I’ve seen tons of posts saying that the fact that the WD TV Live (non plus) doesn’t support NetFlix is purely a marketing scheme to make more money.
I *know* that is not the case, but I’d REALLY like to be able to forward such claims to an OFFICIAL WD response, explaining *exactly* why they needed to come out with a new product in order to support Netflix.
I’m afraid that until this is done, it’ll be a futile discussion with lots of very frustrated WD TV Live users.
Welcome to the forums.
Why do you think anything that WD says is going to quiet the fanboys who insist otherwise? The mere fact that WD went to all the trouble to MAKE a new hardware product says it all – if they could have done it in firmware they would have because it would have been far cheaper for them.
Indeed, there’s absolutely NO upside to them making another hardware product (and a lot of downside). But people who insist otherwise are not going to be convinced no matter what, so don’t bother with trying.
…plus, commentary by WD Staff on the matter only fuels the conspiracy theorists…
I think the most convincing argument against the Live being capable of Netflix comes from b-rad:
The original WDTV Live has a sigma8655 chipset, this chip does not have copy protection capability. Netflix will NEVER come to WDTV Live. Complaining and saying ‘but i know its possible!!!’ are not permitted and whining and arguing will get you warned/banned.
http://forum.wdlxtv.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=772
b-rad is the guy who creates modified firmwares for the various WD TV models and adds as much stuff into the Live as possible. If it was do-able, even if it were massively hard, he’d be the first one to say so. Instead, he has completely ruled it out as a possibility.
I disagree that there is no point in trying to educate users (and potential users) about why WD created the Plus model.
Just the fact that WD is not denying that it *could* put Netflix on the non-plus model is what’s fueling the conspiracy theories (IMHO).
What’s the downside of WD being transparent and explaining why it had to create a new model for Netflix support?
prutwo wrote:
What’s the downside of WD being transparent and explaining why it had to create a new model for Netflix support?
They already said that it couldn’t be done on the WDTV Live, for the exact same reason as b-rad said. Here are a few facts:
Sigma’s chips come in even and odd numbers. The difference between those are that the even numbers have security methods on Chip (like the 8654, the one in the WDTV Live+), the odd ones (like the 8655, used in the WDTV Live) don’t have this.
Netflix stream is encrypted. To decrypt, you either need software that can do this or hardware. There currently is no software decoder available for linux and the WDTV Live runs linux (on windows there, is, it’s supplied by Microsoft and it’s part of their Silverlight framework). So to use it on linux, you need a hardware decoder and these are only available on Sigma’s even chip numbers.
"But… Syabas said that their new ‘popbox’ WILL feature Netflix and their popbox contains an odd cpu number (8643), " I hear you say. Yes, very good point. There’s something going on here. Syabas said a few months ago that their popbox will feature netflix, but now they removed ALL Netflix info from their site and it isn’t mentioned anywhere anymore. They said the popbox will not feature Netflix at introduction (in 2 weeks), BUT (!!) they said they ‘hope’ to add it later on !!! But how are they going to do that without a hardware decoder ? Are they lying ? I don’t know, but it looks very suspicious …
prutwo wrote:
I disagree that there is no point in trying to educate users (and potential users) about why WD created the Plus model.
Just the fact that WD is not denying that it *could* put Netflix on the non-plus model is what’s fueling the conspiracy theories (IMHO).
What’s the downside of WD being transparent and explaining why it had to create a new model for Netflix support?
- Ophir
They said that there was nobody on the grassy knoll but that does not stop the conspiracy theorists. This will just turn into the same pointless thread.
richUK wrote:
They said that there was nobody on the grassy knoll but that does not stop the conspiracy theorists. This will just turn into the same pointless thread.
And don’t forget that there is a very real possibility that WD is not allowed to talk about it. This is what Syabas said about the issue of their Popbox not featuring Netflix at introduction:
“So Second, we pledge this going forward: 1) When something is off the table or not going to happen we will state that. 2) When we appear vague in our wording or “not answering a direct question” it’s because (for business or legal reasons) we CAN’T, not because we won’t or we’re trying to pull anything. 3) If we don’t disclose everything to you it’s because we are in a competitive business vertical and we can’t always be completely transparent – although we are going to be as much as is feasible.”
