming rights for those titles

at least for getting around the cant-watch-on-your-tv bit, it's easy enough to hook up a pc or laptop to a tv to use as a monitor since now most of them have at least one pc input... and it's not even all that expensive to do that wirelessly, either, if you had to go that route instead of cables.

Re:As a US-only service (3, Insightful)

formfeed (703859) | about a year ago | (#44890271)

Even if you're in the US, you can't watch certain shows on certain devices, such as XBox 360 or Roku. Their management lives in this 20 year old fantasy land where I'm going to go sit at my desk and watch something in my web browser.

No. It's exactly the other way around:
They know that most people wouldn't want to watch it sitting at their desk on their PC. They know that most people would prefer to watch hulu on their streaming device / android stick / whatever while sitting on the couch.

And that's exactly why the PC is free and anything that hooks up to a TV or media center costs money

Re:As a US-only service (2)

Rude Turnip (49495) | about a year ago | (#44890643)

I don't begrudge anyone for charging money, but since I was a paying customer, I insist on being able to watch everything in their library on a streaming device.

Re:As a US-only service (2)

craigminah (1885846) | about a year ago | (#44889907)

It's probably rooted in the fact that American commercials shown overseas won't produce any revenue. I despise Hulu because I pay monthly for service and still get commercials...and the interface sucks compared to NetFlix.

Re:As a US-only service (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44889971)

I despise Hulu because I pay monthly for service and still get commercials...

I despise YOU and everyone who just bends over and takes it and rewards this crap like you do. It lowers the bar of expectations for all the rest of us. People like you who act against your own interests like this are why "average" is an insult.

Re:As a US-only service (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890025)

They already do geolocation for ads...they do geolocation for regions to block people...why can't they do geolocation to give non-American ads to non-Americans and make things available?

In general content produces sell rights to shows by region, while Disney might make a drama available where they have the distribution rights available on Hulu, the production company behind it may have sold the exclusive distribution rights in Brazil or the UK to another country. Disney distributing it globally via Hulu could be viewed as a breach of contract.

Of course that doesn't excuse Disney for not distributing their own in house produced shows globally, but they may be able to make more money by selling the overseas rights than they would by making it available directly. Ultimately they are a business trying to maximize their income.

Re:As a US-only service (4, Insightful)

egamma (572162) | about a year ago | (#44890043)

It's probably rooted in the fact that American commercials shown overseas won't produce any revenue. I despise Hulu because I pay monthly for service and still get commercials...and the interface sucks compared to NetFlix.

Then do what I do--vote with my wallet, and stop paying for Hulu Plus, and stick with Netflix. So I'm a year or two behind--so what? I can watch years and years of a single show, and then do the same with another show. I never run out of stuff to watch and never see a commercial. Why bother with Hulu?

Re:As a US-only service (2)

Flere Imsaho (786612) | about a year ago | (#44890085)

If you're a Firefox user, give the Hola plugin a whirl ;-) Works for me.

Re:As a for-pay service that displays ads (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890107)

As a for-pay service that displays ads, Hulu can rot in hell.

I live in the US, but there's no way I'll use it unless they remove the ads.

Re:As a US-only service (1)

TheGoodNamesWereGone (1844118) | about a year ago | (#44890209)

I agree that they're evil. But have you tried using a proxy?

Re: As a US-only service (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890679)

Hulu plus is also in Japan so it's not US only .

Shill service (4, Insightful)

hguorbray (967940) | about a year ago | (#44889417)

They were probably hoping that they could diminish netflix (esp comcast) since they would all prefer pay per (every) view or non ala-carte bundles rather than a 'watch whatever you want for a low flat fee'

Netflix is one of the things that is helping keep the Media cartels at bay at this point and I am happy to have been a subscriber for the past 10 years or so and hope that Comcast/ATT get their comeuppance some day (but doubt it due to regulatory capture)

-I'm just sayin'

Re:Shill service (2)

MrEricSir (398214) | about a year ago | (#44889759)

A pay per view/rental model could be a huge improvement. Just look at Amazon Instant -- they get content fast, there's a huge selection and you only pay for what you want to see. Makes a lot more sense than "unlimited" streaming of shows you don't care about.

