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

Netflix and Alphabet will need to become ISPs, fast

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 284 posts

Re: Netflix and Alphabet will need to become ISPs, fast

#271

Post by amazon_not »

rayiner wrote: post #269
amazon_not wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5G might end up cheaper than FTTP, but I wouldn't get my hopes up on it being massively cheaper. Higher frequencies will require either line of sight or very short distances to the small cell. The small cells themselves will incur costs both CAPEX and OPEX. Basically the only part 5G will replace in a FTTP network is the drop. And that's where the density and the topography is cooperating. Whereas if you install a fi…

You’re not just getting rid of the drop, but also the last 100 meters or so through the subdivision. Moreover, the drop and CPE install is 30-40% of the cost of deployment. Also, fiber is not fire and forget. Just the other day a tree took out the cable to my house. Buried cable has less maintenance, but also much higher initial costs, increasing the cost advantage of wireless for the last 200m.

Like I wrote in the grandparent, it's a density thing. How many subscribers have line of sight (or close enough) for the 5G small cell to work? At some point it's going to be more cost effective to do FTTP.

The CPE cost is negligible. You can pick one up for $20. True, the drop will cost you, but it has a far longer lifespan than the small cell. It's not like the small cell, it's installation, permits, engineering, pole rental or tower, power, etc. are free either.

Like I stated earlier, 5G may be cheaper than FTTP. Or it may not. It may not even be available in your area due to insufficient density. Even if 5G is cheaper, it's not going to be massively more cheaper.

Re: Netflix and Alphabet will need to become ISPs, fast

#272

Post by Fnoord »

adventured wrote: post #147
reaperducer wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>for many who have two choices, the decision is between not-actually-very-Fast DSL or a single cable provider Very true. In one city where I have a house, the choice is 4 megabit DSL for $60/month, or 300 megabit cable for $101. Both are considered "broadband" by the FCC because the DSL is "up to" 8 megabits. But they are not equivalent services. There's also a wireless ISP, but it's $95/month for 5 megabits.

The FCC definition of broadband is 25mbps, not 8mbps. There was a proposal to roll that back, however it didn't succeed. You'll find that companies like Verizon do not call their slow DSL services "broadband." In Verizon's case they say: "High Speed Internet (DSL) service." https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/18/fcc-report-keeps-faster-de... If you look at Verizon's DSL page: https://www.verizon.com/info/dsl-services/ You…

Broadband used to be symmetric (reference to e.g. T1 or E3). Now it is asymmetric. Without mentioning the upload speed, it can be anything.

Re: Netflix and Alphabet will need to become ISPs, fast

#274

Post by DavidVoid »

amazon_not wrote: post #270
DavidVoid wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ace Stream works really well for watching live broadcasts. On demand video would be more difficult though since not everyone is watching the same content at the same time.

What's the latency like? Live broadcasts are hard enough to keep realtime without mixing in P2P problems like buffering and limited upstreams.

I'm not sure. I believe it's pretty good but I've only ever used it to watch Formula 1 streams (since F1TV most likely won't be available in my country until next year).

Re: Netflix and Alphabet will need to become ISPs, fast

#275

Post by wpietri »

rayiner wrote: post #247
wpietri wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok. I've lived in Grand Rapids, Chicago, Sydney, London, and San Francisco. I'd trust all of them except maybe Chicago. People have different opinions and different experiences. Turning toward actual data, in general, the US's water quality is good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinking_water_quality_in_the_... In the US most water systems are run by local governments, and generally it works out fine.

You’d trust the people who run BART and CalTrain with your broadband? BART’s on time performance is 87% arriving within 5 minutes of schedule for all trains. In a place that basically has no weather. In Chicago, 83% of trains arrive within a minute of schedule during rush periods.

Neither BART nor Caltrain is run by the city of San Francisco. And I think broadband is much easier to run than an overloaded, underfunded transport system.

If you're going to keep setting up straw men, could you make them more relevant? Thanks.

Re: Netflix and Alphabet will need to become ISPs, fast

#276

Post by jpao79 »

amazon_not wrote: post #263
jpao79 wrote: post #212

What would seem to make sense for Netflix would be use more HDD/SSD caching of videos, similar to how a DVR for Tivo works. There really isn't a huge reason to live stream Netflix movie/show content. It's not live video. The Netflix subscriber user could download up to 30 or 40 Netflix shows in advance from their Netflix queue (sort of like the original 'Netflix by mail' queue) over LTE at midnight under some sort of…

While technically feasible, content owners won't allow it, so it's a moot point.

Agreed. Caching the video to a Netflix DVR would likely only be guaranteed to work with Netflix's own content. But isn't creating all its own content Netflix's plan?

Re: Netflix and Alphabet will need to become ISPs, fast

#277

Post by amazon_not »

DavidVoid wrote: post #274
amazon_not wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the latency like? Live broadcasts are hard enough to keep realtime without mixing in P2P problems like buffering and limited upstreams.

I'm not sure. I believe it's pretty good but I've only ever used it to watch Formula 1 streams (since F1TV most likely won't be available in my country until next year).

Unless you compare the latency to a live broadcast, you'll never know how bad the latency is.

Most P2P systems are terrible, which makes them pretty useless since you can hear who scored from your neighbor seconds or even minutes before you see it.

Re: Netflix and Alphabet will need to become ISPs, fast

#278

Post by thatfunkymunki »

zn44 wrote: post #194

Can Netflix and Alphabet ‘reverse’ the problem and block the ISP that throttle them? I imagine some consumers would rather change ISP than stop using Netflix/google. (I would but that’s my UK perspective)

Most people in the US don't have more than 1 viable ISP in their area, so switching is not an option.

Re: Netflix and Alphabet will need to become ISPs, fast

#279

Post by bshacklett »

mmt wrote: post #209
rayiner wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All taxing and subsidization is distortionary; but some methods are less distortionary than others. Imposing a tax on "everybody" and using it to pay for a public service dampens economic activity, but at least doesn't distort one industry relative to another. Imposing special, industry-specific taxes, however, dampens demand and investment in that industry relative to the rest of the economy. Take tobacco taxes, for…

> you could simply direct hospitals to treat poor people for free. Nobody does that Actually, I believe that's exactly what happens in the US with emergency departments. Although it supports your point about such a practice being distortionary, it also draws attention to the fact of the sheer complexity of all this. That's mostly what bothers me about seemingly-simple statement or analogies about economics (or, reall…

It's not just emergency departments. I worked for a hospital system in Maine. We provided a significant amount of free care (emergency and otherwise) to those with a qualifying income level as part of a state program.

Re: Netflix and Alphabet will need to become ISPs, fast

#280

Post by lkbm »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #14
HillaryBriss wrote: post #4

People have made endless points about how ISPs and last-mile providers will hurt the consumer and the small video startup. I don't dispute those. But, IMHO, independent of that, the behavior of Alphabet has been less and less charitable to the little guy over the last few years too, especially in the area of android app development. (e.g. they recently eliminated their "free-forever" policy on the use of android map/…

There's an incredibly ironic undertone to an article suggesting two of the world's largest global monopolies should expand their reach to better be able to beat other, smaller regional corporations.

Smaller regional corporations with local monopolies.
Post reply on HN