Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Disney acquires own streaming facilities, will pull Netflix content

thewaltdisneycompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 788 posts

Re: Disney acquires own streaming facilities, will pull Netflix content

#591

Post by 4ad »

rhaps0dy wrote: post #577
lucb1e wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Grooveshark was a lot better than Spotify, both in functionality and in offering, but alas... Youtube is probably the most complete but (1) I don't want to waste bandwidth on downloading the video every time I try to listen to music and (2) it's missing the discovery component that dedicated music services have.

As a solution to (1) you can use youtube-dl https://rg3.github.io/youtube-dl/ It supports downloading only the audio.

But why would you download a (probably illegal) rip that is poor quality, when the act of downloading and keeping the rip is probably illegal in itself (not exactly sure about that) from a platform that is notoriously unsuitable for music when you could just download high-quality release from a music tracker specially optimised for this use case?

I mean, if you are ok with doing something (probably) illegal, why not get the best experience out of it?

Re: Disney acquires own streaming facilities, will pull Netflix content

#593

Post by sschueller »

aamederen wrote: post #590

I believe we are going to see services that will subscribe to all streaming facilities for you (preferably with a discount) and serve content from various studios from a unified interface. Then, we can have the same problem for these "streaming service subscription services". Sad.

Ah, like what cable providers do with TV stations... :(

Re: Disney acquires own streaming facilities, will pull Netflix content

#594

Post by 4ad »

mrmondo wrote: post #497
geff82 wrote: post #112

Maybe when I am 60, 70 or 80 the film industry will get their shi* together and finally agree on a solution that has long been found in the music business. For a truly complete platform, I would FOR SURE pay more than the 10$ a month for Netflix. 20, maybe 30! But then I want it ALL. All films they have in storage. I mean, it is 2017 and there are a lot of films I can't find on Netflix, Amazon Prime or, when I am in…

This and I want as much content as possible in 4K/HDR, I’m really sick of the second tier streaming services being limited to highly compressed 1080p. If a service came along that truly had the TV and films I wanted with a preference for 4K content, I’d happily pay $40-$60AUD a month for it. Right now I subscribe to: - Netflix - Stan - Apple Music - Usenet related services - Audible - Plex Premium - Getflix content u…

> I want as much content as possible in 4K/HDR

Not just 4K/HDR, but high bitrate as well. It's pretty ridiculous that an 1080p BluRay looks better than ANY 4k stream today (NetFlix, youtube, etc) because it's much less compressed.

BluRay's are about 40-50Mbps. I want the same quality for 1080p, and higher for 4k!

Re: Disney acquires own streaming facilities, will pull Netflix content

#595

Post by tiku »

geff82 wrote: post #112

Maybe when I am 60, 70 or 80 the film industry will get their shi* together and finally agree on a solution that has long been found in the music business. For a truly complete platform, I would FOR SURE pay more than the 10$ a month for Netflix. 20, maybe 30! But then I want it ALL. All films they have in storage. I mean, it is 2017 and there are a lot of films I can't find on Netflix, Amazon Prime or, when I am in…

Even a 10 cents per movie pricing strategy would generate millions of dollars for older movies. I just don't get why they don't just try this strategy..

Re: Disney acquires own streaming facilities, will pull Netflix content

#596

Post by giancarlostoro »

rhaps0dy wrote: post #577
lucb1e wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Grooveshark was a lot better than Spotify, both in functionality and in offering, but alas... Youtube is probably the most complete but (1) I don't want to waste bandwidth on downloading the video every time I try to listen to music and (2) it's missing the discovery component that dedicated music services have.

As a solution to (1) you can use youtube-dl https://rg3.github.io/youtube-dl/ It supports downloading only the audio.

You could also use Atraci which streams off YouTube:

https://github.com/Atraci/Atraci

Re: Disney acquires own streaming facilities, will pull Netflix content

#597

Post by Morgawr »

onion2k wrote: post #534
geff82 wrote: post #112

Maybe when I am 60, 70 or 80 the film industry will get their shi* together and finally agree on a solution that has long been found in the music business. For a truly complete platform, I would FOR SURE pay more than the 10$ a month for Netflix. 20, maybe 30! But then I want it ALL. All films they have in storage. I mean, it is 2017 and there are a lot of films I can't find on Netflix, Amazon Prime or, when I am in…

...a solution that has long been found in the music business. Perhaps you're fortunate that everything you want to listen to is on your preferred music streaming service, but what they offer is far from everything in the music industry's catalogue. Ask any classical music fan what they think of streaming services and you'll hear a tirade against the woeful offerings that streaming services make available.

