Netflix has dramatically raised prices for their customers who subscribe to both unlimited streaming and renting DVDs-by-mail, several months after their last rate increase.

The company today announced it was unbundling discounts for its plans that include both online video streaming and DVD rentals-by-mail.  Under the old pricing, customers could watch an unlimited amount on online content and still get one DVD at a time mailed to them for $9.99 per month.  Effective today, that same plan will cost $15.98 — a $6 monthly increase.

According to Netflix’s Jessie Becker, the company is effectively pushing customers through pricing to either renting all of their DVD’s by mail or going with unlimited streaming.  Doing both will carry a significantly higher price.

“We are separating unlimited DVDs by mail and unlimited streaming into separate plans to better reflect the costs of each and to give our members a choice: a streaming only plan, a DVD only plan or the option to subscribe to both,” Becker writes on Netflix’s blog. “With this change, we will no longer offer a plan that includes both unlimited streaming and DVDs by mail.”

That’s not exactly true, however.  Netflix is still selling combined plans, just at substantially higher prices.  A three-DVD-by-mail plan that includes unlimited streaming used to cost $19.99 a month, but will now be priced at $23.98 a month, a four dollar increase.

The new pricing does not include the very steep price increases forecast by Wall Street for unlimited streaming.  Content creators, especially large Hollywood studios, expect to aggressively negotiate for dramatically higher fees to renew contracts for Netflix video streaming rights.  Most anticipate Netflix will need to raise streaming prices to cover those costs in the near future.

Customer reaction?  Overwhelmingly hostile, with many threatening to cancel service in favor of Amazo, Hulu, or even Redbox.

Among the comments:

◊ This is a 60% price increase. Netflix sure has some audacity to think they can get away with a 60% price increase in this economy. I currently have the $9.99 one-DVD plus streaming plan. Sept 1st I will have to pay $15.99 ? Not gonna happen. I’ll cancel one or both services. There are other options (I have Tivo, Apple TV, Amazon Prime, etc.) Netflix has peaked. They are going to blow it.

◊ You can spin this any way you want, Netflix, but it comes down to simple greed. With limited new content on your streaming service, I will be definitely be canceling that and will probably cancel DVD service as well just on principle. Time to sign up for Hulu Plus! Go ahead and change your name to Blockbuster, because with more stupid decisions like this, it’s only a matter of time before you go by the wayside like they did.

◊ 60% increase, practically overnight, to get the same service I get now? That sucks. If I rented more than one or two DVDs a month, it might be worth it, but I only use the DVDs as a fallback when the movie I want isn’t on streaming, and they often take several days to arrive. If you had your entire catalogue on demand, then I could pick between two options, but you’re forcing me (and a lot of other customers) to pay full price for both in the hope of getting one complete service. You already increased prices at the beginning of the year, and this kind of hike six months later is unacceptable. Hulu is starting to look very good.

◊ Congratulations. You’ll probably be losing our household subscription. We’re long-time members (since 2002) on the Unlimited 3-disc plan. We just started streaming more because we finally have a game system set up in the living room. However, with these “changes” we’ll no longer be able to afford both. So why bother to keep either? Thanks, a lot, Netflix. I really bloody hate you. And that’s sad because until this year, I didn’t have many complaints about your company. Why the hell can’t you just leave things as they are? If things aren’t broken, don’t fix them. 🙁

◊ The only way I will be sticking with Netflix then is if they offer newer titles and ALL titles in just streaming. Because I’m not paying 15.98 for what I get now at 9.99. This doesn’t make sense. THe only reason I signed up is because I thought “9.99 a month. I can do that.” but 15.98 a month with my minimum wage job, having to pay for college, gas, insurance, cell phone. I’m not adding an un-needed 15.98 a MONTH netflix bill. Count me out.

◊ So, my 2-at-a-time with streaming and Blu-ray plan currently costs $17.99 (up from $16.99 last year and $13.99 when I first joined in 2008). Under this new scheme, I get no new features or services, but I have to pay $22.98? Um, no thanks… I think I’ve had enough.

◊ The whole point is that we use the streaming primarily and only order a DVD when you don’t have it available for streaming… thus the $2 per month for DVDs makes perfect sense.  You guys have really messed up here.

Dish Networks' ViP722: Leaving on a 60-watt bulb 24 hours a day uses just a tad more than the ludicrous power consumption of this set top box: 55W while active and 52W while in standby.

The average pay television subscriber is spending at least $4 a month in hidden electricity costs thanks to the small set top boxes found on top of many television sets across North America.  That’s more than you are paying to run a modern refrigerator.

That stunning revelation comes from a study by the Natural Resources Defense Council, financed by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Costs for residents in the northeastern United States, where electricity rates are often higher, can reach $10 per month for customers with a DVR in the living room and a traditional set top box in the bedroom.  That’s up to $120 a year in hidden charges.