What I’d make from this ? Either Syabas is misleading their customers (since the 8643 doesnt have a hardware decoder) OR (more plausible) they know of a software decoder for Linux that’s been developed and they’re trying to get that licensed … That would make perfect sense anyway and would explain all the 'hush hush - 'we are in a competitive business ‘- mystery talk’
Anyway, it will be interesting to follow the Popbox/Netflix developments, since if the Popbox will get Netflix, the WDTV Live could in theory as well, although my personal take on it is that Netflix on the Popbox (and hence the WDTV Live as well) will NEVER be available, because even if somebody develops a sofware decoder, netflix will most certainly try to push everybody onto (way more secure) hardware decoding and I don’t think they’d license software decoding on mediaplayer platforms.
Thanks for your two replies which so far have been the best explanations I’ve read so far regarding the + version.> It seems that you are indeed correct that WD isn’t allowed to talk about anything related to Netflix which explains their silence.> I also now finally understand that it’s the stream decryption which is currently being done in hardware. I didn’t really understand what was meant by previous references to “doesn’t support copy protection”.> I’d also guess that indeed the POPBOX probably has Netflix support in software but that Netflix isn’t allowing them to use it (for now at least).> THANKS!> > * * *
SjefDeKlerk wrote:
richUK wrote:
They said that there was nobody on the grassy knoll but that does not stop the conspiracy theorists. This will just turn into the same pointless thread.
And don’t forget that there is a very real possibility that WD is not allowed to talk about it. This is what Syabas said about the issue of their Popbox not featuring Netflix at introduction:
“So Second, we pledge this going forward: 1) When something is off the table or not going to happen we will state that. 2) When we appear vague in our wording or “not answering a direct question” it’s because (for business or legal reasons) we CAN’T, not because we won’t or we’re trying to pull anything. 3) If we don’t disclose everything to you it’s because we are in a competitive business vertical and we can’t always be completely transparent – although we are going to be as much as is feasible.”
What I’d make from this ? Either Syabas is misleading their customers (since the 8643 doesnt have a hardware decoder) OR (more plausible) they know of a software decoder for Linux that’s been developed and they’re trying to get that licensed … That would make perfect sense anyway and would explain all the 'hush hush - 'we are in a competitive business ‘- mystery talk’
Anyway, it will be interesting to follow the Popbox/Netflix developments, since if the Popbox will get Netflix, the WDTV Live could in theory as well, although my personal take on it is that Netflix on the Popbox (and hence the WDTV Live as well) will NEVER be available, because even if somebody develops a sofware decoder, netflix will most certainly try to push everybody onto (way more secure) hardware decoding and I don’t think they’d license software decoding on mediaplayer platforms.
If you go look in the IDEAS LAB on this subject, you’ll see WD’s own comments when they marked the issue UNPLANNED for the Live.
WD should come up with the answer. I purchased WD Live on a day BEFORE the Live+ was announced. Has WD be candid on the plan, I would have holded on from buying Live and istead go with Live+. Since I purchased my Live from internet, there is going to be much more difficult for me to return (vs. buying from B&M store).
Is WD planning to either provide an firmware update that allows Zulu and/or Netflix on Live or willing to give an upgrade to Live+ for people like me?
just wondering, are there any wd hired community reps posting in this thread? or is it just fanboys defending wd based on speculations they may have. all threads re netflix for wdtv live have bunch of users defending why WD is doing it this way but I have a feeling that they are nothing but misinformed fanboys. so which of you actually are real reps working for wdc that can speak on their behalf?
what poster states is clear, he wants response from wdc staff. and if you are gonna provide links, make sure to see if its from a credible source, not from some other fanboy at some other forum rofl.
