Screw you NBC.
Off to [website name removed] for me. They'll never see my money again.
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Off to [website name removed] for me. They'll never see my money again.
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
CJD2112 said:Besides "30 Rock" and "Heroes" (neither of which I watch) and occasionally Law and Order: SVU, I couldn't care less about NBC. They screwed the pooch when they bailed on iTunes, they're third in the big three primetime networks in ratings and with their crappy Fall line-up doesn't appear that will change any time soon. Poor schmucks.
I believe we can blame more than NBC here.We should include the Ad agencies in this cluster***.
AMEN. I HATE commercials. A few weeks ago I took out a few old BetaMax and VHS tapes to convert into digital media, and I was amazed that back in the 80's most shows ran 50 min's (any one remember "Mad Headroom"? I watched the pilot on tape, miss that show). Now most shows run any where from 38-40 min's, which means the average viewer spends a third of their time watching mindless ads telling us to "BUY! BUY! BUY!". It's disgusting. I'd rather pay the $1.99 to avoid being brainwashed by advertisers. God bless the free market.![]()
You and me both. In fact, I'll burn 'em and share 'em with friends.
Can't take this free with me on my iPod.Let's see.. $1.99 vs Free.. I'll take free, thank you very much.
You guys crack me up.. nbc announces that they will have some of their shows for free and you prefer to pay apple $1.99?. why?. Free sounds good to me.
Let's see.. $1.99 vs Free.. I'll take free, thank you very much.
You know, who really needs the crap on "mainstream" TV? I spend my 20 bucks a month on iTunes to get my Stewart/Colbert fix, and the rest is crap. Yeah, I bought a few NBC episdoes here and there, but I certainly will NOT partake in this new 'service'.
I decide WHEN and WHERE I want to watch something. Screw NBC and their misguided ignorant restrictions and format.
I decide WHEN and WHERE I want to watch something. Screw NBC and their misguided ignorant restrictions and format.
WTF? Why aren't macs supported?!!!!
i'm amazed by the lack of common sense on these board sometimes.
Guys, NBC didn't go to Apple and say "you must start charging 4.99 for episodes, or we're leaving." Apple wasn't your resolute hero, standing firm for 1.99 episodes no matter what, looking out for the "little guy" and all of that.
Apple obviously wanted half or more of the consumer price. That's a pretty stiff hosting fee. Yes, Apple wanted the price to go down to 99 cents to match their DRM'ed song price, but they were probably asking NBC to take 40-50 cents on the dollar. Of course that stuff is all secret contract detail, but you'll notice that Apple, not NBC, announced to the public that the price would be 4.99 if NBC got as much per episode up front as they wanted. That might have been 1.50 or 1.75, which is probably what they're getting from Amazon for their 1.99 downloads. The difference between Apple and everyone else is that Apple expects to make at least 50% straight profit on everything they sell. If they don't make that mark, then they have to compensate somewhere else.
Parts on the new Nano cost less than 50 bucks? You can bet that Apple's investment money there will end up being less than 10 bucks in addition to-consumer costs by the time they ship a new Nano design. And component prices will drop over the next year or so, further increasing the bottom line. The Nano's profit margin is probably configured to compensate for iTunes music and video sales that presumably will be purchased along with the Nano with a minimal amount of profit for apple (only 10-20% depending on the source).
Don't get me wrong, Apple makes great hardware and great software...but they're much better at raking in the cash and over fist.
I have two macs at home, one at work, 2 ipods and another Mac on the way when I get my christmas bonus. I get it. But I also know that if I could easily put OS X on a self-built generic intel box, I would do that and save myself several hundred dollars in the process. Apple's OS isn't a money-making product by their standards...it's a way to make you buy a new Mac. I wouldn't have purchased a macbook if I could easily install 10.4 on an Acer laptop. I would, however, still want a mac mini for my home theater. They are overcharging for the components, but until someone makes a better machine that takes up less space, that mini is hard to ignore for home theater guys.