Re:Shill service (4, Interesting)

notanalien_justgreen (2596219) | about a year ago | (#44889921)

At $2 an episode, tv watching adds up quickly. I (and almost everyone I know) vastly prefer netflix's model. Just look at the lack of success of historic pay-per-view channels. Yeah, people will occasionally pay for it, but generally it's something people do very rarely (like once every few years).

Just last week I was sick with the flu for several days - so I loaded up the most recent seasons of Mad Men and Breaking Bad - binged on them while I was sick and couldn't really do anything else. There's no way in hell I would have done this with the pay-per-view model as I would have blown ~$20/day on it.

Re:Shill service (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890723)

$2 per episode would be insanely expensive. I generally watch somewhere between 50 and 75 TV episodes each month on DVD, so $2/episode would cost me $100 to $150/mo. However, I pay less than $30/mo to a certain DVD-by-mail company.

Re:Shill service (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890499)

Amazon is plagued with nonsense billing/performance technical problems and nickel-and-dime gimmicks. No thanks. Unlimited streaming with a flat fee destroys it any day.

Fuck streaming (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44889419)

Seriously.

Why has nobody made a service that even comes close to piracy? 3 clicks. type one word. wait 10 minutes and i have a full movie i can watch on any device anytime i want. using any player i want. no connection needed after dl.

Nobody has even tried to compete with that level of convenience. I'd pay a couple bucks an episode or $5 a movie for that fast and that easy to use.

but nope. there is no legal way to do that.

that's just fucking stupid. you'd rake in BILLIONS.

Re:Fuck streaming (2)

Urza9814 (883915) | about a year ago | (#44889505)

Also integration with other devices and services. I have a custom built media center system. I stuff a magnet link into it and it downloads the movie, then it looks it up on IMDB and grabs all the details, then it dumps all of that into my library. Then I can select it from the library and it will turn on the projector and stereo and such before playing the movie, and turn them off when it's done.

There is literally no paid service that I could do even half of that with. I'd pay for the media if I could use it the way I want...until then, screw 'em. Offer me a bittorrent option of your media and I gladly pay for it or give a donation. Otherwise, I'm not gonna pay for something that I can't use how I want.

Re:Fuck streaming (3, Insightful)

camperdave (969942) | about a year ago | (#44889537)

Seriously.

Why has nobody made a service that even comes close to piracy? 3 clicks. type one word. wait 10 minutes and i have a full movie i can watch on any device anytime i want.

That only works for popular movies. I've had download times in days for some.

Re:Fuck streaming (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44889837)

You've got problems then. I can get cheezy movies from the 80's with a whole dozen people on it in less time than it takes to watch it.

Re:Fuck streaming (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890423)

you have no clue how torrents work do you

Re:Fuck streaming (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44889631)

If you live in the US, I think streaming on hulu is *monumentally* more convenient.

Piracy is full of bullshit responses, false spam files, inscrutable filenames, and inconsistent availability. And 10 minutes is a very fast download. It then takes storage space and potentially requires codecs and shit that is just handled for you on the browser.

I know how to deal with these things, but I really think you're overstating the general convenience of piracy massively. For Hulu, you just type one word, wait 30 seconds (for the pre-roll ad), and watch.

Once you leave the US Hulu becomes terrible, much harder than piracy for sure. A lot of streaming is US only.

Also, Amazon Prime lets you do almost all of what you listed except "using any player I want" with their Unbox client (for the most part, some HD movies excepted). I *really* don't think the video player is a big deal to many people at all. I'd say that not having to wait 10 minutes is probably an order of magnitude more important than choosing your video player software.

Wait wait wait .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44889993)

Who you call'in pirate?

The folks chok'in the content or the folks allowing anyone to get it?