The pay television industry, which has driven the set top box into millions of homes, has never paid much attention to energy consumption of their equipment, if only because they don’t pay the power bills of their customers.  The NRDC found that many boxes even attempt to fool consumers into believing they are running in a reduced-power mode, by programming them to slightly dim the front clock when the box’s “power button” is switched off.

In reality, most set top boxes use nearly as much power “shut off” as they use left on.

The cost of these little power demons to North America’s power grid exceeds 18 billion kilowatt hours. More than seven power plants could not sustain that level of power, even if running 24/7 every day of the year.  The combined electric use of Alberta and British Columbia in a year would still not match the power consumption of every set top box in North America.

These revelations have led the U.S. Department of Energy to lay the groundwork to regulate the power consumption of set top equipment.  Once again, the United States would be a follower.  Europe cracked down on excessive power consumption of electronic equipment years earlier.  In the United Kingdom, for example, satellite providers include a box that can achieve a standby status that only consumes a handful of watts.  The trade-off is that consumers have to wait up to 90 seconds for the box to re-boot every morning when the television is first switched on.  Consumers have the ability to choose different power states as a menu option on the devices.

Some cable operators program their DVR boxes to spin down internal hard drives overnight, assuming no recording is scheduled at those times.  But many of these initiatives were designed to spare the longevity of the hard drive, not reduce power consumption overall.

Popular Science dug through the data and uncovered the best reasonable options subscribers have for boxes that at least snort their way onto your monthly utility bill, as opposed to pigging out at the trough (your wallet):

If You Have Comcast

In terms of energy efficiency, Comcast comes out as the lesser of several evils, but not by much. Comcast’s most energy-efficient boxes tend to be slightly more efficient than their equivalents at Verizon, Time Warner, and the satellite companies, and they also offer more choices in terms of hardware. The NRDC’s data picks the Motorola DCH70 as the best standard-def box (sucking down 10W while active, and 10W while on standby), the Pace RNG110 as the best high-def box (13W active, 12W standby), and the Motorola DCX3400 as the best HD/DVR (29W active, 28W standby).

I spoke to a Comcast representative who told me that typically, the company installs whichever box they want, but that if you request a specific box that they have in stock, they’ll happily install that one for you. They won’t order you a box from elsewhere, and this kind of hardware rotates in and out of availability fairly quickly, but at least you might have the option to choose.

If You Have Verizon FiOS

Verizon’s most efficient boxes are just okay, while its least efficient are some of the worst of any surveyed. Even worse, Verizon gives the customer absolutely no option about which box they get–you can’t request a specific box at any point. That doesn’t matter too much for the non-DVR boxes, as the NRDC’s findings only turned up one standard-def and one high-def box, but there’s a big gap in efficiency between the company’s best and worst DVRs. The most efficient is Motorola’s QIP7216, at an unremarkably 29W active and 28W standby, but the older Motorola QIP6416 clocks in at a lousy 36W active and 35W standby.

If You Have Time Warner Cable

Time Warner has a smaller selection of set-top boxes than either Verizon or Comcast, with only one averagely (in)efficient DVR and one startlingly inefficient standard-def box. For a high-def, non-DVR box, the Cisco Explorer 4250HDC is the most efficient, at 19W active and 18W standby, but Time Warner told me that that’s an older box that might be tough to find. The Time Warner rep was (surprisingly, given the company’s lousy reputation here in New York) quite helpful, and offered to try to track down one of the 4250HDCs if that was what I wanted.

If You Have DirecTV

Here we get to the satellite folks. DirecTV’s offerings are only slightly less efficient than Comcast’s or Verizon’s, with the (currently only) standard-def box coming in at 12W active, 9W standby, the best HD box (the DirecTV H24) at 16W active, 15W standby, and the best HD/DVR (the DirecTV HR24) at 31W active, 31W standby. The DVR is pretty lousy, efficiency-wise, but that’s nothing compared to the Dish Network’s craziness.

If You Have Dish Network

I don’t know what is happening inside the Dish Network’s DVRs. Given the energy usage, they might well be powering nuclear reactors. The “best” DVR Dish offers, the ViP922, uses 43W while active, and 40W while in standby–but the worst one, the ViP722, uses a ridiculous 55W while active and 52W while in standby.

If You Use Internet Video Streaming

Many are ditching traditional cable services for online services like Netflix and Hulu, and luckily, there are a whole bunch of gadgets that can play that content (and more) on a TV. They are also invariably more efficient than a cable box, to a startling degree. The Apple TV (reviewed here), which streams Netflix and plays music, movies, and TV from Apple’s iTunes store, uses a mere 3W while active and 0.5W while in standby. Roku‘s XR-HD, which streams Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Instant Video, and a whole bunch more, uses only 7W while active and another 7W while in standby. The Boxee Box, a curiously shaped media streamer that uses the open-source, ultra-powerful Boxee software, can play Netflix, stream video from other computers on its network, play media from a hard drive or thumb drive plugged into one of its USB ports, and stream from lots of apps (with Hulu hopefully to come soon). It was tested by an Ars Technica commenter whose measurements probably differ from the NRDC’s, but roughly estimates that it uses 13W while active and 13W while in standby.

