Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple TV Streaming Service Receives Price Increase

triumvirate said:
Apple is becoming a joke. It is not some immortal company that will always be successful no matter what. People will stop bending over eventually.
Click to expand...

Sometimes it's hard to tell around these parts.

For some folks, Apple could introduce "iCancer" (via subscription of course) and they would laud it, defend it and be excited about the implications for the stock price!!

Stop loving corporations, people.
They don't give a single hoot about you... even dear Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eifelbube, Pezimak, edvj and 2 others
jimbobb24 said:
Dont steal stuff. If it's worth it pay for it. Your perception of it being harmless doesnt mean on the margin it isnt harmless but the real reason is we shouldn't rationalize stealing.
Click to expand...
I try not to now that I work. But when I was younger, it wasnt even a question.

And man, I dodged a lot of turds that way. A lot of software was more harm than good (Those PC Cleaners things, for example).

Games were actually better back then than now. Nowadays, I'm more picky about what I buy. If the company is not pulling my leg with their prices, yeah, I don't mind paying it. If instead, they are trying to pull my leg, I wont buy it. It all depends on the effort spent on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect and turbineseaplane
neuropsychguy said:
Other than electricity costs and, assuming you acquire what's on it legally, the cost of buying and ripping those movies and shows. That can be less expensive than streaming subscriptions, but not all shows on the various services can be purchased on physical media and ripped from that.
Click to expand...
Well, electricity for playback is moot* because streaming requires electricity too, not to mention it's pretty insignificant compared to other costs. Electricity for ripping is also pretty insignificant. Ripping is really just time cost, but maybe most of that can be automated. Buying vs subscription is the only real money cost, which yes either option can be less expensive depending on factors. For me the ideal is a personal digital collection and free ad-based streaming for discovery.

That's too bad that some titles aren't sold on physical media. Hopefully they'll be released eventually. And hopefully someday they'll figure out how to sell (not rent) all titles digitally without making it easy for piracy and without simultaneously inconveniencing legitimate customers with DRM and low quality files (maybe blockchain can help).

Edit- *Correction, not technically moot but the the additional electricity cost of using a Home Sharing Mac is extremely insignificant. It costs on average about $0.0002 USD per hour of playback via Home Sharing--that's maybe $1 per month if playing video 24/7, and $0.50 USD per month if the Mac is only idle, and considerably less if on standby mode.
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
Reactions: Pezimak and DEMinSoCAL
turbineseaplane said:
Sometimes it's hard to tell around these parts.

For some folks, Apple could introduce "iCancer" (via subscription of course) and they would laud it, defend it and be excited about the implications for the stock price!!

Stop loving corporations, people.
They don't give a single hoot about you... even dear Apple.
Click to expand...
Some people seem to have invested too much “love” & loyalty to Apple over the decades when, sadly, Apple does not indeed give a single flying **** about them. Exactly.

On this path, Apple will eventually crash into the dust.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: eifelbube, arkitect and turbineseaplane
CookeeTim said:
People in NA felt for the fearmongering of "Torrents" being full of virus and stuff like adware.
But nevermind, companies are free to push ads on any of their services, guys. And they still want you to pay for it 🙂

And time and time again, if something gets pirated, it means it is a good product and that it will get sales. I have yet to hear/read about a software product that was good/popular, that got pirated a lot and that brought down their company.

I think even Microsoft has gotten over it lately, and just accepted it. There was a time when Microsoft was in the fore-front of combating Windows/Office piracy, but they learned later, that this allowed them to have ample marketshare, which pushed business to use Office/Windows on their workplaces for their employees which gave them more B2B contracts.

Videogames and movies are another example. No one cares to pirate ET the videogame. Not even Atari cares about it. Nintendo has had their games pirated for years, and yet, they still do pretty well in software sales, even on their smaller IPs (something Sony would love to brag about). While they fight tooth and nail against it (I assume, to protect their IP), they know it allows them to reach a wider public and give them notoriety.

Point is, if you have a good product, money will still come in. Piracy might in theory make you lose money, but it will spread your product usage by word of mouth and establish you as a leader in the long run.
Click to expand...

I think companies care plenty about piracy but some do tolerate it to a degree because completely eliminating it is difficult and expensive and may not be worth the cost.

The way for streaming service companies to "spread product usage" (at no additional cost to user) is by offering free trials. Allowing or tolerating "illegal" activity (piracy) should not be an answer here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CookeeTim
I, as a consumer, will be lowering my payments effective today, following unforeseen headwinds in my household. I hope that companies will find a way to cover this gap in their revenues.

/s but this is getting so old
 
Just 4 of the streamers are costing me $70/mo here in the states right now. That was before this price increase.

Netflix (highest tier) - 26.99 (28.88 w/tax)
ATV+ & Peacock (no commercials) bundled - 19.99 (21.39 w/tax)
Hulu (no commercials) - 18.99 (20.32 w/tax)

The Netflix I would probably cycle off and on, but it's still billed through iTunes. If Apple kicks me off of that, I would start cycling.

Hulu used to be 5.00 + tax through our Verizon plan. The commercial version was free with Verizon plan, but they'd let you do a workaround and pay the difference to have no commercials. Verizon ended that this past spring.