In other words:

Arrrrr matey, if ya wanna pass 'er, ya gonna ave to pay yer toll! Arrr...... Arrrr. And if ye lose yer content, ya gotta pay again! Arrr... And if I change the medium, ya gotta pay again! Arrrrr... And I i decide to change the terms, ya gotta pay again! Arrrrrrr.... Yours, Long John Disney.

As apposed to:

Login,. download from a server where this person who PAID for the content and more than likely isn't using it.

You know, I got a shit load of DVDs and CDs that are collecting dust. Whats the fucking difference if I lend them out ( or give them away) or just allow some folks to download them

Multiple copies?

Well, my bandwidth sucks for being Netflix lite. I can do much more damage by giving away my disks.

Just say'in.

Re:Fuck streaming (1)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about a year ago | (#44890301)

Amazon Instant Video, the iTunes Store, Vudu, and I'm sure others have allowed downloading of some or all of their titles in addition to streaming them for a number of years. None of them have always-on requirements for their downloaded titles, all of them are relatively easy to search, and between those three you have good coverage over a wide range of media and platforms (Android is the only notable platform that doesn't have download support from those three). Not to mention that some of them even offer you a convenience that torrenting typically doesn't: the ability to start watching instantly while the download continues in the background.

If the best excuses you can offer are problems that the legal alternatives addressed several years ago, it tells me that you haven't even bothered looking at them, and I'm willing to bet that the real reason you're doing it simply because you're either too cheap or too lazy to explore the legal alternatives. Either that, or there are other reasons that you're not citing, such as if you were wanting to use your own player because it provides accessibility features unavailable in the players from these services. Or maybe you're philosophically opposed to DRM, intellectual property, or copyrights. Or you live in a region where none of them are available. There are plenty of decent justifications, but griping about "nobody" doing things that they've actually been doing for years just tells me that you haven't even bothered looking at them.

The one thing you did get right: they are raking in billions.

Re:Fuck streaming (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890741)

Not to mention that some of them even offer you a convenience that torrenting typically doesn't: the ability to start watching instantly while the download continues in the background.

Sometimes, some paid services can do the same thing that some free services can do. Doesn't really sound like a plus to me.

Re:Fuck streaming (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | about a year ago | (#44890403)

that 10 min for you is about 4 hours for me, just to get a sub par celphone video with Chinese subtitles

funny how pirates refuse to pay money, cept for faster internet

Re:Fuck streaming (2)

OhANameWhatName (2688401) | about a year ago | (#44890413)

Why has nobody made a service that even comes close to piracy?

Fucking stupid question IMO.

The media cartels are all scared shitless. They can't see the forest for the trees because the upper management is still wondering "How do we get people to go to cinemas again?". Why? Because they're all frightened, ageing, greedy, foolish, incontenent, semi-literate control freaks.

No point in shouting at the wind. Just keep pirating.

"everything's just fine" (4, Insightful)

globaljustin (574257) | about a year ago | (#44889423)

Hulu.com is doomed in its current incarnation.

Exclusivity was the game 5 years ago, before Netflix sort of cornered the market w/ userbase & began its successful 'original programming' venture.

Getting BBC 'content' that is already available on competitors, fee or not, is kind of sad, really.

Maybe Dr. Who is a big 'get' (look IMHO its shit scifi, but i don't know what people like)...maybe it'll boost 'clicks' by 20%...that's just polishing the brass on the titanic

the 'profit model' iceberg sunk Hulu.com a long time ago...we're just watching it play out now...

**if** the copyright holders decided to just dump their content onto hulu exclusively for free...that would change things, but that's virtually impossible

my prediction: hulu.com dies a slow sad death and gets bought by some Mark Cuban type for $1.2 Million in 5 years who uses it for MMA fights or something

Re:"everything's just fine" (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44889481)

You're correct that Doctor Who is shit scifi but many around here like it. The best move for Hulu is to pick up some fag pr0n too. Both of these would be bit hits among the local faggots.