[flv width=”640″ height=”388″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CBC TV boxes guzzle power 6-27-11.flv[/flv]

CBC TV took a closer look at the pay television set top box: a real power guzzler.  (2 minutes)

The performance doesn't match the promise.

Time Warner Cable took a fine free iPad app allowing authenticated cable TV customers to watch dozens of national cable networks and turned it into a complete disaster in its latest upgrade, now dubbed TWCable TV App for iPad.

Under no circumstances should you consider running this until the inexcusable bugs are worked out in a future release.

We tried this app at Stop the Cap! HQ last evening and ran into immediate problems — troubles shared by the majority of app users who took the time to bottom rate the app in Apple’s App Store.

1. On several attempts, the application claimed we were running a modified version of the Apple iPad 2’s basic software.  While “jailbreaking” iPad to improve the user experience is important for some, it has never been for us, and we are running an unmodified original firmware version of iPad 2.  But you can’t tell that to Time Warner Cable — the app will refuse to run when this error message displays.
2. When we were able to launch the application, we found the expanded channel lineup, which now includes around 100 national cable networks enticing… if we could manage to watch any of them.  Within two minutes of launching any channel, we found a frozen, unrecoverable picture.  The only way to restore viewing was to exit the channel and start again.  It left things completely unwatchable.  A few dozen channels you can watch or 100 you cannot watch?  This was not an improvement.
3. The “interactive program guide” addition allows users to see program listings for up to 7 days. Customers can also configure the guide to display only their favorite channels, in order to avoid scrolling through the entire channel line-up.  That last feature is essential — it will take you 7 days of eternal tedium to scroll through hundreds of channels looking for something to actually watch.  Cable companies need to abandon the traditional “program guide” and deliver an improved service that answers this basic question: what do YOU want to watch.  If I am in the mood for mysteries, show me what I can see.  If I want one of those cheap “true crime” documentaries, let me select from a seedy list of those shows either on now or upcoming.  It no longer matters what is showing on each channel at any time.  We want program content, not a recitation of upcoming programming on the Yarn Channel.
4. The ability to tune the set-top box from within the new guide in the app. Simply tap on a network logo within the iPad program guide or the “watch on TV” button within the program description to tune directly to the channel.  Playing around with this feature only showed one of my set top boxes — the DVR in the living room.  The one in the bedroom is apparently the bad child you want to forget.  It doesn’t show up at all.  This feature turns your iPad into a glorified remote control.  Its most useful function is to annoy your family as you change channels from another room.  Sick and tired of your significant other watching Design on a Dime when you could be watching Columbo?  Just change the channel on them.  Again and again.
5. The new app theoretically allows you to remotely manage your DVR recordings.  I say ‘theoretically’ because it worked only inconsistently.  I repeatedly found recordings I wanted to “manage” were completely unmanageable with the app, exiting with an error message.

Time Warner’s control freak mentality over jailbroken versions of iPad no doubt deals with their nightmare scenario: you might be an “unauthenticated” cable cord cutter trying to watch their networks for free, or even worse, record them for later viewing.  It took all of a few hours for iPad enthusiasts to outwit the cable company and work around this roadblock.

Perhaps it’s wrong to complain loudly about a free app like this, but with all of the negative reviews and basic functionality problems, one wonders who beta tested this thing?

Stop the Cap! readers Tom and Scott both sent word that the music industry, Hollywood studios, and your Internet Service Provider have teamed up to begin inspecting your downloading activity looking for evidence you are grabbing illegal, copyrighted content from the Internet.

ISPs ranging from Comcast, Verizon, Time Warner Cable, Cablevision, and AT&T are installing the “Copyright Alert System,” an industry-approved “solution” to copyright theft of online content.  Your ISP will receive word if either the music or movie industry suspects you are trying to download an episode of your favorite TV show or latest Hollywood film from an “unauthorized” download site.  Then, the ISP will start sending you warnings or redirect your web browsing to Alert Purgatory, the place where you learn you are suspected of copyright theft, but haven’t yet been convicted for it.

If you don’t contact your ISP straight away to protest your innocence, your provider may then begin redirecting all of your web journeys to the copyright theft warning website and leave you there until you convince your ISP you are not doing anything wrong.

The voluntary agreement between service providers and copyright owners delivers very little to consumers, despite protestations to the contrary by the cable industry lobbying group — the National Cable & Telecommunications Association.

