If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   AOL vs. Netflix: The entire story of the last decade of the internet in one simple bar chart   (splatf.com) divider line 44
    More: Obvious, Netflix, bar charts  
•       •       •

9328 clicks; posted to Geek » on 09 May 2013 at 1:05 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



44 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-05-09 11:35:18 AM
i blame terrorists on 9/11
 
2013-05-09 12:57:14 PM
I'd say this chart doesn't really show that much about the internet as a whole other than tangentially indicating that less people use a phone in based ISP and more people use Netflix.

In fact I'd say it totally misses the huge problem that a lot of people get their Internet connection through a cable provider, which has a vested interest in hobbling Netflix as much as possible.

Your headline is bad and you should feel bad.
 
2013-05-09 01:00:39 PM
I'm still trying to recover from the abomination that Hemlock Grove was. What a retarded mess that was. Fark you for that, Netflix. I hope they didn't fark up Arrested Development too.
 
2013-05-09 01:14:31 PM
They say AOL still have 2.7 million accounts. They don't say if those are active account.

/has an inactive AOL account, with not a single number in the screen name.
//old fart
 
2013-05-09 01:15:01 PM

Hetfield: I'm still trying to recover from the abomination that Hemlock Grove was. What a retarded mess that was. Fark you for that, Netflix. I hope they didn't fark up Arrested Development too.


I haven't watched Hemlock Grove, but it seems to be their only real "miss" so far. Lillyhammer was decent (I enjoyed it, anyway) and House of Cards was spectacular. According to wikipedia there is one called Bad Samaritans that I haven't seen yet and a few more shows in the pipeline.
 
2013-05-09 01:16:36 PM

Thoguh: I'd say this chart doesn't really show that much about the internet as a whole other than tangentially indicating that less people use a phone in based ISP and more people use Netflix.

In fact I'd say it totally misses the huge problem that a lot of people get their Internet connection through a cable provider, which has a vested interest in hobbling Netflix as much as possible.

Your headline is bad and you should feel bad.


I suspect the point of the headline is that, as the article says, the decline in AOL and rise of Netflix both parallel the spread of broadband and (implicitly) the transformation from a static, low-bandwidth version of the internet to a dynamic (and media-rich) high-bandwidth one.
 
2013-05-09 01:18:33 PM

Hetfield: I hope they didn't fark up Arrested Development too


I don't see how they have a chance not to fark up AD. The series came to a solid logical conclusion in the original last episode.
 
2013-05-09 01:19:16 PM

MightyPez: Lillyhammer was decent (I enjoyed it, anyway) and House of Cards was spectacular.


I haven't seen Lillyhammer, but House of Cards was decent.
 
2013-05-09 01:20:34 PM

Kyosuke: They say AOL still have 2.7 million accounts. They don't say if those are active account.

/has an inactive AOL account, with not a single number in the screen name.
//old fart


Actually, I believe (believe it or not) that 2.7 million is PAYING customers, not just people who use free services on AOL.com, like email or calendar.
 
2013-05-09 01:20:54 PM
Misleading chart.

For most of the years of Netflix's history, it was a solely a DVD-by-mail service (which it still does).  So it's growth over those years says nothing about the growth of broadband.

The Netflix streaming service is a relatively recent development.
 
2013-05-09 01:25:29 PM

Thoguh: I'd say this chart doesn't really show that much about the internet as a whole other than tangentially indicating that less people use a phone in based ISP and more people use Netflix.

I

AOL isn't just a dial up service.
 
2013-05-09 01:37:27 PM
How does that compare to Prodigy BB usage numbers?

I really wish those were archived somewhere, I spent the early 90's as a nocturnal Prodigy BB junky.
 
2013-05-09 01:45:20 PM

Dinki: AOL isn't just a dial up service.


And Netflix isn't just a streaming service.  More importantly, it is neither a competitor to or a replacement for AOL.

In conclusion, I'd like to explain the entire story of global warming in one bar chart.

i.imgur.com
 
2013-05-09 02:02:32 PM

Doc Daneeka: Misleading chart.

For most of the years of Netflix's history, it was a solely a DVD-by-mail service (which it still does).  So it's growth over those years says nothing about the growth of broadband.

The Netflix streaming service is a relatively recent development.