Why would someone want to respond to an insulting *demand* like the previous post?
vu3kkm wrote:
WD should come up with the answer. I purchased WD Live on a day BEFORE the Live+ was announced. Has WD be candid on the plan, I would have holded on from buying Live and istead go with Live+. Since I purchased my Live from internet, there is going to be much more difficult for me to return (vs. buying from B&M store).
Is WD planning to either provide an firmware update that allows Zulu and/or Netflix on Live or willing to give an upgrade to Live+ for people like me?
simple answer - no.
dk922 wrote:
just wondering, are there any wd hired community reps posting in this thread? or is it just fanboys defending wd based on speculations they may have. all threads re netflix for wdtv live have bunch of users defending why WD is doing it this way but I have a feeling that they are nothing but misinformed fanboys. so which of you actually are real reps working for wdc that can speak on their behalf?
what poster states is clear, he wants response from wdc staff. and if you are gonna provide links, make sure to see if its from a credible source, not from some other fanboy at some other forum rofl.
so why are you joining in?
Rich, SHAME SHAME SHAME! You are a Fanboy, not a “Credible Source,” and you’re a Fanboy. 
(You know I kid, right? 
)
dk: I’ll abide your indignation and give the OP what both he asks and you demand:
As to NETFLIX on the WDTV Live (Not Plus): OFFICIAL “No” by WD:
http://community.wdc.com/t5/WD-TV-Live-Ideas/NETFLIX-streaming-support/idi-p/143
richUK I am joining in with the poster seeking for same answer/response. how did you not get that message from reading my post?
tonyph - thanks, I took a look at the link, but rasta isnt a wdc rep is he…?
Ok, here’s something direct from WD:
Unfortuantely supporting Netflix is not possible on the current WDTV Live platform. This requires additional hardward component and content protection mechanism. We understand this is a very hot idea and we will keep this in mind for the future.
Source: http://community.wdc.com/t5/WD-TV-Live-Ideas/NETFLIX-streaming-support/idi-p/143
The specific post by jchen (WD staff) can be viewed here:
http://community.wdc.com/t5/WD-TV-Live-Ideas/NETFLIX-streaming-support/idc-p/20183#M2018
This is from back in April (22nd), so the hardware limitation is not something they recently fabricated as the idiotic conspiracy theorists would have you believe.
Here’s another official comment from Bill_S, a member of WD staff:
For those of you that can’t seem to believe that there is a hardware difference between the WD TV Live and the Live Plus, one of our users posted, probably after taking each one apart, that “The WD Live Plus has a SMP8654 chip that supports Macrovision whereas the Live has a SMP8655 chip which is the non-Macrovision version of the very same chip.”
You can find the thread post here: http://community.wdc.com/t5/General-Discussions/WD-TV-Live-Plus-with-Netflix/m-p/27548#M8222
Source: http://community.wdc.com/t5/WD-TV-Live-Ideas/NETFLIX-streaming-support/idc-p/27716#M2388
That seems to be all (or most of) the official commentary on the matter.
There is not a huge WD staff presence on these boards (in fact, there are less than a handful who have posted), so demands for replies will often go unheard. Eventually you’ll get a response from Bill_S, he’s the one in charge of overseeing the boards.
thanks pixelpower, you just gave me the closure i needed ahaha. that wd logo next to name adds a lot of weight to the post.
dk922 wrote:
richUK I am joining in with the poster seeking for same answer/response. how did you not get that message from reading my post?
tonyph - thanks, I took a look at the link, but rasta isnt a wdc rep is he…?
No, but “jchen,” who changed the status to UNPLANNED (as indicated in the first post) IS. If you look at the last third of the posts (I don’t know what page it’ll be on for you, but for me, it’s on page 5 of 6) you will see his comments.
| Forums | News and Announcements | Register | Help | Forum Guidelines |
Copyright © 2021 Western Digital Technologies, Inc. All rights
reserved.
|
Trademarks
|
Privacy
|
Community Terms of Service
|
Site Terms of Use
|
Copyright
|
Contact WD
|