Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
'Hulu Plus' Unveiled With Support for iOS Devices: $9.99 Per Month
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So let me get this straight... Pay $10 a month AND watch ads to see most of the same network content you can get for free over the air? Even the cable-stuff isn't that great, and isn't worth that price.
It should be either ad supported or cheap subscription (<7.99). another $10/mo fee charged to my credit card AND ads?? Forget it...
It should be either ad supported or cheap subscription (<7.99). another $10/mo fee charged to my credit card AND ads?? Forget it...
I suspect that most people can choose their service plans a little more efficiently than that.
i'd like to introduce you to something called the DVR. Maybe you've read the word "Tivo" at some point in the last 10 years and wondered what people were talking about. It might help you understand how people manage to get by with commercials taking up a third of the programming time. I pretty much don't see a commercial unless I want to. I just skip them.
I will even pause if I'm "live" and commercials come on, and then wait till they are over and jump forward and watch again. Maybe go get a snack. or do something useful for 10 minutes. Whatever i can do to avoid watching a commercial.
Chris, should we assume that your cable service is free? Otherwise I would think you are paying a lot more than $10/mo for cable service that allows you to use your EyeTV. Which would seem not to be free.
I am with you on that
But the question is about the hardware, what about the server cost and the internet bandwidth usage cost ? Isn't that just like the hardware that delivers the content to your TV.
I remember reading about that.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)
I keep reading how people don't want to "pay for ads". I assume this means you currently do not pay for satellite or cable service which are plagued with ads.
I keep reading how people don't want to "pay for ads". I assume this means you currently do not pay for satellite or cable service which are plagued with ads.
Correct. Hulu should be free if with ads.
Also, many of us now have caps on our internet so I am curious to see how many people will be reaching those caps.. Comcast (250GB cap) originally stated that the the typical person would never reach it but if you are streaming 720p all the time plus doing your usual internet browsing then I am sure more people are going to start to have issues with caps.
Doesn't anyone have cable? It's way more expensive, and has ads much more frequently. Also, not as versatile with devices.
I know there is a huge negative reaction to this, but Hulu will do just fine. They'll get tons of customers. And for those that don't want this, it sounds like the existing service is staying. So who cares?
I know there is a huge negative reaction to this, but Hulu will do just fine. They'll get tons of customers. And for those that don't want this, it sounds like the existing service is staying. So who cares?
720p only requires about 8-10Mb/s, or at least that's what it needs for HD on Netflix. I get around 12-16Mb/s for $40 a month, but I understand that varies from city to city.
Good point about triple billing 'though.
Cool, so Hulu is charging $10 a month to provide shows WITH COMMERCIALS to people who with that same computer connection can download them for free WITHOUT COMMERCIALS. Sign me up, I'm stupid.
Just a note, I would consider paying Hulu $10 a month if there were no commercials.
Just a note, I would consider paying Hulu $10 a month if there were no commercials.
I swear some people really are IDIOTS. As someone already posted earlier (but it was largely ignorned, apparently) TV COMMERCIALS=REVENUE FOR COMPANIES THAT MAKE TV SHOWS (ABC, CBS, etc). SATELLITE or CABLE TV BILLS=REVENUE FOR SATELLITE/CABLE COMPANIES (COMCAST, DIRECTV, etc,). HULU ADS=REVENUE FOR COMPANIES THAT MAKE TV SHOWS, while HULU SUBSCRIPTION FEE=REVENUE FOR HULU (Revenue that has to be used for DIGITAL CONVERSION, STORAGE, SERVERS, TECHNICIANS, etc.) Not to mention the fact that HULU PLUS OFFERS MORE TV SHOWS THAN REGULAR HULU!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I mean, damn, people act like just because its on the internet money isn't required to make it work, like people don't have to (and don't want to) get paid.
I mean, damn, people act like just because its on the internet money isn't required to make it work, like people don't have to (and don't want to) get paid.
I shell out $110/month for Internet plus cable. Ditching cable is $50 of that bill. I can live with $60/month and add Hulu fees. Much much cheaper. Also check your bandwidth or ISP service because Hulu 480p plays flawlessly for me with a T1 line (1.5 Mb/s) which is pretty much standard in many American homes now a days. (AT&T, Cox, And others have the $19.95 plan which is that 1.5 Mb/s plan.)
All of your points are valid, but the fact that they are asking us to pay $10 a month for content that still has ads is just stupid. I'm not saying someone shouldn't get paid, I'm simply saying this model sounds idiotic, and I'm not going to pay to also watch ads.
I already do that with my cable service.
TiVo or DVR or even a homemade HTPC DVR would still require me to have cable service, which I don't have.
So, maybe $10/mo more on top of cable is silly, but $10/mo INSTEAD of cable seems reasonable to me.
What are you talking about?? Hulu on the computer HAS commercials. Unless you are talking about illegally downloading them WITHOUT commercials, or paying for them individually on iTunes WITHOUT commercials.