|
Post by Raskovnik on Feb 26, 2014 6:43:53 GMT -5
I'm using the Kindle Fire WWE app (which is not the best, but not so bad) to watch No Way Out 2009 and I'm having absolutely no problems at all with the VOD or streaming as of this moment, other than the picture quality being pretty lousy as opposed to the TV shows I stream with Prime where I get HD with no problems. I'm not going to buy a subscription but I'd definitely be pretty pleased if I got one as a gift or something.
EDIT: I guess that was a big lie because a short time after posting this it stopped and won't work at all anymore. Oh well. It's just a free trial so can't say I care all that much.
|
|
Professor Chaos
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bringer of Destruction and Maker of Doom
Posts: 16,332
|
Post by Professor Chaos on Feb 26, 2014 6:51:30 GMT -5
I'm using the Kindle Fire WWE app (which is not the best, but not so bad) to watch No Way Out 2009 and I'm having absolutely no problems at all with the VOD or streaming as of this moment, other than the picture quality being pretty lousy as opposed to the TV shows I stream with Prime where I get HD with no problems. I'm not going to buy a subscription but I'd definitely be pretty pleased if I got one as a gift or something. EDIT: I guess that was a big lie because a short time after posting this it stopped and won't work at all anymore. Oh well. It's just a free trial so can't say I care all that much. Still says a lot about this company being an absolute joke for shilling this thing so hard when it doesn't even work. Not like it's some new concept when other companies have done it for years.
|
|
|
Post by doinkmark on Feb 26, 2014 7:02:18 GMT -5
It's day 3 on the Network for me. Some videos still won't work (mostly clips and not full shows) despite having a successful, paid account. The full-screen feature has improved, as has the ability to skip around on what you're currently watching (that red bar at the bottom). The first Raw episode is currently out of sync, and it took me too long to find it (page 35) after trying to search for it three different ways. They really need to start putting full shows at the top of lists and THEN start listing individual matches and moments.
|
|
|
Post by Slammy Award-Winning Cannibal on Feb 26, 2014 7:29:46 GMT -5
I'm using the Kindle Fire WWE app (which is not the best, but not so bad) to watch No Way Out 2009 and I'm having absolutely no problems at all with the VOD or streaming as of this moment, other than the picture quality being pretty lousy as opposed to the TV shows I stream with Prime where I get HD with no problems. I'm not going to buy a subscription but I'd definitely be pretty pleased if I got one as a gift or something. EDIT: I guess that was a big lie because a short time after posting this it stopped and won't work at all anymore. Oh well. It's just a free trial so can't say I care all that much. Still says a lot about this company being an absolute joke for shilling this thing so hard when it doesn't even work. Not like it's some new concept when other companies have done it for years. Other companies like MLBAM, which is the same company running this?
|
|
|
Post by 1 Free Moon-Down with Burger on Feb 26, 2014 7:51:53 GMT -5
Internet based products rarely work flawlessly out of the gate.
By rarely, I mean never.
|
|
|
Post by cruiserfan on Feb 26, 2014 7:52:54 GMT -5
I work in an industry that deals with performance issues in high traffic websites and applications. There are ways to simulate virtual users all hitting a site at once and streaming video/signing up/doing whatever. It would be horrifically challenging and expensive to do for millions of users though. I wonder they did any at all and how many users they actually have.
I kind of want to suggest to my boss that we target MLB and WWE for a tactical engagement because this is the type of thing we fix, but we're in the UK and I'd be embarrassed to bring it up honestly.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Feb 26, 2014 7:58:34 GMT -5
Still says a lot about this company being an absolute joke for shilling this thing so hard when it doesn't even work. Not like it's some new concept when other companies have done it for years. Other companies like MLBAM, which is the same company running this? The buck stops ultimately with WWE. MLBAM will presumably be providing a service WWE is paying for. Given how successful MLBAM is in other ventures it does raise the suspicion that maybe WWE aren't paying for 'the works' when it comes to running the network. If it is then it's gross incompetence on behalf of MLBAM However given the two possible scenarios in this situation, I'd say it is far more likely that WWE have tried to do this 'on the cheap' rather than paying for the effective management of the network as the company they've got to do it has shown many times in the past it is capable of. What I'm saying is that I'm not sure MLBAM can be blamed if it's true that WWE have gone for the 'Budget Package C' of network management they offer.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Feb 26, 2014 8:02:49 GMT -5
I work in an industry that deals with performance issues in high traffic websites and applications. There are ways to simulate virtual users all hitting a site at once and streaming video/signing up/doing whatever. It would be horrifically challenging and expensive to do for millions of users though. I wonder they did any at all and how many users they actually have. I kind of want to suggest to my boss that we target MLB and WWE for a tactical engagement because this is the type of thing we fix, but we're in the UK and I'd be embarrassed to bring it up honestly. If you were advising on the launch what would be your response if they said they wanted weeks and weeks of promotion, anticipated six, maybe seven figure interest with the free trial, and wanted for the website to open and accept sign-up about 10 hours before the first event 'deadline' - what would be your response to this plan?
