Live data from Hacker News

Why is Warner Bros. Discovery putting old movies on YouTube?

tedium.co

461–470 of 485 posts

Re: Why is Warner Bros. Discovery putting old movies on YouTube?

#461

There was a time fairly early in Netflix's streaming era when all the studios were just dumping their old back catalogs on Netflix to get some revenue from 'dead content' that I thought "Wow, someday soon pretty much all the old content will just be available on a central streaming service. The future will be good." Then the stock market started inflating the value of streamers because of ARR projections and studios…

i’ve heard that another reason every studio started their own service was to make it easier to cook the books with profits and losses between the content and the costs of the service

Re: Why is Warner Bros. Discovery putting old movies on YouTube?

#462
post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can imagine that the DRM part is a difficult problem, however, why is DRM so important and require so much focus? I ask as the end goal of protecting the content is meaningless as I’ve yet to see content that does NOT end up on Pirate sites in perfect quality. (so why put so much effort into drm if it’s going to end up on pirate sites anyway.). Especially if DRM is causing UI issues or slowing down the experience.…

> however, why is DRM so important and require so much focus? Because the content owners demand it. No content = no customers. You could probably build out a public domain streaming service, if you really wanted to build out a non-DRM streaming platform, but it's going to be hard to find customers for that too, I'd imagine.

This exactly.

I guess Netflix owns some of its concent, and could do as they pleases(?). But they still need a uber fast pipeline for the other stuff.

Re: Why is Warner Bros. Discovery putting old movies on YouTube?

#466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What device are you using? I use Apple TVs, and Apple TV+ is consistently extremely high quality streaming for me. YouTube is incredibly painful to use because their tvOS UI is garbage. Quality's OK, though.

I'm using an Apple TV (device) to stream Apple TV (the streaming service.) Streaming quality is great, so agree on that. It is the bugginess of the app. For example, with the Apple TV native remote, the silly touchpad is super clunky, painfully lacking the exponential fast forwarding i'm so used to with better services. The experience with the Samsung remote is very buggy. For example, when the "Dismiss" or "Skip" bu…

I'm not defending the stupid touchpad because it is indeed awful, but I worry you're not taking advantage of literally its only feature, because you say "lacking the exponential fast forwarding". The only reason I keep that annoying thing enabled at all, or that I don't just have it learn a random "real" remote and use that, is how good the Apple remote is with FF/Rewind. Assuming your streaming app is using the correct "native" video player, you're meant to hit (Center button) to pause/bring up the scrubber, then swipe quickly horizontally across the touchpad to move the playhead in large chunks. It's very accelerated, and if you need to say, rewind a movie from the credits to the beginning, it's about 3 swipes if you're swiping fast and vigorously. If you swipe slowly, on the other hand, you can go a couple minutes at a time.

Finally, if you want to jump a few seconds instantly, like if you just missed a few lines of dialogue, the thing to do is to physically press down the left or right directional pad (the edges of the circle) while praying to the touchpad gods that you don't accidentally quiver by 0.2mm and be detected as a swipe which will do the wrong thing.

Of course, it's proof of Apple's poor usability that literally anyone reading this who owns the device doesn't already know how to do all three of those functions. But we're still at the peak of the fad of 'minimalism' instead of putting dedicated buttons for each of these in an ergonomic arrangement and printing labels on them.

Re: Why is Warner Bros. Discovery putting old movies on YouTube?

#467
post #418
post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4K doesn't really say anything about image quality, just the resolution of the picture, which tells you the theoretical maximum level of visual detail. Focusing on resolution is like asking "how strong is one meter of rope" without talking about the composition of the rope. With streaming video, image quality ultimately comes down to the codec and the bitrate. They probably use a relatively low bitrate regardless of…

Bitrate can be massive with a low quality video so that also doesn't tell you much.

Bitrate, resolution, and codec are all of course critical, and not knowing all three makes it impossible to judge how good or bad it will look. Sadly the resolution is the only one of the three that's easy to describe to consumers, so here we are.

Re: Why is Warner Bros. Discovery putting old movies on YouTube?

#468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what sense? Leeching?

most of the clients are ripped off open source and sold for profit/subscription. and filled to the brim with trojans and adware.

Stremio is (mostly) open source and doesn't cost a penny and AFAIK has no malware. It does sometimes have some ads, about which they are very open about.

Debrid and torrent indexing services are simple websites/APIs with some mostly proprietary hacked together backends. Some of them have subscriptions, but you know what you buy if you subscribe, and many don't even have recurring payments. Someone probably makes some profit out of those, but I'd guess the margins are quite slim, and there's a lot of competition.

There are surely a lot of scams out there too, but I'm quite well aware what my $3 per month buys and I know better what I'm installing or downloading than with any commercial services.

Majority of what's happening underneath is done by the saints of the scene, taking huge risks for zero pay.

Re: Why is Warner Bros. Discovery putting old movies on YouTube?

#469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IME Netflix is a close 2nd best after Apple, which I don't think I can distinguish from a 4K BluRay. I've found that the quality depends on the platform a little -- for Netflix the native LG app seems to look best on my LG TV, while Apple looks best on the Apple TV app (perhaps unsurprisingly). Amazon Prime 4K HDR on the other hand looks like garbage on every platform I've used -- the compression is unbearable in any…

I would put Disney+ after apple. Both AppleTV+ and Disney+ consistently looks great to me. Netflix is strange as it generally looks good but whatever compression they use does something funny to the picture which makes it look fuzzy and sharp at the same time to me.

Netflix is actually the lowest bitrate offering.

Netflix: 15-18 Mbps Disney+: 25-30 Mbps Amazon Prime Video: 15-18 Mbps Apple TV+: 25-40 Mbps HBO Max: 15-20 Mbps

This is from an LLM but it tallies with what I remember reading. Apple TV is by far the best, followed by Disney+.

Netflix unfortunately seem to use any improvement in compression encoding efficiency to reduce bitrates, rather than improve PQ at the same bitrate. It's definitely got worse over time. I also remember reading that for content they deem more compressible they use a lower bitrate.

I can sort of get that on the lower plans, but its frustrating they won't improve PQ (or at least keep it the same) for the (expensive) 4K plan.

Re: Why is Warner Bros. Discovery putting old movies on YouTube?

#470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if they license it specifically, or if anyone has even approached them about it. I do think it's ridiculous that all of these companies are making their own solutions that are all terrible. What they really should do is license their content to netflix for a fair price and just let netflix be the service people use.

Why do you think Netflix wants to buy it? There is no point buying everything as a streaming provider. It doesn't get you more customers and it costs money. Heck, Apple will not even let you put up anything on the iTunes store to purchase - they have to be very confident it will recoup their costs for encoding, ingest time etc etc.

>Why do you think Netflix wants to buy it?

Because they previous had a lot of that content before those providers pulled it and created competing systems.

Post reply on HN