[themartorana]

Well, they make it seem trivial, while dealing with every watch and every pause, every rating updating complex recommendation engine algorithms. They deal with licensing and region awareness and proxying by ISP and running their own CDNs and...

And that's the magic.

To boot, they do it at enormous scale on a multitude of platforms all while their own destructive code (Chaos Monkey) runs around destroying servers.

It's true, some things like "stream me this" are maybe not rocket science, but at Netflix scale, everything becomes a bit more difficult.

[jcampbell1]

Netflix is good at providing the service on any device, and having 100% uptime.

Their requirements are 100% availability, and an API's that never breaks, but consistency rarely matters.

The engineering effort is cool, but it is solving a problem that I don't have. The only thing that matters to netflix is they list the catalog somewhat correctly, and always deliver a stream.

I have a different problem, thus I am uninterested in their magic. If I had a similar problem or they signed my paycheck, I'd care.

[res0nat0r]

Not to deride what you are saying, but when I see comments that dismiss Netflix as a site that just simply streams movies consistently; it tells me that the commenters haven't seen and appreciated the difficulty of the problems they are actually solving under the hood as evidenced by their github page.

http://netflix.github.io/#repo

[personZ]

Neither that or the number of open engineering positions tells you the difficulty of the problems they are solving. It might just tell you the difficulty of the problems they are making: If Netflix has a technology side with a history and the executive ability to overcomplicate, they might be making little problems into big problems. My perspective as an outsider is to look at the complexity of their app platform (again, separating the video streams which happen from systems that never seem to be the foundation of these tech blog entries), and it is unarguably not a complex system.

Early on I remember the heroics that Netflix went through running on EC2, building numbers of complex tools for varied performance, reliability issues, etc. At the time many much larger sites just quietly worked 24/7, minus the heroics, and minus the effort, often by using purpose-suited dedicated servers. Later, once Amazon rolled out SSDs, Netflix triumphantly announced how much of an improvement it was to their product, again demonstrating that they were creating a problem (huge numbers of horrible I/O machines) that they then solved with gusto, albeit unnecessarily.

I'm not trying to be overly down on Netflix, but it is a company that seemed to make tech blog entries a product of the company years ago, and the result is that people have bought into this notion that they're doing some hugely complex task. They aren't.

[res0nat0r]

Sorry but you are just flat out wrong. Operating at the scale that they are is in fact complex. They aren't creating all of this software just because they are having fun in their free time.

[personZ]

They aren't creating all of this software just because they are having fun in their free time.

Sorry, but this is an invention of yours. No one said they're doing anything flippantly.

But they may be doing it ignorantly: Success in one field (in this case turning a mail subscription business into a stream service) doesn't imply technical innovation or leadership, and often is despite it.

This industry is absolutely rife with people creating solutions to problems they themselves invented and caused. In the case of Netflix, an enormous amount of their solutions have been founded around the notion of deploying on huge numbers of miserable Amazon EC2 instances, and then dealing with the problems related to that. Others simply deployed distributed data centers hosting their own purpose suited, reliable hardware with big fat storage arrays, and the problem is solved. It's like trying to build a car out of toothpicks and then detailing the innovations you created in toothpick redundancy and robustness.

[res0nat0r]

Sorry but this just reeks of naiveté. When the few areas of tech that I have actually been involved with in the real world come up on HN there are always comments stating that things are just so simple and why so and so is doing it wrong and why it so much easier if they just do something simplistic...

That just isn't the case in the real world when working with tens of millions of customers. This will become apparent when you actually get out there in the field and realize systems involving tens of thousands of machines hosting dozens of different services to millions of people is actually not simple.