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.