|
|
|
Post by cruiserfan on Feb 26, 2014 8:30:47 GMT -5
I work in an industry that deals with performance issues in high traffic websites and applications. There are ways to simulate virtual users all hitting a site at once and streaming video/signing up/doing whatever. It would be horrifically challenging and expensive to do for millions of users though. I wonder they did any at all and how many users they actually have. I kind of want to suggest to my boss that we target MLB and WWE for a tactical engagement because this is the type of thing we fix, but we're in the UK and I'd be embarrassed to bring it up honestly. If you were advising on the launch what would be your response if they said they wanted weeks and weeks of promotion, anticipated six, maybe seven figure interest with the free trial, and wanted for the website to open and accept sign-up about 10 hours before the first event 'deadline' - what would be your response to this plan? You would be shocked at how common this is. Marketing is the bane of the IT department. As for the post above, I'd hope WWE put in some decent SLA's (service level agreements) with MLBAM which would mean MLBAM loses money for performance falling below a certain level. Personally I doubt it's down to how much the WWE is paying (would they really skimp on something they are calling the biggest thing they've done in 30 years?) and more down to either the contracts and SLA's being lacklustre in regards to downtime and performance issues, or it's just a really complicated technical issue that will take time to resolve.
|
|
|
Post by Slammy Award-Winning Cannibal on Feb 26, 2014 8:39:16 GMT -5
Other companies like MLBAM, which is the same company running this? The buck stops ultimately with WWE. MLBAM will presumably be providing a service WWE is paying for. Given how successful MLBAM is in other ventures it does raise the suspicion that maybe WWE aren't paying for 'the works' when it comes to running the network. If it is then it's gross incompetence on behalf of MLBAM However given the two possible scenarios in this situation, I'd say it is far more likely that WWE have tried to do this 'on the cheap' rather than paying for the effective management of the network as the company they've got to do it has shown many times in the past it is capable of. What I'm saying is that I'm not sure MLBAM can be blamed if it's true that WWE have gone for the 'Budget Package C' of network management they offer. I have no idea where in the world anyone got the idea that WWE is trying to cut corners on this and do it "on the cheap." Like, not many things are as ridiculous as that theory. MLBAM has stated publicly that THEY did not expect the overflow of demand in the first 24 hours. So whatever they were expecting or prepping for, that's on them. It's THEIR world class media platform. Not WWE's.
|
|
|
Post by kingoftheindies on Feb 26, 2014 8:46:21 GMT -5
Working great on the computer at work, if it works on my PS3 when I get home I'll be happy.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Feb 26, 2014 8:46:33 GMT -5
The buck stops ultimately with WWE. MLBAM will presumably be providing a service WWE is paying for. Given how successful MLBAM is in other ventures it does raise the suspicion that maybe WWE aren't paying for 'the works' when it comes to running the network. If it is then it's gross incompetence on behalf of MLBAM However given the two possible scenarios in this situation, I'd say it is far more likely that WWE have tried to do this 'on the cheap' rather than paying for the effective management of the network as the company they've got to do it has shown many times in the past it is capable of. What I'm saying is that I'm not sure MLBAM can be blamed if it's true that WWE have gone for the 'Budget Package C' of network management they offer. I have no idea where in the world anyone got the idea that WWE is trying to cut corners on this and do it "on the cheap." Like, not many things are as ridiculous as that theory. MLBAM has stated publicly that THEY did not expect the overflow of demand in the first 24 hours. So whatever they were expecting or prepping for, that's on them. It's THEIR world class media platform. Not WWE's. yeah it's an absurd theory that a company that for years launched DVDs full of rehashed music and edited voice overs because they were too cheap to pay for music or a company or a company too cheap to buy out the contracts of the biggest WCW wrestlers at the time of the buy-out of that compay - could possibly be accused of trying to do things on the cheap in any other regards. Crackpot theory that. I don't know where it came to mind. It could be because the company are too cheap to provide their wrestlers with health insurance but I guess not. Or possibly how cheap they were not to be bothered to uncensor material they were no longer legally obliged to alter because they were too cheap to employ the man hours to do it......
|
|
|
Post by Slammy Award-Winning Cannibal on Feb 26, 2014 9:17:05 GMT -5
I have no idea where in the world anyone got the idea that WWE is trying to cut corners on this and do it "on the cheap." Like, not many things are as ridiculous as that theory. MLBAM has stated publicly that THEY did not expect the overflow of demand in the first 24 hours. So whatever they were expecting or prepping for, that's on them. It's THEIR world class media platform. Not WWE's. yeah it's an absurd theory that a company that for years launched DVDs full of rehashed music and edited voice overs because they were too cheap to pay for music or a company or a company too cheap to buy out the contracts of the biggest WCW wrestlers at the time of the buy-out of that compay - could possibly be accused of trying to do things on the cheap in any other regards. Crackpot theory that. I don't know where it came to mind. It could be because the company are too cheap to provide their wrestlers with health insurance but I guess not. Or possibly how cheap they were not to be bothered to uncensor material they were no longer legally obliged to alter because they were too cheap to employ the man hours to do it...... If those are your points to support the theory that WWE is going "on the cheap" for the WWE Network, then yes, I will say with absolute confidence that it is a crackpot theory.