Re:"everything's just fine" (1)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | about a year ago | (#44889551)

>

Maybe Dr. Who is a big 'get' (look IMHO its shit scifi, but i don't know what people like)...maybe it'll boost 'clicks' by 20%...that's just polishing the brass on the titanic

Doctor who is great once you look at it as a fantasy series instead of as a scifi series, everything else you said I agree with.

Re:"everything's just fine" (1)

geekoid (135745) | about a year ago | (#44890083)

There is on difference between sci-and fantasy except setting. Yes, Dr. Who is Science Fiction.

yeah yeah I know, you have some view of sci-fi yu are emotionally attached to and thus stopped any actually thinking about it a decade ago.

Re:"everything's just fine" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890865)

There is on difference between sci-and fantasy except setting. Yes, Dr. Who is Science Fiction.

yeah yeah I know, you have some view of sci-fi yu are emotionally attached to and thus stopped any actually thinking about it a decade ago.

Fucking grammar, how does it work?

Re:"everything's just fine" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890963)

Depends on the Sci-Fi. Dr.Who is entering the realm of "Any sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic. . ."

A *LOT* of Space Opera Sci-Fi fits into that category as well.

On the other hand of the spectrum you have hard sci-fi that deals strictly with present day theories, and everything in between.

Even a lot of the Space Opera style sci-fi break as few rules as possible, and when they break them try to at least do so consistently. . . except for space battles. Most space battles follow WWII / Star Wars style dog fights because depicting an actual battle in space would be difficult. At best you'd end up with something that looks like an old style sailing fight with ships matching speed then flying parallel to fight. . . at best. Difficult to film that dramatically, though the Honor Harrington novels give a hint to how it would be done.

Re:"everything's just fine" (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about a year ago | (#44890813)

word yeah it's all IMHO...

scifi has something for everyone

Re:"everything's just fine" (1)

frinsore (153020) | about a year ago | (#44889579)

I have hope for Hulu simply because it can fill a niche that is very under-served. Netflix provides a back catalog but rarely has current content. iTunes provides current content but at a premium. Amazon seems to be attempting to copy both Netflix and iTunes. If I want to watch current content without paying a few dollars my only options are Hulu, torrent sites, and broadcast TV/cable.

used it for this (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about a year ago | (#44890831)

Netflix provides a back catalog but rarely has current content.

yeah I do occasionally hit up hulu.com when Daily Show and Colbert new episodes don't update on Comedy Central fast enough...usually they post the new episodes just after 12pm Pacific but sometimes it doesn't cycle through till later

Also, I'll choose hulu.com over some network's free airing (like when I watch New Girl) b/c Hulu.com's players is actually pretty smooth

so I have *used* hulu.com but only as a sort of 'hack' to get better quality of something that was already available elsewhere...

my goto for tv on the web is www.free-tv-video-online.me

Project Free TV rarely lets me down :P

Re:"everything's just fine" (1)

whoever57 (658626) | about a year ago | (#44889653)

I have to wonder at the thinking of Hulu execs: there are programs available on Hulu if you are using a Desktop computer, but not if you use a Roku box. Why?

Re:"everything's just fine" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44889773)

Not their [Hulu] option, I'm sure. I have 2 Apple TVs and really hate that I could see more shows if I hooked up a mac mini to my TV instead, even though I pay for Hulu+ and there's no technical reason (not like some content is harder to decode or something and needs better hardware).

Re:"everything's just fine" (1)

geekoid (135745) | about a year ago | (#44890089)

Re:"everything's just fine" (2)

whoever57 (658626) | about a year ago | (#44890577)

In what way does that link contradict my statement? I posted that there are programs that can be watched via Hulu on a desktop computer, but not via Hulu on a Roku box.

You got the wrong link from the Hulu site. Try this one [hulu.com]

Re:"everything's just fine" (1)

mrbester (200927) | about a year ago | (#44889747)

In case anyone is wondering, "MI-5" == "Spooks". Guess they changed the name in case people thought it another shit reality show about ghosts.

