iTunes Movies Removed From Library, Can't Re-download! (1 Viewer)

[Adam Lenhardt]

Even on a planet with 7.5 billion people, there's a lot of sparsely populated places. New York State is trying to kick Charter/Spectrum out of the state because it failed to honor its obligations to build out its broadband infrastructure to these unprofitable, sparsely populated places. And New York is the seventh most densely populated state in the U.S.

Next generation cellular wireless solves the "last mile" problem but doesn't address the issue of running broadband to the towers necessary to support it. 5G might be on its way in, but there are a lot of places that don't even have 3G services available, and some remote areas that still have no cell service at all.

In Canada, two-thirds of the population lives within 100 km (63 miles) of the U.S. border. The odds of most of the other 96 percent of the country's area having the necessary internet speeds soon are slim.

You can through a portable DVD player and a handful of portable chargers into a backpack and watch movies for days in the remotest places on Earth, even places with no other electricity. Streaming tethers you to a grid.

 

[Cranston37+]

There will absolutely still be a problem getting high speed internet to rural areas. If you think I’m saying otherwise, you are misreading me. All I am saying is that 5G will improve things over cable broadband.

It costs much less to send signals wirelessly than by physical cables to each home. And 5G travels 10x further than 4G, so you get more bang for your buck from each tower.

Please don’t read my view that our internet is going to be improving greatly in the near future as me saying that every household will have 1Gb internet on Oct 1st. That’s taking things to the extreme in an attempt to disprove a point.

 

[tempest21]

The one thing, the one problem, that nobody has addressed is the streaming platform. I don't think it's sustainable. Now, before anyone shoots down my theory, just hear me out on this.

There are a lot of households that cannot afford internet access because certain areas either are too cost prohibitive for low income households or the ISPs simply will not invest is expanding to areas that are not covered. Every time ISPs are forced to provide coverage in areas that cannot receive it, their lobbyists, in conjunction with the federal courts, seem to always smack those ideas down hard. ISP's simply do not like investing in expanding their current areas of service because of the additional cost of extending their service.

Additionally, streaming services rely on consumers who have subscription services to ISPs and those ISPs are constantly throttling the internet traffic on their platforms. Data caps would need to be eliminated. Until these things happen, I think that streaming services are going to continue to run into brick walls.

I know I always hear about how Comcast, Cox, Verizon or some other internet service provider is throttling their network traffic to prevent other streaming services like Crunchyroll, Youtube, Hulu and so on from being able to stream their content without the ISP throttling that traffic. Personally, I have Comcast Xfinity broadband, and every single time I try to watch a Youtube video, it's always throttled because of Comcast's network interference (thanks to the FCC for that Christmas gift to the ISPs).

There are just too many hurdles to make online streaming more attractive to consumers.

But, the biggest problem is that there are too many streaming services. They all should be brought under the same service with the content creators getting paid by the service every time their content is viewed or watched by a consumer.

 

[Cranston37+]

There are a lot of households that cannot afford internet access because certain areas either are too cost prohibitive for low income households

As of 2017, 110 million out of the 126 million households in the US have broadband internet service. 5G will only make those numbers better because it’s a lot cheaper to build a tower than it is to run a cable to every house in town. There will always be those that do without but I just don’t see lack of internet service being an impediment to a robust streaming business in 2018.

I would also argue that if a household cannot afford internet access, they won’t be out buying tons of discs, either...

ISPs are constantly throttling the internet traffic on their platforms. Data caps would need to be eliminated.

I know I always hear about how Comcast, Cox, Verizon or some other internet service provider is throttling their network traffic to prevent other streaming services like Crunchyroll, Youtube, Hulu and so on from being able to stream their content without the ISP throttling that traffic.

As I said in a previous post, the one 5G home service we have to look at now, Verizon, has no data caps, throttling, or deprioritization. Half the point of 5G is it has much higher bandwidth so those things just won’t be done the same way they are today.

But, the biggest problem is that there are too many streaming services. They all should be brought under the same service with the content creators getting paid by the service every time their content is viewed or watched by a consumer.

How can too many services possibly be a problem for consumers? Does it not lead to better services and lower costs?

 

[RolandL]

I have AT&T's fastest service available in my area, 18 Mbps,

With Comcast, slowest in 100Mbs and fastest 1000.

