This summarizes the greed and idiocy of these companies. How is it a "discount" when you don't get to keep it? Renting and selling aren't the same thing, and the fact they don't understand that says that they don't deserve my money anyway. They don't see the consumer's end, they just see "need get more monies".
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.
Rupert Murdoch and News Corp. to Be Swing Vote for 99-Cent iTunes TV Show Rentals?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This summarizes the greed and idiocy of these companies. How is it a "discount" when you don't get to keep it? Renting and selling aren't the same thing, and the fact they don't understand that says that they don't deserve my money anyway. They don't see the consumer's end, they just see "need get more monies".
I would too, but when I asked the SO, the response was "What about Project Runway". This was me
Guess what, we still have cable.
A quick search turned out nothing about what an "SO" might be in this context.
99 cents is a great deal if you only watch a few shows per week and don't want to pay for cable.
My cable package is $80. I would have to watch 2 1/2 episodes of TV every day for it to break even with my cable package. That's just not possible.
So why haven't I dropped cable?
I would too, but when I asked the SO, the response was "What about Project Runway". This was me
Guess what, we still have cable.
Same here... my Fiancé's love of crappy reality TV shows and other shows on Bravo, HGTV, and TLC will probably cement our subscription to cable forever.
On the flip side, when we were out of contract/promotion and it would have cost $13/month for the package that pretty much just had Bravo in it, she was against getting the package for the little shows she'd watch on it. But would she probably save us $13 every month in exchange for buying $22 worth of individual episodes off iTunes over the course of a year? Probably.
It's like going to a bar... if I'm paying per drink I'm probably only going to get 1 or 2 drinks. But if it's open bar for a $25 wrist band I'm probably drinking 4 times as much because they already got my money.
A quick search turned out nothing about what an "SO" might be in this context.
Significant Other
You're missing the point. Yes the cable/satellite companies do offer more, but at what cost? And I'm not just talking strictly financial costs. I'm talking about what else you could do with your time rather than spending all day in front of the tv watching cable so you can justify the monthly expense. It's just not worth it to me. With watching Netflix, free OTA TV, playing $1 iphone games, browsing the internet, playing flag football, hanging out with friends/family, and etc. the variety, the cost, and the time needed to spend to justify the cost make a cable/satellite subscription at $100 a month not very attractive. I'm sure many will disagree but I bet many others have never thought of it that way.
Here's something interesting to try. Ask someone spending $40 a month for internet and $100 a month for cable/satellite which one they would give up if they had to. Even though cable/satellite is often over twice as much as internet, you would almost unanimously get people to say they would rather keep their internet access. Even though you basically get the same thing from both which is entertainment, news, and information about the world around you.
That's something to think about.
You would have to watch less than a quarter of an episode per day for this to be more worthwhile than Netflix. Do you watch an average of 7 minutes of TV a day? If you dont then you are overpaying for dramatically less content by using itunes.
I was thinking the same thing. Why would I pay $.99/show when I can pay only $9.99/month and get unlimited shows with hulu plus? For $10 I can only watch 10 shows with Apple and for the same $10 I can watch unlimited shows with hulu.
Okay, my over the air digital TV is 40 channels and i only care about Discovery channels, Animal Planet, National Geographic channels, local news, BBC stuff and few sports channels (Euroleague and English Premier League). That's it. Oh and it costs me 11 US dollars.
Hell to the no. For a rental? You can BUY HD shows for 1.99-2.99, why would I want to RENT a show? As someone else cleverly stated, there are other methods in getting TV shows, but I refuse to pay ANY ONE for renting a show.
and please, please, please, enough with the fanboy/fanboi nonsense. We're adults here (or most any ways), this is just juvenile. Besides, you're on MACumors, of course there are MAC fans here. Go to Engadget if you want Windows tailored news.
Žalgiris;10956780 said:
I was planning on canceling our cable, but ever since I got EyeTV, I've been using it much more. It makes a nice DVR for your computer, it can convert recorded shows/movies and either stream them via WiFi or 3G to your iDevice, as well as streaming live TV, and you can stream them to your AppleTV. In addition, it has tuners for hi-def channels. It definitely makes more use of our time and money, so I hardly buy shows from iTunes, aside from the occasional movie, but even with a good internet connection, renting movies can take any where from 1-2 hours before being able to fully watch them, 3-4 if hi-def, and that's not even 1080P with 5.1 surround sound. I'll wait till Apple figures out how they want to play out the iTunes versus Blu-Ray b.s.
Are you for or against this plan? I would have to assume you are against this $.99 per show plan since the write up states that Murdoch actually supports it.
None of this really matters much considering Google has most of the major movie studios in line to offer first time release movie streaming for $5 a pop on its Google TV platform.
I would too, but when I asked the SO, the response was "What about Project Runway". This was me
Guess what, we still have cable.
Tell SO she can watch Project Runway here: www.mylifetime.com/video
I watch it on my iPad.
I dropped cable, and I do get live HD streams of local sports - from an antenna. The HD picture is better than what cable was giving me (they compressed it).
I probably won't rent for $0.99/episode as seasons can be purchased for less on DVD (albeit with a time delay). That pricing seems absurd to me.
I'm missing the point because it's clearly evident that the cost is negligible for most people. Look at DirecTV, they're gaining customers like gangbusters.
Unless it's a live sporting event, the tv doesn't go on for me until about 8/9pm since I've got so much going on during the day... work/kids/coaching, etc. But there are still a lot of days I'd rather just sit and veg, and a lot of people not only feel that way but are doing it everyday. TV has become such a mainstay in our society that trying to change it's landscape now is going to be very hard.
I'd rather keep my internet than tv, but until I can get the HD quality sporting events, the amount I get right now on channels not available on the internet, on my tv it's a moot point for me.
TerraTec H7, I'll have to check that out. As great a product as EyeTV is their customer service is awful. You can't call and speak with anyone, it's all via their support forum, and they take their time in responding.
Thankfully it's a pretty simple device to setup, even for novices.
cable is the biggest value out there
i have hundreds of channels to choose from, there are shows for everyone of all ages to watch
iTunes has some good deals on kids' content but there are a lot of shows my wife watches and it would be too expensive going thru iTunes. Hulu Plus is a PITA because you have to hook up a computer to the TV to watch it on TV. and there are less shows than on cable
the only people who hate cable are the single people in their 20's or 30's who spend their entire lives glued to a computer or cell phone and only watch a few stupid prime time shows.
who spends $140 a month on cable and internet? $130 a month for internet, cable, unlimited phone and DVR from Time Warner Cable
if i were to do just internet from Time Warner it would cost $40 or $50
I agree. Most of the people who hoot and hollar here are probably either young and immature or have that mindset of I know everything yet have little life experience.
Give it the old college try. I live in the hood. If I haven't been robbed yet, I think I'll be ok.
I pay $152 a month for my DirecTV service, it includes a DVR and a couple HD receivers.
TWC just upped their cost for internet, $69 a month now for their top tier internet.... which is a whopping 10mb download speed... fracking pathetic. I could pay $59 a month for 5mb dl.