←back to thread

492 points storf45 | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
_fat_santa ◴[] No.42157053[source]
When you step back and look at the situation, it's not hard to see why Netflix dropped the ball here. Here's now I see it (not affiliated with Netflix, pure speculation):

- Months ago, the "higher ups" at Netflix struck a deal to stream the fight on Netflix. The exec that signed the deal was probably over the moon because it would get Netflix into a brand new space and bring in large audience numbers. Along the way the individuals were probably told that Netflix doesn't do livestreaming but they ignored it and assumed their talented Engineers could pull it off.

- Once the deal was signed then it became the Engineer's problem. They now had to figure out how to shift their infrastructure to a whole new set of assumptions around live events that you don't really have to think about when streaming static content.

- Engineering probably did their absolute best to pull this off but they had two main disadvantages, first off they don't have any of the institutional knowledge about live streaming and they don't really know how to predict demand for something like this. In the end they probably beefed up livestreaming as much as they could but still didn't go far enough because again, no one there really knows how something like this will pan out.

- Evening started off fine but crap hit the fan later in the show as more people tuned in for the main card. Engineering probably did their best to mitigate this but again, since they don't have the institutional knowledge of live events, they were shooting in the dark hoping their fixes would stick.

Yes Netflix as a whole screwed this one up but I'm tempted to give them more grace than usual here. First off the deal that they struck was probably one they couldn't ignore and as for Engineering, I think those guys did the freaking best they could given their situation and lack of institutional knowledge. This is just a classic case of biting off more than one can chew, even if you're an SV heavyweight.

replies(8): >>42157067 #>>42157069 #>>42157146 #>>42157772 #>>42158104 #>>42158143 #>>42158185 #>>42158359 #
JumpCrisscross ◴[] No.42157772[source]
Livestreaming is a solved problem. This sounds like NIH [1]. (At the very least, hire them as a back-up.)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here

replies(3): >>42157965 #>>42157973 #>>42160144 #
oehpr ◴[] No.42157973[source]
Look. I'm a small startup employee. I have a teeny tiny perspective here. But frankly speaking the idea that Netflix could just take some off the shelf widget and stuff it in their network to solve a problem... It's an absurd statement for even me. And if there's anyone it should apply to it would be a little startup company that needs to focus on their core area.

Every off the shelf component on the market needs institutional knowledge to implement, operate, and maintain it. Even Apple's "it just works" mantra is pretty laughable in the cold light of day. Very rarely in my experience do you ever get to just benefit from someone else's hard work in production without having an idea how properly implement, operate, and maintain it.

And that's at my little tiny ant scale. To call the problem of streaming "solved" for Netflix... Given the guess of the context from the GP post?

I just don't think this perspective is realistic at all.

replies(2): >>42158138 #>>42158527 #
1. ikiris ◴[] No.42158527[source]
There are multiple companies that offer this capability today that would take a few weeks to hide behind company branding. This was a problem of netflix just not being set up for live stream but thinking they could handle it.
replies(1): >>42160583 #
2. shermantanktop ◴[] No.42160583[source]
At 120m concurrents? I’d be interested who can whitelabel that.