Hulu lost me with their other device BS... (1)

Lohrno (670867) | about a year ago | (#44889437)

I have a Google TV and it would not let me watch Hulu on it without paying for Hulu plus. Considering they have nowhere near the catalog that Netflix does, I really don't see them as a serious competitor. They might have been able to get me to watch a commercial or two considering their small catalog, but they didn't want that either.

Re:Hulu lost me with their other device BS... (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about a year ago | (#44889533)

Yeah, that's standard. If you aren't watching hulu on a PC, you have to pay for it. It's free on my mac, but my ipad and my Apple TV require a subscription.

I'm not sure where the Chromecast fits in.

Re:Hulu lost me with their other device BS... (1)

Lohrno (670867) | about a year ago | (#44889573)

I think for them to actually stand a chance they'd have to first stop that with the locking out other devices. Next step - make deals with all the people Netflix did somehow and get at least their catalog. (Unlikely) And then get newer stuff or something better. THEN maybe they could compete...

Re:Hulu lost me with their other device BS... (1)

evilviper (135110) | about a year ago | (#44889613)

Considering they have nowhere near the catalog that Netflix does, I really don't see them as a serious competitor.

Netflix has more back-catalog movie content, and Hulu has much more up-to-date TV content. Hulu is closer to being a direct broadcast and cable TV replacement than Netflix.

Can you watch the nightly news on Netflix? Can you watch Netflix streaming videos on your Linux systems?

Linux != GNU/Linux (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#44890503)

Can you watch Netflix streaming videos on your Linux systems?

Linux yes, GNU/Linux no. Netflix works on Android, which is Linux but not GNU/Linux. There's a reason RMS has insisted on the distinction.

Re:Linux != GNU/Linux (4, Insightful)

evilviper (135110) | about a year ago | (#44890733)

GNU hasn't got a damn thing to do with it. GNU is just some crap userland tools which are trivially easy to replace with something else. The important part is X11/Linux.

The reason RMS insists on sticking GNU in the name is pure self-promotion, and he's a shameless blowhard.

Service is meh... (5, Insightful)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#44889447)

For $6/mo you still have to watch ads, and the only real benefit you get is that you can watch a new episode of certain shows a couple days before the non-paying members.

On top of that, when we watch using the Wii, the interface is quite clunky. I'm not sure if they're doing a similar thing as Netflix where they have all these dozens of wrappers for different devices, but I can only assume they are to some extent. I'm sure Hulu on other devices is equally painful (though, on a computer it's actually quite well-done).

Netflix is just a way better value and it works better. I'm all for Hulu "stepping it up", but I'll believe it when I see it.

Re:Service is meh... (1)

fermion (181285) | about a year ago | (#44890593)

I dunno, does one have cable? Now if one watches sports then it is a good value. Every subscriber subsidizes the habit, but if we are just watching the stuff you get on Hulu, then we are being ripped off, totally.

What is keeping Hulu back is the realization that such services are going to kill television, which has become dependent on the cable fees at least as much as the advertising. If things are going as they are, it is going to be very expensive to keep high profit ventures such as sports and fox news, which will be the only thing left, on the air.

The way I look at it si that I pay maybe $60 a month for most of the content I want instead of $150 a month. What annoys me is that Hulu requires a cable account for so much content. The networks know that they have to promote the cable stations.

Which is why I would not mind if Amazon had advertisement for some of it's content. They are doing shows, and are not connecting with the traditional media. If they have to do commercials to air MI-5, i would not mind.

Ha (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44889457)

Too little, too late. Netflix ate their lunch while they were too busy putting out a half-assed, inferior service. But hey, with names like Disney, Fox, and Comcast, maybe they can litigate their competition away.

I still don't get it. (4, Insightful)

seebs (15766) | about a year ago | (#44889489)

Hulu's options:
1. I watch shows which have ads.
2. I pay them money, and they still show me ads.