“Consumers have a right to know if their broadband account is being used for illegal online content theft, or if their own online activity infringes on copyright rules—inadvertently or otherwise—so that they can correct that activity,” said James Assey, executive vice president of the NCTA.

Innocent or not, consumers who wish to seek an independent review before their ISP redirects every web address to the enforcement page, can get one — for the low, low price of $35.

Where that money ultimately goes is anybody’s guess, and nobody yet understands the exact mechanism of how consumers can prove their innocence.

Stop the Cap! believes this system does not serve consumers well.  Copyright enforcement measures taken by the music and movie industry in the past have proven to be far from well-targeted, using a “sue first, ask questions later” approach that has cost some consumers thousands of dollars to settle threatened litigation that would have cost far more to defend in court — guilty or not.

YouTube videos cited for copyright enforcement claims may irritate those who uploaded them, but never put YouTube visitors at risk of the Copyright Alert System just for landing on one that a studio executive deemed copyright theft.  Forcing a consumer to pay $35 to defend themselves from watching that New Order music video from the 1980s is simply unacceptable.

Copyright theft is a serious problem, and we don’t blame content owners for seeking to protect what is rightfully theirs.  But as we have learned over the last 20 years, overzealous protection measures have always backfired.  Openly available, legally accessed content from sites like Hulu have put a major dent in illegal downloading of entertainment from torrent sites and file hosting providers.  It’s more convenient, and the studios sell well-tolerated advertising to help pay for the costs.

Solutions like that are far superior than spying on web traffic looking for “illegal downloads” using unknown mechanisms which could prove as unreliable as earlier copyright enforcement efforts.  In the past, profit-making companies with an incentive to identify “theft” have been hired to ferret out those suspected to stealing online movies and music.  With a financial motive to lean towards guilt before innocence, subscribers confront the very real possibility they’ll have to pay $35 to try and prove a negative – that they didn’t engage in illegal downloading.

While Australian officials promote the noble aspects of its new fiber-based National Broadband Network to power commerce, health care, and education, one content and applications developer says the prospect of improved “adult entertainment” options will drive demand for fiber broadband adoption in Australia, just as it has in many other countries.

Jennifer Wilson, project director for The Project Factory, took discussions about the decidedly-adult topic of online content private to be certain it did not overshadow the more virtuous-aspects of the fiber network.

“The single most important factor is the porn factor because pornography has always been at the cutting edge of technology,” Wilson said. “If we cannot get porn on the NBN than we will have trouble getting consumer acceptance and uptake.”

Australia is just starting a debate about the appropriateness of adult entertainment on a publicly-owned network — a debate familiar to community broadband providers who face scrutiny over adult video content often found on municipally-owned cable systems.

Access to adult content and keeping it away from children is now evolving into a secondary debate about the NBN, and some politicians are considering placing adult content controls on the network.

For Wilson, that would be a major mistake.

Speaking at an Australian Computer Society (ACS) forum in Sydney, Wilson said giving parents the tools to control viewing options was perfectly appropriate, but a national policy banning pornography on the NBN would be a disaster.  Wilson believes adult content has always “stimulated” digital growth, and even, in her view, forced a final decision on which high definition DVD format would become the primary standard — Blu-Ray or HD.

“The main reason Blu-Ray took off was because the adult entertainment industry chose the format over HD,” Wilson said. “No one is going to install the NBN on the basis that one day they might need e-health services but they will use that as a justification for getting the service in order to download movies and watch TV.”

Australian technology evangelists of all kinds favor an agnostic approach to content, keeping government out of the viewing rooms of individual NBN subscribers.  Some have gone as far to say adult content will represent an enormous revenue opportunity — one that will help pay off the expense of constructing the network.

That moral dilemma — porn accelerating profit for the NBN, has politicians in a quandary over whether that represents government promotion of adult content for financial reasons.

“Which is exactly why the government needs to stay as far away from this debate as possible,” Jeffrey Maindonald, a Unitarian Universalist tells Stop the Cap! “Give people the tools to make personal decisions for themselves and their families, but stay out of the content and leave that to the authorities when it crosses the legal line.”

Maindonald, a retired minister, accepts adult content has driven everything from home video recording, film cameras, the Internet, and now the possibilities of what can be done with fiber broadband.  For him, it’s an extension of the inevitable debate between “good” and “evil” mankind deals with everywhere else.  Enforcing self-defined moral laws online is a highly subjective business, Maindonald says, one that will simply lead to endless debate and clashes.

“Thankfully, the new network has virtues that extend far beyond a virtual red light district,” Maindonald says, hoping the debate won’t derail the country’s fiber broadband future.

“A colleague of mine, an Anglican archdeacon, told me he was amazed that the most modern technology was being used to still obsess over God’s miracle of the human body,” Maindonald adds. “It won’t stop with the NBN.”