|
|
|
Post by KofiMania on Feb 26, 2014 9:38:19 GMT -5
I'm using the Kindle Fire WWE app (which is not the best, but not so bad) to watch No Way Out 2009 and I'm having absolutely no problems at all with the VOD or streaming as of this moment, other than the picture quality being pretty lousy as opposed to the TV shows I stream with Prime where I get HD with no problems. I'm not going to buy a subscription but I'd definitely be pretty pleased if I got one as a gift or something. EDIT: I guess that was a big lie because a short time after posting this it stopped and won't work at all anymore. Oh well. It's just a free trial so can't say I care all that much. Still says a lot about this company being an absolute joke for shilling this thing so hard when it doesn't even work. Not like it's some new concept when other companies have done it for years. Lol, take a step back dude.
|
|
|
Post by KofiMania on Feb 26, 2014 9:39:12 GMT -5
I have no idea where in the world anyone got the idea that WWE is trying to cut corners on this and do it "on the cheap." Like, not many things are as ridiculous as that theory. MLBAM has stated publicly that THEY did not expect the overflow of demand in the first 24 hours. So whatever they were expecting or prepping for, that's on them. It's THEIR world class media platform. Not WWE's. yeah it's an absurd theory that a company that for years launched DVDs full of rehashed music and edited voice overs because they were too cheap to pay for music or a company or a company too cheap to buy out the contracts of the biggest WCW wrestlers at the time of the buy-out of that compay - could possibly be accused of trying to do things on the cheap in any other regards. Crackpot theory that. I don't know where it came to mind. It could be because the company are too cheap to provide their wrestlers with health insurance but I guess not. Or possibly how cheap they were not to be bothered to uncensor material they were no longer legally obliged to alter because they were too cheap to employ the man hours to do it...... So you're just guessing?
|
|
|
Post by jamofpearls on Feb 26, 2014 10:04:39 GMT -5
Everything was working fine this morning. I'm guessing the hours of 5-11 in the evening are going to be a little difficult for a while.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Feb 26, 2014 10:10:59 GMT -5
yeah it's an absurd theory that a company that for years launched DVDs full of rehashed music and edited voice overs because they were too cheap to pay for music or a company or a company too cheap to buy out the contracts of the biggest WCW wrestlers at the time of the buy-out of that compay - could possibly be accused of trying to do things on the cheap in any other regards. Crackpot theory that. I don't know where it came to mind. It could be because the company are too cheap to provide their wrestlers with health insurance but I guess not. Or possibly how cheap they were not to be bothered to uncensor material they were no longer legally obliged to alter because they were too cheap to employ the man hours to do it...... So you're just guessing? I qualified it appropriately in the original post. It's quite a slippery slope to go down on a wrestling forum to dismiss any opinion that's 'just guessing', unless all your opinions, predictions and assessments are based on direct contact with Stamford?
|
|
|
Post by HisRoyalGreeness on Feb 26, 2014 10:44:50 GMT -5
On demand footage is working great on IOS right now even over 4G. Now, if only we can get the 360 app working I'll be in business.
|
|
|
Post by xCompackx on Feb 26, 2014 10:50:05 GMT -5
I have no idea where in the world anyone got the idea that WWE is trying to cut corners on this and do it "on the cheap." Like, not many things are as ridiculous as that theory. MLBAM has stated publicly that THEY did not expect the overflow of demand in the first 24 hours. So whatever they were expecting or prepping for, that's on them. It's THEIR world class media platform. Not WWE's. yeah it's an absurd theory that a company that for years launched DVDs full of rehashed music and edited voice overs because they were too cheap to pay for music or a company or a company too cheap to buy out the contracts of the biggest WCW wrestlers at the time of the buy-out of that compay - could possibly be accused of trying to do things on the cheap in any other regards. Crackpot theory that. I don't know where it came to mind. It could be because the company are too cheap to provide their wrestlers with health insurance but I guess not. Or possibly how cheap they were not to be bothered to uncensor material they were no longer legally obliged to alter because they were too cheap to employ the man hours to do it...... I don't get any of these examples. If WWE were to pay for every time they licensed music on DVD copies, they would never do it at all. Editing the music just makes sense. And could you imagine how much health insurance would cost if WWE had to provide it for every single wrestler on their roster? I doubt they'd be making any money with the premiums they'd have to pay.
|
|
Scooterdust
ALF
I'm in the center of the epicenter of the pandemic!
Posts: 1,097
|
Post by Scooterdust on Feb 26, 2014 10:52:40 GMT -5
12 hours later, after testing it on 3 different mediums (Macbook, PS3, and iPhone), the WWE Network seemed to be running very smoothly after struggling to start a bit. It looks AMAZING on PS3!
With that being said, I have noticed that the WWE Network seems to run better in Chrome than Firefox (a bit of struggling with the player plug-in), so I would recommend using Chrome if viewing through a PC.
I really hope that they have plans to launch a pop-out player, or at least a player that can be resized with the browser. Anyone know if that is the case?
|
|