That's not including the Amazon Video commercial-free version 4.99 (5.34) for which I pay (and the Prime itself, although I have that for other reasons...the video just comes with it).

These joints are like the Postal Service anymore. They seem like they raise prices 3 x's per year. That's hyperbole in most of their cases, but it sure doesn't feel like it.
 
Last edited:
webkit said:
I think companies care plenty about piracy but some do tolerate it to a degree because completely eliminating it is difficult and expensive and may not be worth the cost.

The way for streaming service companies to "spread product usage" (at no additional cost to user) is by offering free trials. Allowing or tolerating "illegal" activity (piracy) should not be an answer here.
Click to expand...
I think Crunchyroll had the right approach back when they had the free tier.

It had ads, and you saw new episodes until a week later after they arrived. You could have even pushed that to two weeks later. I enjoyed the free tier for years, and even paid for a Premium year later on because it was so good.

Then, Sony came in and ruined everything. And Funimation shutting down didnt help it either.

Idk if " Allowing or tolerating "illegal" activity (piracy) should not be an answer here." is an statement that I can support. Some companies protect their IP so much that even if there is no product being sold, they still fight nail and tooth for it and do not give consumers a fair way of consuming it. When greed creeps in, issues start ramping up
 
subjonas said:
Well, electricity for playback is moot because streaming requires electricity too, not to mention it's pretty insignificant compared to other costs. Electricity for ripping is also pretty insignificant. Ripping is really just time cost, but maybe most of that can be automated. Buying vs subscription is the only real money cost, which yes either option can be less expensive depending on factors. For me the ideal is a personal digital collection and free ad-based streaming for discovery.

That's too bad that some titles aren't sold on physical media. Hopefully they'll be released eventually. And hopefully someday they'll figure out how to sell (not rent) all titles digitally without making it easy for piracy and without simultaneously inconveniencing legitimate customers with DRM and low quality files (maybe blockchain can help).
Click to expand...
Not true with electricity costs...a home media server runs 24 hours a day regardless of how often you turn on the TV (or TV's), and those TV's also consume their own electricity when you're using them. Depending on where you live, the cost of electricity is not trivial -- where I live it's about 50 cents per kWh, delivered.
 
jayb3 said:
You know what would keep people from cancelling their streaming services? How about if you actually decreased their price over time for being a loyal subscriber. If you cancel, then you start over at the new price. Obviously, I am not a shareholder 🙂
Click to expand...

Loyalty pricing is dead and buried - you can see this across every industry. Executives would rather chase new customers than retain their existing ones. That's the high-gloss sexy path. Keeping existing customers happy doesn't get you promoted.
 
immediately cancelled upon reading this...
I cancelled last year... then resubscribed when they offered a 3 month promo, ended up never watching it, left it subscribed a few months waiting for Silo.... still haven't gotten around to Silo, and now won't watch it
 
DEMinSoCAL said:
Not true with electricity costs...a home media server runs 24 hours a day regardless of how often you turn on the TV (or TV's), and those TV's also consume their own electricity when you're using them. Depending on where you live, the cost of electricity is not trivial -- where I live it's about 50 cents per kWh, delivered.
Click to expand...
Macs are very low power, it costs on average maybe $0.50 USD per month to leave it on all the time on standby, so if you live in a place with expensive electricity, it's what, $1? That why I think most people just leave their home computers on standby all the time (Home Sharing works on standby).
TVs consume electricity when you're using streaming too, how is that different?

Edit- $0.50 USD per month is actually a Mac on idle, so standby is even cheaper.
 
Last edited:
I only pay for a month and then cancel it so I can catch up on the shows I like. While Apple TV has some stellar programming, it just isn't enough to warrant $15/mo. I have plenty of other options.
 
subjonas said:
Don't most people leave their computers on all the time anyway? I suppose one can turn it on only when they want to use it, but doesn't seem necessary. Macs are very low power, it costs on average maybe $0.50 USD per month to leave it on all the time on standby, so if you live in a place with expensive electricity, it's what $1?
TVs consume electricity when you're using streaming too, how is that different?
Click to expand...
You can continue to cherry-pick a specific scenario that fits your narrative, but most people do not leave their computer on 24 hours a day, especially overnight and especially if you live somewhere that energy is costly. Since putting Plex on my PC (an Alienware Aurora that is a room heater) I do have to leave it on 24 hours. I have energy monitoring smart outlets and my average electricity cost to leave my PC on 24 hours is over $30 a month (just the PC). Last month, it was $35 (71.2 kWh).

Clearly you don't live where you have expensive energy.
 
Last edited:
turbineseaplane said:
What won't?

UHF does multiple things and provides no links to anything.

I've been getting the Pluto link from elsewhere for a long time now. I don't think Pluto even cares.
It doesn't skip the ADs or anything, it's just a nicer watching experience on Apple devices.
Click to expand...
I haven't used it, but, because you are using VPN, it seems to me you're gaining access to things for free that are not meant to be aired outside their country of origin, for instance, I saw TF1 in a screenshot, which is a commercial network in France. There may be more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back