Blockbuster launches film downloads from Internet

Times Dispatch ^ | 29 Dec 2008

[giotto]

I have DSL. The internet connection is pretty fast, so I don’t know why the NetFlix downloads are so poor.

[Brookhaven]

“I have DSL. The internet connection is pretty fast, so I don’t know why the NetFlix downloads are so poor.”

If you have DSL, you DO NOT have a fast internet connection.

You are probably running 1.5 Mbps downloads (maybe a max of 3 if everything is working perfectly).

On cable, 3 Mbps is usually the floor. My cable runs at a solid 5 Mbps, and I have an option to upgrade it to 10 Mbps if I need it.

Go to speedtest.net and you can test your upload/download speed.

[John Will]

That sounds like what Microsoft and sony are attempting to do.

[MartinStyles]

Netflix instant watch is nice as an EXTRA for their main service, delivering Blu-ray discs at a cheap rate.

Instant watch has a TERRIBLE selection, and the president said it likely always will.

All these stupid competing boxes will cancel each other out and fail. AppleTV, Vudu, this Blockbuster thing will all fail.

The thing that’ll live is Netflix since it can be played on Xbox, Tivo, and is starting to show up on Blu-ray players.

Again, the only way to really go is with Blu-ray for a long time. The downloading is an ok ‘extra’.

[dfwgator]

I just got a Wii, has anyone tried downloading movies to a Wii?

[MartinStyles]

On my 10 megabit cable, instant watch on netflix would vary every time you paused the movie for awhile. It would re-check the signal. So I'd end up pausing it a few times for max quality. Pretty lame. I'd rather just pop in a Blu-ray on my PS3 that looks infinitely better than the best that streaming can do in the foreseeable future.

[MartinStyles]

Don’t think so. Xbox360 and TivoHD/Series 3 are the best ‘multipurpose’ streaming players for now. The PS3 can do it, and maybe will someday, but Sony’s being dumb with it.

The PS3 does do very well for streaming media off a LAN computer though. Better than the xbox imo

[MediaMole]

That’s not true any more. As the newer services like FIOS and AT+T Uverse that bring fibre closer to the home are rolled out, DSL has become just as fast as cable. I’m getting a consistent 6Mbps with my DSL in a Uverse area. And that is without any slowdowns in the evening when cable service slows down due to high demand.

Cable is also $20/month more expensive. $35 for DSL and $55 for cable. Even at the low end, 1.5 Mbps DSL is only $15 while a 768Kbps cable option is $30.

[giotto]

Thanks a lot. You just reminded me of another reason to move. We don’t have cable in our area.

[Tunehead54]

Reference bump! ;-)

[LibLieSlayer]

I am collecting a library on Blu Ray to replace my DVD collection. I do not rent and I will never download or stream a movie. When they allow a digital copy and can supply a bandwidth up to 49 mbs (including DTS Master and Dolby True HD audio); I "might" pay attention.

HNY!

LLS

[LomanBill]

"Our competitive advantage is that we already own the customer for home entertainment,"

 

Oh hoh reheheally?

 

[jokar]

bump