If you haven't noticed, all of the content companies[1] are doing the initial work. Look at how many of them are now on devices such as Apple TV. Time Warner / HBO has quite a lot of content they can stream.

I don't have a doubt Netflix will survive, but it will be one of many and probably the Indy / small provider company, if Amazon doesn't run them over.

1) even MLB

Yup. The competitive advantage is not the streaming technology. Many providers, including the ones you mentioned, have feature parity w/ Netflix. I have Netflix, HBO Go w/ Time Warner (and their TV app), and MLB.TV. Although those 4 all have the technology, Netflix's competitive advantage is in convenience. HBO Go and TWC requires an expensive cable subscription and MLB.TV has a horrid blackout policy.

It all comes down to sports for many. If Netflix of Google TV begin to seriously bid for sports contracts things will change very soon. Similarly if traditional sports outlets like ESPN or Fox would cut their cord requirement (even at an egregious per-subscriber cost to start off with) the landscape will really start to shift.

> Many providers, including the ones you mentioned, have feature parity w/ Netflix.

Oh really? Netflix is far ahead of the competition when it comes to device support. And the streaming technology plays a lot bigger role than you might imagine, especially when it comes to live content. Contrary to popular belief, this is not a solved problem. Like I mentioned above in another comment, just try watching a streaming NBA game.

Yes really. Can you elaborate on "far ahead" on device support compared to the TWC TV, HBO Go, and MLB.TV? Being able to control a DVR (like in the TWC TV app) or watching live television and easily perusing a guide and switching between streams (like in the TWC TV app or the MLB.TV app) are pluses over Netflix's offering. I have watched live streaming sports without issue over ESPN's offerings or individual league offerings and I find they work well and provide a lot of alternative content, things which Netflix isn't even in the business of having much less having the features for.

I don't think Netflix would have any special insight as to streaming live action such as sports. Streaming and caching content from a movie or TV episode enables additional options compared to live content.

> If you haven't noticed, all of the content companies[1] are doing the initial work

And most of them suck ass. You can't stream an NBA game live without it buffering the crap out of itself.

> if Amazon doesn't run them over.

Based on what Amazon has done so far, it doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell. They have no understanding of content - their recently released pilots were horrible. You can let a bunch of tech guys up in Seattle make content decisions.

Their insistence at treating their prime streaming like just an aspect of the normal purchasing view is also annoying. If I'm searching through shows, It doesn't help me to see multiple seasons of the same show 'on the shelf,' both SD and HD versions. It just takes longer to find what I want that way.

I don't watch NBA, but the MLB[1] and Disney streamers work damn well. HBO Go works pretty nicely for all my friends who have it (GOT fans).

As for Amazon, they'll do what they do best, buy content from everyone.

1) the MLB has home or away announcers and HD video - much better than the cable version

I would like to have a serious talk to whoever designed the Amazon streaming video interface on the Roku. It shows a grid video selections in rows, then proceeds to obscure most of the selections with the description text. I really can't stand to use it unless Amazon is the only source for that content.

> (presuming that they're good shows)

That's the crux of it. There will inevitably be good and bad shows, or even good but unpopular shows. The viewers are fickle and Netflix will need to somehow manage keeping their attention. Netflix's problem is that they don't own the content. But as soon as they enter the content-creation business, they will be the same as Disney (and will face the same challenges).

Given that Netflix has Ted Sarandos as its CCO, I think they are well-placed to make the right decisions regarding content.

Netflix's goals run much deeper than this. The article touches on this briefly. The goal of becoming HBO has been completed. Take a look at the list of Netflix Original Programming. They've succeeded at becoming a content generator, and they are actively scooping up other companies' IP a la Valve (Arrested Development being the epitomal example of this.). All this does, however, is puts them in league with the major studios.

Netflix is still at the mercy of the internet providers, which are increasingly also controlled by the major content studios. Comcast just won a huge net neutrality battle and is making a play for Cablevision. Netflix has said it's willing to "mobilize its users" against traffic throttling abuse. Netflix's goal is to become Disney before Disney can become Netflix.

They've got better data and infrastructure. And they seem to have a one-up on a culture that lets them be flexable with IP. We'll see what happens.

HBO already has HBO Go so they would only have to scale it out.

From what I've heard, HBO Go has many technical and content quality problems. Plus they have promised real support for Apple TV for a long time, and only presented crappy non-solutions based on AirPlay using an app that can't multitask. :-P

HBO Go arrived on Apple TV last summer.

http://www.macworld.com/article/2042405/hbo-go-watchespn-com...

Not in my country, Sweden. We have to use a computer or iOS device.

What you've heard is, in my opinion, wrong - the service works great across all my devices.