Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
nagromme said:
My main reactions:

1. No, rentals should not cost the same as buying to keep. I don't think Apple would permit such a system on iTunes. Subscriptions are a fine option to offer--for video more so than music--but only at a lower price.

Here's the real kicker question: Why rent one episode for $1.99 for twenty-four hours when I could rent an entire DVD of Survivor episodes and watch it for a good week at any video rental store (and then rip it to my iPod, if I wanted to be dishonest as well) for the same price.


2. I would pay $1.99 to AVOID seeing any reality show. I'd even pay monthly, forever. Name your price.

clapclapclapclapclapclapclapclap. Agreed!
 
mtigerv said:
CBS shows should have been put on iTunes weeks ago. Nickelodeon and MTV are owned by Viacomm which is owned by TimeWarner, who owns CBS, the WB, and UPN. I was surprised they wern't added at the same time like the Disney-owned networks were.


uumm....
Viacom owns CBS/MTV/Nickelodeon

Time Warner does not own Viacom or the other way.
 
dashiel said:
i think it has more to do with the ipod than either bandwidth or eating in to DVD sales. they figure, rightly or wrongly, that most people have television and that these sales supplement first run viewing. since the ipod only does 320x240 why bother going higher? at least that's my guess.

I guess if the Video iPod was going to be your only viewing method then this would be true. However there's a growing number of people that have HDTV with a HTPC hooked up to it. With this kind of setup, ITMS becomes a format for distributing shows on demand.
 
i hope...

i hope that sales continue to swell and eventually get to a point where Studios see iTunes and the like as comparable with the DVD market - then we'll get DVD quality downloads. it's just a matter of how long will this take.

i guess it's like how the records companies offered limited content at the start. now, most of them, are desperate to be in with iTunes, offering priority artsit tracks exclusively, often before they even go to radio.....
 
I would really like to see a tv subscription service in iTunes. I really can't justify paying$1.99 for a tv show I will only watch once. Music, of course, is different. I would pay $15+ a month to have unlimited access to the TV shows iTunes offers. This whole TV thing may the thing that makes major Apple a media mogul.
 
illegalprelude said:
uumm....
Viacom owns CBS/MTV/Nickelodeon

Time Warner does not own Viacom or the other way.

CBS is now owned by CBS..

For information about CBS Corporation, formerly named Viacom Inc. prior to its separation into two publicly traded companies on December 31, 2005, click here:
http://www.cbscorporation.com/
 
You can also be two publicly traded companies and still be owned by one conglomeration(sp)

im kind of lost, if CBS is adding more content, thus making iTunes more valuable, thus making Apple more profit and better position, how is this a negative?
 
Mac Dummy said:
I want to see WB shows on iTunes, specifically "Charmed" season 8 (this season) which is rumored to be the last. I can't get the WB through Dish Network and TNT that carries re-runs of older seasons does carry the new season 8 episodes and BitTorrent is too risky.🙁 Heck the WB has some great shows like Smallville and the Gilmore Girls among others. I also heard that UPN and the WB will be merging with CBS and Warner Bros. in the fall of 2006 to form the CW network. 😱 Maybe they'll have re-runs of popular series from both channels on iTunes.🙂

UPN and WB.... that alone says it all. 😛
 
illegalprelude said:
im kind of lost, if CBS is adding more content, thus making iTunes more valuable, thus making Apple more profit and better position, how is this a negative?
Have you seen some of CBS's shows? 😀

(I'm not trying to start a debate, that is just what they are thinking when they vote negative)
 
EricNau said:
Have you seen some of CBS's shows? 😀

(I'm not trying to start a debate, that is just what they are thinking when they vote negative)

haha yea, i dont watch too much tv to be honest so not sure what their airing these days. I do enjoy their CSI and Without a Trace type shows
 
Negative?

I don't understand why so many people are marking this negative?

CBS is adding content to the Apple store. It is increasing our options and making the store better.

If it has to do with the "Rental Model" that CBS is using on thier own website, Apple does not use that model. And Apple will not go to a rental model just for CBS. Apple has been pretty adamant about having content providers play the Apple way or not at all.

From my perspective, this can only be good.
 
A bit disappointing - I really hope apple don't think a rental agreement is a good plan (for the same price as pay to keep), especially at the dire quality offered.
 
24

the only thing I would pay $2 for renting for 24 hours is Fox's "24." no pun intended.

seriously, 24 is the best show on tv.
 
This is only good news. Sure their rental idea is lame, but any new content is good news.

The big networks are going to bring people in, but it will be video podcasts which make people stay. I can't wait until some independent video podcaster makes it big on itunes. It is going to happen it is just a matter of time.
 
That is simply an idiotic idea. $1.99 is too much for a show already. How many people would download and never watch it within their 24 hours? I certainly didn't watch the 1 episode of Lost I downloaded within 24 hours. I hope Apple tells them where to go with this. Even if selling, they make more on these sales than they do per episode by selling DVD seasons so why the stupid expiration!?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.