I am really not seeing the attraction of option #2.

Re:I still don't get it. (3, Funny)

camperdave (969942) | about a year ago | (#44889565)

Hulu's options:
1. I watch shows which have ads.
2. I pay them money, and they still show me ads.

I am really not seeing the attraction of option #2.

They're better quality ads?

Re:I still don't get it. (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | about a year ago | (#44889811)

3. You pay them money, still watch ads, and can't watch certain shows on devices like XBox or Roku, which was sort of the point in the first place.

Re:I still don't get it. (1)

geekoid (135745) | about a year ago | (#44890105)

Newer content.

Re:I still don't get it. (1)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about a year ago | (#44890311)

It's worked for cable companies for years. What they haven't realized is that it's not working so well any longer, since Hulu was basically an attempt to bring that model to the Internet, without regard for the fact that people were turning to the Internet to get away from that model.

Hulu Plus needs to be cheaper (1)

evilviper (135110) | about a year ago | (#44889507)

It's crazy to fault Hulu for having a free service. They're getting money from those 1 million Plus subscribers, AND the ads they're forced to watch. They're also getting money from ad viewing of many millions of others who are not paying, which Netflix/Amazon can't claim.

IMHO, Hulu Plus is too expensive for what you get... the same price as Netflix, for less value. They could increase their subscriber count by just lowering the price to something reasonable. Or they could just do a better job monetizing their huge hordes of free viewers.

I'd expect better treatment of Hulu around here... Its service works quite well on Linux. Netflix doesn't. If you can find a copy of the discontinued HuluDesktop for Linux (or Windows) you can even get their content wrapped in a nice 10ft interface that works well navigating with remotes (and has LIRC support).

Re:Hulu Plus needs to be cheaper (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year ago | (#44889775)

I have no interest in Hulu with ads, ever. I hate ads, i hate being programmed like that. Those days are gone for me. I dont even like having to fast forward through them on the DVR anymore. Just sick of the volume of ads in my life.

Original Content = Awesome(s) (2)

dcollins (135727) | about a year ago | (#44889515)

Hulu has been on a downward slide for a few years, no doubt. But I'll say that their two original series this summer, The Awesomes and Quick Draw, have been absolutely spectacular. The Awesomes is a lot of SNL people (Seth Meyers, etc.) with a love-letter spoof to animated superheroes. Quick Draw is improv Western-crime-procedure-comedy, and is the best TV show I've seen in years; I've been laughing at it after the fact all week. Try them out if you can. (I'm crossing my fingers for another season of Quick Draw, it's a real gem.)

I will never use Hulu (5, Interesting)

dmomo (256005) | about a year ago | (#44889673)

When they first came out, I was impressed. They were streaming programs and trying honestly to generate revenue. Instead of cramming ads down my throat, they tried to show them in innovative ways, as a sort of compromise to the ad-weary consumer. They would show two cars and let me pick an ad to watch. They would ask if I wanted to view all commercials first so I could watch the show uninterrupted.

And the commercials were short. I was optimistic about the way things were headed. I understand the need to make money. Hulu seemed to be sensitive to their audience.

Then, Hulu Plus came along. They basically said.. "Some of that free content is no longer free. You have to pay for it now. But, you still have to watch commercials". With that, I ceased all interaction with Hulu. About a year later, I decided that paying for some streaming content would be worthwhile, if I could watch it on my terms. I now gladly give Netflix my money for that. So long as they don't charge me twice by also showing ads, I will stick with them.

Re:I will never use Hulu (1)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about a year ago | (#44890345)

I was actually shocked when I went to go watch Top Gear on Netflix last week and was not greeted with the musical intro I was expecting, but was instead met with a trailer for one of their original shows (Hemlock Grove). One I had already marked as Not Interested and which even their own recommendation engine thought I would only give two stars.