Came here to say this. The chart even admits that it switches to streaming subscriptions in 2012. It makes no goddamn sense.
 
2013-05-09 02:09:03 PM
FTA:
Worth pondering: What will eventually cause Netflix's decline?
The content creators deciding they can make it on their own and offering a cheap service, with ads, in a streaming package. HBOnline for 1.99$ monthly with locked in advertising spots anyone?
 
2013-05-09 02:17:08 PM

SearchN: FTA:
Worth pondering: What will eventually cause Netflix's decline?
The content creators deciding they can make it on their own and offering a cheap service, with ads, in a streaming package. HBOnline for 1.99$ monthly with locked in advertising spots anyone?


Yup. Times Warner has already started the stupidity by taking content away from Netflix to start their own (soon to fail) service.
 
2013-05-09 02:20:51 PM

SearchN: FTA:
Worth pondering: What will eventually cause Netflix's decline?
The content creators deciding they can make it on their own and offering a cheap service, with ads, in a streaming package. HBOnline for 1.99$ monthly with locked in advertising spots anyone?


If you think a standalone HBO service would be $1.99, or have ads, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you...

As far as the decline.  Everybody and their brother is trying to break away from Netflix to form their own streaming service, but most of them are going to come crawling back before long.  People aren't going to want to deal with 10 different streaming subscriptions.
 
2013-05-09 02:35:15 PM
Huh, I didn't even realize Netflix had been around that long.  Interesting.
 
2013-05-09 02:39:21 PM

Thoguh: SearchN: FTA:
Worth pondering: What will eventually cause Netflix's decline?
The content creators deciding they can make it on their own and offering a cheap service, with ads, in a streaming package. HBOnline for 1.99$ monthly with locked in advertising spots anyone?

If you think a standalone HBO service would be $1.99, or have ads, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you...

As far as the decline.  Everybody and their brother is trying to break away from Netflix to form their own streaming service, but most of them are going to come crawling back before long.  People aren't going to want to deal with 10 different streaming subscriptions.


That would be nice, but more likely outcome is they will kill Netflix first. Then come come back with their own joint service that costs more and offers less.
 
2013-05-09 02:44:21 PM

Doc Daneeka: Misleading chart.

For most of the years of Netflix's history, it was a solely a DVD-by-mail service (which it still does).  So it's growth over those years says nothing about the growth of broadband.

The Netflix streaming service is a relatively recent development.


Actually, it says a lot. Despite cutting out a portion of Netflix subscribers, the chart still shows growth. It is a strange way to go about it, but it definitely show that a service now has more subscribers than what many people considered "the Internet" only a few years ago.
 
2013-05-09 02:46:02 PM

SearchN: The content creators deciding they can make it on their own and offering a cheap service, with ads, in a streaming package. HBOnline for 1.99$ monthly with locked in advertising spots anyone?


I don't have a problem with the idea, except for a few things:

I don't want 40 different services. I want three or four. Amazon, Netflix, Hulu, and maybe a couple others. That would fine. If at the end of the day, the price is the same as a cable subscription and everything is on-demand, I'm ok with all that.

I don't even mind the ads, but whatever Hulu is doing sucks bad. With Hulu, I have to sit through 60-90 seconds of ads, after they eventually load, just to watch a few seconds of an episode to see if I've already seen it. If I miss something and have to rewind or fast forward, I have similar issues. I've found it easier to just pirate the stuff I want to watch, even though I'm still paying for Hulu+.  If the ads were skippable, like the ads I used to see in my DVR recording, I'd be ok with that and I probably woudln't even skip them half the time.

Their shiat better be searchable, too, with a fairly standard API. There are media players out there with an "omnisearch" function that wiill go through Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, and your local media to find results. Whatever is out there needs to work with that.  It already takes way too long to "flip channels" from Netflix to something else, let the program log in, start to search, etc. There must be an easy way to see what's new and what's on. I don't even bother logging in to Hulu most of the time because it's a pain in the ass and I rarely find something I want. However, if I see the high points of all my subscription services in a single place, including Hulu, then I'll bother to watch something, and probably stay logged in to watch something else.
 
2013-05-09 02:49:03 PM
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-05-09 03:17:54 PM

Doc Daneeka: Misleading chart.