The macpro i have at work has a lot more value than my G5 in my eyes, not so much it's faster, but because it's got 4 hard drive bays and 2 optical bays and built-in optical audio, decent amount of room for expansion cards, and relatively-easy-to-upgrade processors. It costs too much by a couple hundred bucks, but it has overkill potential that's hard to ignore. You can stuff a lot of RAM in these puppies.
If you would install OSX on a Acer computer, I have my doubts about you being a Mac user/ enthusiast. Do you work for NBC or Fox?![]()
You guys crack me up.. nbc announces that they will have some of their shows for free and you prefer to pay apple $1.99?. why?. Free sounds good to me.
Let's see.. $1.99 vs Free.. I'll take free, thank you very much.
If you would install OSX on a Acer computer, I have my doubts about you being a Mac user/ enthusiast. Do you work for NBC or Fox?![]()
Allowing OSX on any PC would mean that drivers would have to be written to support a lot more hardware. Apple couldn't do this all themselves, meaning that they would have to rely on 3rd party software/code/drivers for this piece. This would likely have a negative effect on the operating systems overall stability.you're not considering the possibility that people might be interseted in the apple software without having to pay a hefty amount of money to use it, especially when they can install about any windows/opensource OS they want on their PC?
I mean, I like a lot of people don't support microsoft by buying a 2000$ PC from Dell, many people build their own computers (or have some website or local store do it for them) and would appreciate if apple offered software for them too.
about NBC: most people would appreciate free content, I would. But most people aren't on these online forums and news sites finding out these things(But on the other hand I don't know how much NBC will market this (or how many people will bother caring if they do)).
they watch things on their TV, or maybe purchase some shows from iTunes. They don't toogle between websites to se what they want. either they turn on the TV when they know it's on, or they don't care.
But hopefully people will start supporting digital distribution more so that we can finaly move on from all these restrictions that have plagued us for so many years.
But in about 10-20 years we are bound to notice a difference. Because by then the people who grew up with high speed internet connections, partial online distribution and PMP:s will be in charge of things.
If Apple didn't "over charge" for the components (the hardware), and their software margins are low (or in some cases non-existant). How do you expect them to make money? If Apple allowed people to run Apple software on any old computer they'd fold faster than an over-caffinated origami artist.Apple's OS isn't a money-making product by their standards...it's a way to make you buy a new Mac.
.
.
.
They are overcharging for the components, but until someone makes a better machine that takes up less space, that mini is hard to ignore for home theater guys.
Allowing OSX on any PC would mean that drivers would have to be written to support a lot more hardware. Apple couldn't do this all themselves, meaning that they would have to rely on 3rd party software/code/drivers for this piece. This would likely have a negative effect on the operating systems overall stability.
i'm amazed by the lack of common sense on these board sometimes.
Guys, NBC didn't go to Apple and say "you must start charging 4.99 for episodes, or we're leaving." Apple wasn't your resolute hero, standing firm for 1.99 episodes no matter what, looking out for the "little guy" and all of that.
Apple obviously wanted half or more of the consumer price. That's a pretty stiff hosting fee. Yes, Apple wanted the price to go down to 99 cents to match their DRM'ed song price, but they were probably asking NBC to take 40-50 cents on the dollar. snip
Bingo why would anyone think their content is so great you have to go someplace that only carries that? Sony has tried this and failed many times. A tue iTunes challenger doesn't have to be Mac or iPod compatible , but it does need to carry more content not less.Well, there's no way I'm downloading one of those proprietary video players. These companies need to get a clue. And people are not going to go to umpteen different websites to be able to download the shows from each network, do a separate video player for each one, and so forth. Even if it is free, it's too much hassle, not even counting the commercials. What are these companies thinking.
If Apple didn't "over charge" for the components (the hardware), and their software margins are low (or in some cases non-existant). How do you expect them to make money? If Apple allowed people to run Apple software on any old computer they'd fold faster than an over-caffinated origami artist.
Lethal