 

[John Dirk]

Which part?

Sorry. I probably misread your post. When that happens it will be great for the areas served but incentive for it to ever become ubiquitous simply isn't there.

 

[John Dirk]

I’m using the cheapest tier service, 100Mbs, my provider offers, and UHD content plays instantly and smoothly. As I noted a page back, Verizon just introduced 5G home internet with 1Gb speeds (10x what I have) for $49 a month...

Same for me but think about it on a macro level. There are millions who do not [and may never] have the options you and I have, not because they can't afford it but because they either live in a rural area or simply don't trust the Internet. My whole point is I believe there are enough people in this category to justify physical media for the foreseeable future.

 

[John Dirk]

The incentive is in providing coverage for customers as they travel through these areas, as well as the people who live in them. Cellular wireless has improved in leaps and bound -- both in coverage and speed -- over the past decade. There is no reason to expect that to stop. Competition between carriers for customers drives innovation and improvements.

And my point regarding Gates quote was more general -- we shouldn't limit our thinking regarding technology to its current state or current growth rate. That holds for computing power, network speeds and availability, storage possibilities, etc.

Agreed and this will mean better coverage in generally populous areas but I do not believe it will mean much for rural areas, unless of course, the government steps in and classifies broadband as a "utility." Without getting into forbidden territory, that's basically what happened with landlines and the cost of the required infrastructure to serve rural areas was "shared" by all Americans in the form of an extra line item on our phone bills.

 

[tempest21]

Comcast may have fast speeds but only for content on their own network. I have Comcast and I have noticed that they throttle my traffic when I visit other websites and even other streaming services. Their advertised speeds are not applied to other sites and services that you access while on Comcast's network.

 

[Sam Posten]

It’s really not that big a deal to fix. The services have the right and legal responsibility to remove those films if the IP rights run out.

The markets need to be forced to alert you each and every time this happens, and to give a full refund

I r smert.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnar...of-sale-change-brings-good-news/#2f8f9de2ad20

 

[tempest21]

I r smert.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnar...of-sale-change-brings-good-news/#2f8f9de2ad20

You are? LMAO

 

[Sam Posten]

I surprise even myself sometimes.

 

[tempest21]

I surprise even myself sometimes.

LMAO

 

[KeithAP]

Personally, I have Comcast Xfinity broadband, and every single time I try to watch a Youtube video, it's always throttled because of Comcast's network interference (thanks to the FCC for that Christmas gift to the ISPs).

I would polite suggest that you are incorrect. I have Comcast and I know other folks with Comcast (in my area and out of state) and no one is having such problems with Youtube. If you are having problems with Youtube the fault lies somewhere in your home/office network.

-KeithP

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I would polite suggest that you are incorrect. I have Comcast and I know other folks with Comcast (in my area and out of state) and no one is having such problems with Youtube. If you are having problems with Youtube the fault lies somewhere in your home/office network.

-KeithP

I have Comcast, too, and have never experienced any issues with YouTube or any other site, either.

 

[tempest21]

I always get those black pop up boxes on youtube (experiencing problems, click here) and they always talk about Comcast's throttling taffic because Google won't pay Comcast for broadband traffic on their network. I just chalked it up to the FCC screwing around with Net Neutrality. There are a lot of complaints against Comcast in the region I'm in.

 

[John Dirk]

Comcast may have fast speeds but only for content on their own network. I have Comcast and I have noticed that they throttle my traffic when I visit other websites and even other streaming services. Their advertised speeds are not applied to other sites and services that you access while on Comcast's network.

Shame on you, @tempest21 , you have me defending Comcast!

Seriously though, no ISP can guarantee speeds outside of their own network. It's stated in every disclaimer from every ISP. While Comcast [and others] do likely slow down traffic when they see it is destined for, say, Netflix, there are also many other potential links in the overall path that could be causing the issue. A VPN can help mitigate this but they add another layer of overhead which may defeat the purpose if top speed is your priority.

 

[tempest21]

OUCH! Shame on me for getting you to defend Comcast. Every ISP interferes with their network traffic. ISPs and their customers who say otherwise are full of crap, I hate to say. They started doing that when bit-torrent started monopolizing their traffic and after copyright holders started suing everyone under the sun.