For most of the years of Netflix's history, it was a solely a DVD-by-mail service (which it still does).  So it's growth over those years says nothing about the growth of broadband.

The Netflix streaming service is a relatively recent development.


Anyone else remember when Netflix first kicked off?  It was a pay-per-rental system back then, like any typical video store.  No monthly subscriptions.
 
2013-05-09 03:27:13 PM

Hetfield: MightyPez: Lillyhammer was decent (I enjoyed it, anyway) and House of Cards was spectacular.

I haven't seen Lillyhammer, but House of Cards was decent.


I have seen Lillehammer. What starts as a pretty fresh idea (a wiseguy mobster in Norway?) turns absolutely stale in 3 episodes (he's got girl trouble, he owns a bar that he pays for in bribes, he's threatened everyone, the cops are suspicious of The New Guy).

Re-watch Soap instead. Or any of the DC Animated Universe movies.
 
2013-05-09 03:28:36 PM

spelletrader: How does that compare to Prodigy BB usage numbers?

I really wish those were archived somewhere, I spent the early 90's as a nocturnal Prodigy BB junky.


http://news.cnet.com/Prodigy-opens-Bulletin-Board-Archive/2100-1023 _3- 206413.html
 
2013-05-09 04:01:06 PM

Hetfield: I'm still trying to recover from the abomination that Hemlock Grove was. What a retarded mess that was. Fark you for that, Netflix. I hope they didn't fark up Arrested Development too.


The sets were nice, the acting was pretty good, the story was all over the place.

*SPOILER ALERT*

Can anyone tell me what the point was of Peter to purposely having his face eaten off? It seemed to accomplish nothing.
 
2013-05-09 04:16:39 PM

SearchN: FTA:
Worth pondering: What will eventually cause Netflix's decline?
The content creators deciding they can make it on their own and offering a cheap service, with ads, in a streaming package. HBOnline for 1.99$ monthly with locked in advertising spots anyone?


Why in the world would HBO sell its service for $2 a month???  Do you think that they don't like money or something?
 
2013-05-09 04:26:53 PM
I watched the first episode of Hemlock Grove, set a good tone with the whore titties. Then it went all adult twilight with the vampires vs wolves.

I probably watched half of the 2nd episode and I was done. Also what's with Famke's accent, I cant tell if she wants it to sound British or a cross between Frasier and a Scotsman.

I loved House of cards, more than I thought I would. I liked it on the first run and when I rewatched the entire season thought it was brilliant. Got all the missed references from the first viewing.

Can't wait for Arrested Development, I really hope it continues where it left off.
 
2013-05-09 04:44:22 PM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: *SPOILER ALERT*

Can anyone tell me what the point was of Peter to purposely having his face eaten off? It seemed to accomplish nothing.


That was the price he had to pay for being able to turn on a non-full moon. What I don't understand is why he didn't kill her after he tied her up, before she had a chance to turn.

The entire show was stupid beyond belief. SOME of the actors were ok, the rest was just terrible. Famke Janssen's accent was ridiculous. I couldn't appreciate the sets because it seemed like they used a cheap-ass camera that turned everything into an unsharped, unsaturated, washed out shot. The camera work was sloppy, as was the editing. And don't get me started on the story.
 
2013-05-09 04:46:26 PM

Dr Dreidel: I have seen Lillehammer. What starts as a pretty fresh idea (a wiseguy mobster in Norway?) turns absolutely stale in 3 episodes (he's got girl trouble, he owns a bar that he pays for in bribes, he's threatened everyone, the cops are suspicious of The New Guy).


Thanks, but now I'm actually really curious about the show.
 
2013-05-09 05:09:31 PM

Thoguh: Dinki: AOL isn't just a dial up service.

And Netflix isn't just a streaming service.  More importantly, it is neither a competitor to or a replacement for AOL.

In conclusion, I'd like to explain the entire story of global warming in one bar chart.

[i.imgur.com image 600x400]


Dammit. *shakes tiny fist*
 
2013-05-09 05:40:19 PM
Doc Daneeka:  Misleading chart.
For most of the years of Netflix's history, it was a solely a DVD-by-mail service (which it still does).  So it's growth over those years says nothing about the growth of broadband.
The Netflix streaming service is a relatively recent development.


