I think it's pretty clear from their last shareholder news release. 18,000 Star Wars expanded universe spin off series & movie trilogies, coming right up! Not that I'm really complaining :o)
On one end, you have Netflix practically leading the field with the best of the best engineers and practices.
Then you have Disney with makeshift off-the-shelf solutions assembled and aligned by multiple siloed armies of overseas contractors that rotate out every year as their contracts expire and some very expensive vendors.
I don't really think users will care at all about this, though. They just want high quality content. The users and the their dollars will flock to the high quality content.
Netflix is feeling like H&M "fast fashion" where they churn out a bazillion low quality shows to throw everything against the wall and hope something sticks to keep people subscribing.
Meanwhile the entire field is getting diluted by other platforms popping up and customers are getting fatigued enough to pay for premium content only (HBO/Disney/ESPN) and then pirate everything else, imo.
For example, over the holidays I watched 3 different streaming platforms:
BBC iPlayer - occasionally cut out and dropped back to main menu requiring me to find the program again.
Amazon Prime - often had buffering problems requiring me to manually lower resolution (on a 150Mb/s connection...)
Netflix - No problems, hit start on a movie and watch it to the end.
This kind of thing does get remembered; I certainly ended up watching a heck of a lot more Netflix than any other platform.
I haven't had any issues with the service of Disney+, so they're at least doing good enough (on my devices, on my home network).
On the other side of the spectrum, Apple TV on my devices takes about 8 attempts to start a stream, including a reboot. They would have to have a big exclusive that I really wanted to see for me to use that again.
Smallish differences in how long it takes to get a stream started (including browse/search time) probably drive long term behavior, when content quality is similar enough though; because I'll tend to use the service that gets me into watching something I'll enjoy sooner; and when the same content is available on multiple services, I use the one that's faster to get started.
They may have the best engineers but content wise all I hear are complaints. Mediocre shows and cancelling shows after one season if specific metrics aren't good enough. When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.
Disclaimer: work at Hulu, opinions are my own
Doesn't Disney own star wars nowadays. Is that sequel-mill of terrible writing really what passes for quality?
I have many qualms about The Mandalorian, but compared to the dumpster fire called the "sequel trilogy" it's very good content.
However I would agree it's seems better so far than Netflix which aims somewhat more on quantity over quality.
Regions probably vary.
Each to their own!
I mean, if you count all the content they own and you already saw before on cinema or other medias then you're right.
But after paying 1.5 years for Disney+ I think I'm paying 120 dollars a year just to watch Baby Yoda. I cannot find any other content over there really worth the Disney+ membership price.
On the other hand it's really hard for me to decide what to watch on netflix because of the amount of content I'm interested.
If you don't count that then Disney+ probably isn't for you. It's ideal for parents who want a bunch of good kids movies and shows. Mandalorian, although it was the "killer app" is an outlier. The rest of the original content I've watched on there is almost literally advertisements for Disneyland. Just buy a membership for a month and watch Mando.
I wouldn't pay for Disney+ on its own, but getting it as part of a bundle with Hulu (ad free) was ok. ESPN+ is worthless.
shrug. ymmv