Netflix Raises The Price For Ultra HD 4K Video stream..

[Tech_Dreamer]

When 1080p HD is not enough

 

 

 

 

Own an Overpriced  4K UHDTV & want to pay even more for the service? why not switch to 4K stream?

 

it's been a while since Netflix stated to get on the 4K bandwagon , We got quite a few shows in 4k such as Breaking Bad & House of Cards on 4K recently,Good news is that for those who've already signed up for a 4K-enabled account, it won't affect your price & it will not change until August 12th of the year 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Even if you have a 4K UHDTV, it has to be that which Netflix supports.."

 

But If you’re a new subscriber or a current subscriber who hasn’t already enabled 4K content, your monthly price will be $11.99 (vs the standard $8.99 that most new subscribers pay which, itself, went up from $7.99 back in May).

 

Thats a hike of about 33%.

 

 

Leave your thoughts & rants below , Also tell me what are your thoughts on 4K & it's pricings , do you think 4K is un-nessesary thing to go after for a premium experience..

 

 

 

http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/11/netflix-raises-the-price-for-those-who-want-ultra-hd-video/

 

[Sidiox]

Its still quite cheap, compaired to normal TV prices, which these days only offer complete and utter crap. Although I doubt wheter there are many people whose internet can support a constant 4k data stream. 

[elecxonica]

Wow, just in time for the Australian version to be released.

[Sauron]

2160p is something I see being useful for a monitor I can stare at from 40cm (that's why I have one), not necessarily a tv that's 4 metres from my couch. Eventually I'll get a 4k tv too, but only when the pricing is much lower than now. I could still watch netflix on my monitor though, so this isn't great news for me...

[FloRolf]

Netflix just launched in germany and we have to pay 11,99€ for the 4k service. That's 15$! So please, calm your boobies 'muricans.

I currently pay 8,99€ for the 2-device 1080p service (11,3$)

[Rorgash]

well, im pretty sure its to cover the bribes they need to send your ISP´s way.

[Exotath]

Its still quite cheap, compaired to normal TV prices, which these days only offer complete and utter crap. Although I doubt wheter there are many people whose internet can support a constant 4k data stream. 

 

Don't worry if there is they will be sure to cap it and charge extra for it. /Comcast

[EChondo]

I doubt this is from "4k content".

 

This if from "Verizon and Comcast making us pay to use their pipes, which you guys should already be paying for".

[Trik'Stari]

Someone needs to force these companies out of business by making a better product with better service at a better price. there's money to be made, why has no one done it yet?

[LePawel]

Here's the extensive list of consoles that can support the new 4K streaming:

 .

 .

 .

 .

As an additional burn, here's a list of consoles that support 1080/60 gameplay:

[patrickjp93]

Here's the extensive list of consoles that can support the new 4K streaming:

.

.

.

.

As an additional burn, here's a list of consoles that support 1080/60 gameplay:

You missed one: Dreamcast.

[FroggyTaco]

Well if 4K Netflix streaming is a fourfold increase in bit rate then a 33% surcharge seems like a good deal to me. What's the bit rate of Netflix "HD" vs "4K" streams?

 

Edit: Looks like about double the video bit rate.

[Techhog]

Thank you most major US ISPs. You're making things so much better for everyone!

[Snickerzz]

Its still quite cheap, compaired to normal TV prices, which these days only offer complete and utter crap. Although I doubt wheter there are many people whose internet can support a constant 4k data stream.

you have to pay $50 a month for just 1080p content with comcast

[The Benjamins]

what I don't get is why can't I watch UHD content on my pc, why dose it have to be a TV? the only reason I can think of is IF the stream was encoded in h265, and most PC can't decode it fast enough or don't have a h265 hardware decoder.

 

On a side note, I want a place were I can buy DRM free movies in the highest quality possible, why that dose not exists is beyond me. I don't want to have to buy a Bluray disc and rip it to get a DRM free 1080p file. also a way to pu out higher quality content then bluray, like UHD.

[KungPaoChino]

 

This is true sadly in area I live at...

[Keudn]

I would care if we had fast enough internet to stream it, but when we can't stream 1080p without waiting for it to load halfway I don't care at all

[LukeTim]

what I don't get is why can't I watch UHD content on my pc, why dose it have to be a TV? the only reason I can think of is IF the stream was encoded in h265, and most PC can't decode it fast enough or don't have a h265 hardware decoder.

 

On a side note, I want a place were I can buy DRM free movies in the highest quality possible, why that dose not exists is beyond me. I don't want to have to buy a Bluray disc and rip it to get a DRM free 1080p file. also a way to pu out higher quality content then bluray, like UHD.

 

It is encoded with HEVC, yes. That is why it is not supported on PC (browsers/silverlight/html5 do not support HEVC yet). The TVs you need to have to receive the 4K content have hardware HEVC decoding in their SoCs.

[Stefano]

Stop complaining Americans, in Switzerland you pay $18.80 a month for 4K and a fraction of the content is available.

[The Benjamins]

It is encoded with HEVC, yes. That is why it is not supported on PC (browsers/silverlight/html5 do not support HEVC yet). The TVs you need to have to receive the 4K content have hardware HEVC decoding in their SoCs.

I know my 4770k can decode HEVC, I have a few UHD clips in HEVC, but it can use anywere from 50%-80% of my cpu. I just want UHD content to watch on my monitor.

[YellowDragon]

Someone needs to force these companies out of business by making a better product with better service at a better price. there's money to be made, why has no one done it yet?

 

If only it was  that simple, the problem with creating your own ISP would be a massive barrier to entry, you would need a titanic amount of capital for the infrastructure plus the costs for all the approvals you would need then you still have to deal with the internet mafia of time warner and  comcast which will try to block you with legislation at every turn. Look at how big google is and they are still struggling with these issues.

[MarvinKMooney]

If only it was  that simple, the problem with creating your own ISP would be a massive barrier to entry, you would need a titanic amount of capital for the infrastructure plus the costs for all the approvals you would need then you still have to deal with the internet mafia of time warner and  comcast which will try to block you with legislation at every turn. Look at how big google is and they are still struggling with these issues.

that's not true all you have to do is get the town/city your in to figure it out

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/small-alberta-town-gets-massive-1-000-mbps-broadband-boost-1.1382428

 

once you get the Town/city to agree its easy from there considering the town agrees to go with certian IPS or atleast thats how it goes for where im at

[Misanthrope]

Its still quite cheap, compaired to normal TV prices, which these days only offer complete and utter crap. Although I doubt wheter there are many people whose internet can support a constant 4k data stream.

It's not that cheap if you consider the Grand total of 2 series available in 4k. Later on maybe but later on they might jack up the price again

[notenoughtv]

It's not that cheap if you consider the Grand total of 2 series available in 4k. Later on maybe but later on they might jack up the price again

At least in my region there is the added bonus of being able to watch on for simultaneous on the 4K level of payment instead of the 2 screens on the cheaper version.

[Poohy14]

Still would pay for 4k content because its still cheaper than cable