I think it's happened only once before to me, so they're doing it sparingly, but they need to stop doing it, since it actually really annoyed me that a service that prides itself so much on providing a great experience to the customer would waste my time by showing me an ad for their own product that they already knew I wouldn't be interested in.

Re:I will never use Hulu (1)

dmomo (256005) | about a year ago | (#44890757)

I've never seen that happen. Wow. If that's the case, they are probably testing certain people to see how it pans out. That doesn't bode well. Be vocal with them, if you can.

Doesn't get it (3, Insightful)

EmperorOfCanada (1332175) | about a year ago | (#44889799)

The bar has been set by piracy. If you want to be successful you must beat piracy. The key attributes of piracy are: Worldwide release, no commercials, no FBI WARNING screens, doesn't promote crap that people don't want to watch but you want them to see, doesn't charge too much, simple interfaces, doesn't upsell upsell upsell, doesn't try to extract continuous marketing information, doesn't use your product to try and support your 20th century business model, make it as easy for me to use your product (basically make it available on every conceivable device).

Netflix basically matches or beats nearly every one of these attributes. Hulu does not.

Re:Doesn't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890097)

The bar has been set by piracy. If you want to be successful you must beat piracy. The key attributes of piracy are: Worldwide release, no commercials, no FBI WARNING screens, doesn't promote crap that people don't want to watch but you want them to see, doesn't charge too much, simple interfaces, doesn't upsell upsell upsell, doesn't try to extract continuous marketing information, doesn't use your product to try and support your 20th century business model, make it as easy for me to use your product (basically make it available on every conceivable device)....

And yet I wonder as you sit back and type this if you even realize just how many jobs you're describing, and how many existing revenue streams you are asking companies to simply walk away from...

Re:Doesn't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890561)

Boo f-ing hoo. Just like evolution, the market requires one to adapt or die.

The old models must be destroyed when their time is past. New jobs can be created in unexpected ways. The luddites were wrong, automated manufacturing didn't kill off factory workers; it moved them into peripheral or senior positions.

Re:Doesn't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890973)

And content. . .

With as many companies withholding content from Netflix streaming, or asking for exorbitant licensing fees, the non-original streaming content on Netflix has taken a real hit. It's great to see Netflix original content, and successful partnerships, like their mostly positive relationship with AMC, but I've recently switched back to DVDs because their streaming selection is getting terrible. Not saying it's their fault since they don't control the content. . . but it'll be a while before cable dies out enough for HBO and others to seriously feel the pinch enough to give Netflix a go. . . assuming they don't put together their own half assed streaming service.

And yet they still missed the boat (2)

jnmontario (865369) | about a year ago | (#44889801)

When they first came out I wanted to support them, but I'm in Canada - geoblocked. Strike 1. A year or two later I finally got a VPN, stopped my satellite subscription, modded my ATV2 and started watching. Shortly thereafter most of the content creators pulled their content from Hulu to try and create their own empires. Most of the shows I WOULD watch got pulled and placed onto their crappy services. Strike 2. In this digital age I want to watch what I want, when I want, and I don't want the limitation of having to try to remember to squeeze in that episode of X before the show expires on Hulu. I missed the season finale of Grimm by 3-4 days because of this expiration model for the show. Strike 3. Netflix, you get my money. Hulu/NBC etc... you don't, and I still watch the stuff that could have been on your site making you revenue, but I do it through other sources.

Re:And yet they still missed the boat (1)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | about a year ago | (#44890179)

Ok, I'm no CEO super villian who's only purpose is to make more money, but hear me out. If you obviously have the technology to determine which region someone is in, can't you... wait for it, serve them region local advertisements? Why tell people,"Sorry sorry, you can't help make us money."

Re:And yet they still missed the boat (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#44890525)

If you obviously have the technology to determine which region someone is in, can't you... wait for it, serve them region local advertisements?

For one thing, if not enough advertisers in a particular region have placed region-local advertisements, I don't see how a video provider can show region-local advertisers. For another, a lot of these video producers have decade-long exclusive contracts with regional distributors in other countries that predate Hulu.