The Company was founded in 1997, it's subscription based digital distribution service started in 1999.  You have a strange definition of the term "most".
 
2013-05-09 05:42:07 PM
Latinwolf:  Doc Daneeka:  Misleading chart.
For most of the years of Netflix's history, it was a solely a DVD-by-mail service (which it still does).  So it's growth over those years says nothing about the growth of broadband.
The Netflix streaming service is a relatively recent development.
The Company was founded in 1997, it's subscription based digital distribution service started in 1999.  You have a strange definition of the term "most" "recent.
 
2013-05-09 05:46:08 PM
moothemagiccow: Doc Daneeka: Misleading chart.
For most of the years of Netflix's history, it was a solely a DVD-by-mail service (which it still does).  So it's growth over those years says nothing about the growth of broadband.
The Netflix streaming service is a relatively recent development.
Came here to say this. The chart even admits that it switches to streaming subscriptions in 2012. It makes no goddamn sense.


Really, I've had their streaming service since 2008 and it was already around for a few years.
 
2013-05-09 06:15:26 PM

StoPPeRmobile: spelletrader: How does that compare to Prodigy BB usage numbers?

I really wish those were archived somewhere, I spent the early 90's as a nocturnal Prodigy BB junky.

http://news.cnet.com/Prodigy-opens-Bulletin-Board-Archive/2100-1023 _3- 206413.html


As of April 2013,http://www.prodigy.net/ serves up an error message with no content.
 
2013-05-09 06:45:47 PM
Let me see the graph of Trade Wars users.
 
2013-05-09 06:50:27 PM

Thoguh: In fact I'd say it totally misses the huge problem that a lot of people get their Internet connection through a cable provider, which has a vested interest in hobbling Netflix as much as possible.


My cable provider actually hopped right on board with Netflix's Open Connect system and actually advertises that they're the best internet provider (in the area) for viewing Netflix. They're not just not hobbling it, they're advertising for it.
 
2013-05-09 07:12:51 PM
I wonder how many of the 2.7 million are actually Time Warner employees with their free accounts.
 
2013-05-09 07:15:14 PM

Latinwolf: Latinwolf:  Doc Daneeka:  Misleading chart.
For most of the years of Netflix's history, it was a solely a DVD-by-mail service (which it still does).  So it's growth over those years says nothing about the growth of broadband.
The Netflix streaming service is a relatively recent development.
The Company was founded in 1997, it's subscription based digital distribution service started in 1999.  You have a strange definition of the term "most" "recent.


I think you misunderstood what you posted.  The "subscription-based distribution service" started in 1999 that you are referring to is their unlimited DVD-by-mail business.  In the two years prior to that, Netflix had used a traditional, Blockbuster-sequel pay-per-rental model.  They switched over to a subscription model in 1999.

Netflix instant streaming didn't come until much, much later.  Can't find the exact date, but it was the late aughts.
 
2013-05-09 07:18:59 PM

Doc Daneeka: Blockbuster-sequel


Err, that should read, "Blockbuster-esque."

Stupid iPad auto-correct.
 
2013-05-09 08:13:12 PM
Kyosuke:
Yup. Times Warner has already started the stupidity by taking content away from Netflix to start their own (soon to fail) service.

Most (content creators) will fail, but a few will work. Those will be used as the model for the rest.

Thoguh:
If you think a standalone HBO service would be $1.99, or have ads, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you...

As far as the decline.  Everybody and their brother is trying to break away from Netflix to form their own streaming service, but most of them are going to come crawling back before long.  People aren't going to want to deal with 10 different streaming subscriptions.


That seems to be the major issue a lot of people have (multiple subs), but cheap automated payment can take care of that. As long as you don't worry about a few low cost transactions taking place every month.

jonny_q:
I don't have a problem with the idea, except for a few things:

I don't want 40 different services. I want three or four. Amazon, Netflix, Hulu, and maybe a couple others. That would fine. If at the end of the day, the price is the same as a cable subscription and everything is on-demand, I'm ok with all that.