This is why I love Google Play Music, you can basically upload any kind of personally-acquired (legally or not) music to the service and it will seamlessly and transparently integrate with the platform itself and let you stream them wherever and whenever like any other.

They are stricter than Spotify with regional licenses unfortunately. I listen to a lot of Japanese artists that are on Spotify but not on GPM in Europe (but are there in Japan), I simply imported their albums and ripped them and uploaded them on the service and now they behave exactly the same. Not ideal, but still. For like 90% of the rest of the library (anecdotal experience at least) it's the same as Spotify, which is pretty great.

DISCLAIMER: I work at Google, but I've been using GPM long before that. These are my opinions and not those of my employer, yadda yadda.

Re: Disney acquires own streaming facilities, will pull Netflix content

#598

Post by wiz21c »

alkonaut wrote: post #550
onion2k wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...a solution that has long been found in the music business. Perhaps you're fortunate that everything you want to listen to is on your preferred music streaming service, but what they offer is far from everything in the music industry's catalogue. Ask any classical music fan what they think of streaming services and you'll hear a tirade against the woeful offerings that streaming services make available.

You don't need "everything" but you need enough. If you subscribe to e.g Spotify you initially get surprised by some things not being in their library. However the library is so large and the use of a single service so convenient that most people can simply accept what's there. After the initial disappointment, any further disappointment is nearly zero so long as you keep all your discovery of new music within Spotif…

I understand that you like to discover new music. But for me it's the other way around, I like to discover old stuff. Basically, things that I should I've listened at 30 years ago. Moreover, in that old stuff, it's always things that I've missed at that time, so most of the time, it's very niche stuff (old EBM tracks, obscure new wave bands, etc.); if it was not niche, then I wouldn't have missed it. So for me, the current services are not broad enough... Because I'm interested in the 1% that didn't make it... YouTube remains, for me, the best option (because many people upload things without looking at rights issues and because old-and-niche music is not worth protecting)

Re: Disney acquires own streaming facilities, will pull Netflix content

#599

Post by rangibaby »

Morgawr wrote: post #597
onion2k wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...a solution that has long been found in the music business. Perhaps you're fortunate that everything you want to listen to is on your preferred music streaming service, but what they offer is far from everything in the music industry's catalogue. Ask any classical music fan what they think of streaming services and you'll hear a tirade against the woeful offerings that streaming services make available.

This is why I love Google Play Music, you can basically upload any kind of personally-acquired (legally or not) music to the service and it will seamlessly and transparently integrate with the platform itself and let you stream them wherever and whenever like any other. They are stricter than Spotify with regional licenses unfortunately. I listen to a lot of Japanese artists that are on Spotify but not on GPM in Euro…

Apple Music is the same. The first time you add it will apply their (shit) deduping, but if you delete and add your files again it will consider your version the "real" ones and upload them to the cloud

Re: Disney acquires own streaming facilities, will pull Netflix content

#600

Post by headmelted »

alkonaut wrote: post #550
onion2k wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...a solution that has long been found in the music business. Perhaps you're fortunate that everything you want to listen to is on your preferred music streaming service, but what they offer is far from everything in the music industry's catalogue. Ask any classical music fan what they think of streaming services and you'll hear a tirade against the woeful offerings that streaming services make available.

You don't need "everything" but you need enough. If you subscribe to e.g Spotify you initially get surprised by some things not being in their library. However the library is so large and the use of a single service so convenient that most people can simply accept what's there. After the initial disappointment, any further disappointment is nearly zero so long as you keep all your discovery of new music within Spotif…

Your examples aren't wrong. Spotify is "good enough" for most people.

"so long as you keep all your discovery of new music within Spotify - because you'll never discover what isn't there."

This is exactly the reason we have arguments about the importance of net neutrality - which your underlying point is arguing directly against. Not sure if that was intentional or not - but the music industry is a really bad measuring stick of success in this area.

To contrast to Spotify - I'm sure Disney would be fine with it if everyone watched what they were hosting on their network exclusively and ignored the content on other platforms.

On a side note: Isn't this basically what Disney Life is already? Did I miss something?

Post reply on HN