All streaming service suck a$$ (1)

Vince6791 (2639183) | about a year ago | (#44890021)

All these streaming services suck ass. Netflix u.s sucks major balls, we get nothing but repeated old shit over and over again. I used an unblocker for chrome and got to see what Canada, Britain, Denmark netflix all have compared to U.S, guess what, better quality movies even though they have less selection. But, this is quality over u.s netflix quantity crap. Nothing to do with licensing, netflix claimed their u.s movie selection is based on customer demand, yeah like we like shitty, unheard of, b movies.

DVD's and bluerays are still relative.

Competition Here Is Good, but (1)

SydShamino (547793) | about a year ago | (#44890093)

Competition in this space is good... but since I already have a Netflix account and Amazon Prime, I really don't want to see anything decent signed exclusively to Hulu. I especially don't want to see the owners of Hulu (content producers) make it their exclusive provider. That's using one monopoly (copyright, a government granted monopoly) in one market to try to move into another market, and should be illegal.

Plus, and I know this is hearsay, but just a few days ago someone on slashdot was complaining that they had a Hulu account in their real name, and then they discovered that all the shows they watched were searchable online. Uh, no thanks. Even if that's not true now, if that was ever true they can screw off. (If it was never true, I got trolled, sorry.)

Pay for Ads? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44890151)

If they would drop ads from the paid version perhaps I might show interest. But since I know that won't happen... what were we talking about again?

you whern;t in action? (1)

geekoid (135745) | about a year ago | (#44890161)

can I have my money back for that time?

False advertisements. (1)

Cammi (1956130) | about a year ago | (#44890219)

Hulu is a scam. They still refuse to provide services advertised ...

At Least They Supported Linux (1)

thedbp (443047) | about a year ago | (#44890353)

I want to see them resurrect Hulu Desktop and update it on all platforms. Hulu supported Linux, so I think maybe some of the folks on here might want to cut them some slack. Unfortunately, the most recent builds crash when going into full screen on recent releases of Ubuntu.

I have to laugh at complaining about devices... (1, Troll)

tlambert (566799) | about a year ago | (#44890443)

I have to laugh at complaining about devices...

"The Wii UI is clunky"
"It doesn't work with the Roku"
"It doesn't work with the XBox"

Has it occurred to you that it's your choice of device that's wrong? You buy a device for the content it can display; you don't subscribe to a content service because of the devices which decide whether or not to support it. It's be trivial to fix the 3 above listed issues, BUT the people who should be fixing them are the device vendors, not the content sites. Aren't you the same people who complain when Microsoft fails to support some aspect of HTML5 in IE, rather than complaining to the HTML5 web sites that they aren't supporting IE?

It's not Netflix vs Hulu, it's Netflix & Hulu (2)

bknack (947759) | about a year ago | (#44890541)

Netflix is awesome but it doesn't carry current network content. Hulu does for the most part (with CBS being a big exception).

I know most (all?) of this content is available online but I can't bring myself to go back to being tied to a schedule. The online content is often here today and gone tomorrow. Also, I really like all my content delivered by a box that's hooked directly to my TV.

As for the BBC stuff... (yawn). I can see all of it on Netflix without the commercials. If this cost Hulu any $$ I think someone saw them coming. Come to think of it, this brings up a question I never thought to ask: Is there anyone out there who subscribes to Hulu without subscribing to Netflix?

Cheers,
Bruce.

Sorry. Not going to support Hulu. (2)

Chas (5144) | about a year ago | (#44890915)

Sorry. But until Hulu can offer a subscription service WITHOUT ads, and that allows place-marking, I won't be supporting them.

Netflix remembers where I am in a flick. So if I stop watching and come back to it later, it picks right up where I left off.

Amazon Prime does the same thing.

Hulu? I have to drag to the approximate spot. Then suffer through all the interstitial commercials. Even if I'm paying them money.

People pay for convenience. And Hulu just isn't convenient.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?