I don't even mind the ads, but whatever Hulu is doing sucks bad. With Hulu, I have to sit through 60-90 seconds of ads, after they eventually load, just to watch a few seconds of an episode to see if I've already seen it. If I miss something and have to rewind or fast forward, I have similar issues. I've found it easier to just pirate the stuff I want to watch, even though I'm still paying for Hulu+.  If the ads were skippable, like the ads I used to see in my DVR recording, I'd be ok with that and I probably woudln't even skip them half the time.

Their shiat better be searchable, too, with a fairly standard API. There are media players out there with an "omnisearch" function that wiill go through Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, and your local media to find results. Whatever is out there needs to work with that.  It already takes way too long to "flip channels" from Netflix to something else, let the program log in, start to search, etc. There must be an easy way to see what's new and what's on. I don't even bother logging in to Hulu most of the time because it's a pain in the ass and I rarely find something I want. However, if I see the high points of all my subscription services in a single place, including Hulu, then I'll bother to watch something, and probably stay logged in to watch something else.


Decent search functionality would be nice. Again though as I stated above, a few small automated payments can take care of that.

meanmutton:
Why in the world would HBO sell its service for $2 a month???  Do you think that they don't like money or something?

If they can start streaming and break away from the satellite and cable providers setting the price of their channels at a high price point and making it a bundle that is only attractive to a select few...

Or, setting the price point low enough to cover a wider market and get more customers over all..

I'd rather go with more customers that can now easily afford it, providing the content they want instead of the rest of the random crap that's forced into the package.

Wishful thinking, I know. But, being able to provide that and expand the market massively seems to be a better option.
 
2013-05-10 01:16:18 AM
Why does AOL dial up still exist?

I mean really, why? A low end feature phone on a 50MB data plan offers a better internet experience than dial up. And if you can't even get that, there are plenty of dial up services which offer far better value than AOL does.

The 'grandma can't figure out anything else' excuse is getting tiring. AOL's ISP services haven't been relevant for at least 5 years now, as illustrated by this graph. If grandma can't figure out how to use her computer beyond AOL in 2013, then you would be doing her a favour by simply taking her PC away.

The saddest thing is that AOL has only themselves to blame. They were on top of the world in the mid-90s, front row centre for the internet revolution thanks to their marketing campaign of free disks and trials. With their license to print money they could have invested in R&D to improve web services and improve broadband infrastructure. They could be where Google is today, only with an ISP attached (and with some of Google's initiatives in fibre networks, soon they will have that base covered as well). Instead, they threatened to fire their customer service reps if they couldn't "save" an account from cancellation.

Anyone who had any decision making powers at AOL in the late 90s to present, especially regarding their ISP services, should NEVER work in business again. Period.
 
2013-05-10 03:40:26 PM

Thoguh: SearchN: FTA:
Worth pondering: What will eventually cause Netflix's decline?
The content creators deciding they can make it on their own and offering a cheap service, with ads, in a streaming package. HBOnline for 1.99$ monthly with locked in advertising spots anyone?

If you think a standalone HBO service would be $1.99, or have ads, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you...

As far as the decline. Everybody and their brother is trying to break away from Netflix to form their own streaming service, but most of them are going to come crawling back before long. People aren't going to want to deal with 10 different streaming subscriptions.


True. People won't deal with 10 different subscriptins. But what if the goal isn't to beat netflix, just to wound it?

Get rid of a enough good content from netflix and it becomes worhtless.
 
2013-05-10 08:22:52 PM

KFBR392: Thoguh: SearchN: FTA:
Worth pondering: What will eventually cause Netflix's decline?
The content creators deciding they can make it on their own and offering a cheap service, with ads, in a streaming package. HBOnline for 1.99$ monthly with locked in advertising spots anyone?

If you think a standalone HBO service would be $1.99, or have ads, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you...

As far as the decline. Everybody and their brother is trying to break away from Netflix to form their own streaming service, but most of them are going to come crawling back before long. People aren't going to want to deal with 10 different streaming subscriptions.

True. People won't deal with 10 different subscriptins. But what if the goal isn't to beat netflix, just to wound it?

Get rid of a enough good content from netflix and it becomes worhtless.


No point in wounding it. Right now its the perfect dumping ground for older content, which is mostly what it is. Let it keep going until they are in a position to flat out kill it and take over there space.
 
Displayed 44 of 44 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report