or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Fox, ABC agree to 99-cent TV rentals
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fox, ABC agree to 99-cent TV rentals

post #1 of 58
Thread Starter 
Apple has reached an agreement with both News Corp. and Walt Disney to allow 99-cent rentals of Fox and ABC TV shows through iTunes, according to a new report.

Although some executives within the two media companies have reservations about the deal, the partnership is ready to be announced Wednesday, according to the The Wall Street Journal. Citing "people familiar with the matter," the Journal noted Tuesday that while some of the management at Fox was uncomfortable with the pricing, which could jeopardize traditional income avenues, they were willing to go along with the "experiment."

ABC is generally assumed to have been the first studio on board, as Apple CEO Steve Jobs is Disney's largest shareholder and a board member. Disney was also the first content provider to agree to sell its TV shows on iTunes in 2005.

Fox has agreed to offer broadcast shows that it "both produces and airs," such as "Glee," "Bones," and "Lie to Me."

Earlier reports claimed that Rupert Murdoch, CEO of News Corp., was prepared to agree to Apple's pricing in order to help solidify a relationship with Jobs. Since Murdoch is pushing for a dedicated iPad and tablet news division, getting on Jobs' 'good side' with a TV rental agreement could benefit the news side of News Corp.'s business.

Alongside the newly priced TV show rentals, a $99 re-designed Apple TV with a focus on streaming content is expected to be announced Wednesday at Apple's media event, which begins at 10 a.m. Pacific Time, 1 p.m. Eastern.
post #2 of 58
I'll rent one!
post #3 of 58
ABC/Fox is a good start but they really need to tap into some cable/satellite favorites to make a big splash. Discovery, Viacom, etc. All the NBC stuff -- which might be really difficult if Comcast is pulling the strings. (though the move to buy NBC signals Comcast is being realistic about the future of selling content and not access) This is a bit of a moot point though if they have an SDK for these networks to sell directly to the consumer. Even with Apple taking a modest cut (just like any video provider) they'll have a huge incentive to get on iTV one way or another. That's all that really matters. (we also have apps like ServeToMe that facilitate streaming pirated content to iOS devices as a fallback)
post #4 of 58
rent a TV show? for 99 cents? i thought you could buy episodes to watch forever for $1.99. isn't this even more of a rip off?

so you have to pay $99 for an iTV and then pay for each TV show you want to watch? these aren't even cable shows, these are network television that you get for FREE over the air with BETTER HD QUALITY than streaming OR cable.

if you replace your high end digital cable (let's say $60/month) and completely move to iTV, you'll end up paying the same price and you'll be limited to watching two shows a day. The average American watches something like 4 hours of TV a day.

Can you see how media companies are already ready to shoot themselves in the foot with streaming IPTV? If they don't give us a real deal, people are just going to resort to free online streaming video (piracy).

Network TV shows should be FREE. Cable TV shows should be available for a very small cost. Not 99 cents for every episode you watch.
post #5 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post

rent a TV show? for 99 cents? i thought you could buy episodes to watch forever for $1.99. isn't this even more of a rip off?

so you have to pay $99 for an iTV and then pay for each TV show you want to watch? these aren't even cable shows, these are network television that you get for FREE over the air with BETTER HD QUALITY than streaming OR cable.

if you replace your high end digital cable (let's say $60/month) and completely move to iTV, you'll end up paying the same price and you'll be limited to watching two shows a day. The average American watches something like 4 hours of TV a day.

Can you see how media companies are already ready to shoot themselves in the foot with streaming IPTV? If they don't give us a real deal, people are just going to resort to free online streaming video (piracy).

Network TV shows should be FREE. Cable TV shows should be available for a very small cost. Not 99 cents for every episode you watch. With the cost of distribution over the internet being lower than cable or broadcast, it should all be free, with a reduced number of ads.

1) If I want to watch a show once, how am I being ripped off if Im paying half the price that Id have to pay today to watch a TV show from iTS once?

2) Do you take your cable box or satellite with you when you leave the house? With iTS can you can take your videos with you.

3) Network shows are not free. You pay for them with your cable and with your time by sitting through commercials.

4) If one isnt a heavy TV watcher then Id say that $60/month for a service you arent using is a waste of money and a ripoff. Dont you agree?

5) If one doesnt have a PVR, if that PVR for some reason doesnt record a show, or if you are not at your home then catching up on a show youve missed by renting it for 99¢ sounds pretty reasonable. Dont you agree?

6) If you were taking a long flight and wanted some video content for the flight would you pack your PVR and TV, would try to stream it at home and hope if decides to save a local copy in RAM for your flight, or would you rent it from a service that allows you to keep a local copy on your device for a month? The latter sounds the most reasonable to me.

6) I dont understand this concept of a service should be free or shouldnt exist at all simply because it doesnt suit ones particular needs. I probably wont be using this TV show rental service much if at all (I dont use the iTS as it is) but I can certainly find reasons and scenarios why this would appeal to certain consumers.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #6 of 58
I wonder if this means the shows on abc.com and fox.com will no longer be free?
post #7 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post

rent a TV show? for 99 cents? i thought you could buy episodes to watch forever for $1.99. isn't this even more of a rip off?

It's a bit high to start with but I don't think it's totally out of line. They'll be on-demand and (presumably) ad free. I think you're right though that the iTV won't be targeted towards the marathon TV watcher at first. There's a good argument to be made though that IPTV is going to change the way lots of people watch TV. If you tune in at 7PM to watch the Wheel of Fortune you might just keep watching for 3 hours to catch the CSI at 10PM. In an interactive / on-demand world you might just run the Wheel of Fortune app and play along with interactive features. When you're done you load up the network app for CSI and watch it -- or maybe you just browse your friends Facebook photos, or look at some stupid Internet meme sites. It's really going to blur the lines. (not just the iTV but all IPTV set tops)

(Another exciting prospect when we reach the point of really good quality live streams is the ability to watch sports -- select different cameras, look at stats, read Twitter posts in-line, etc. The MLB app already shows where that's heading. I bet ESPN is on-board tomorrow with a big push for ESPN360 / ESPN3. )
post #8 of 58
Countdown to another blind, irrational Rupert Murdoch hate-fest in 5…4…3…2…
post #9 of 58
New direction for TV. Just like when ITUNES started with digital music downloads.
Popularity as well as increased revenue for the newtworks will determine in which direction this experiment goes.
Many networks, cable providers and other media interactives will be watching to see how they can capitalise on this.
Remember, renting a TV show for 24 hours may not be as popular as owning music. But then again time will tell.
post #10 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by pt123 View Post

I wonder if this means the shows on abc.com and fox.com will no longer be free?

I dont see the correlation. One is an ad-supported streaming while the other is an ad-free download.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #11 of 58
WEB-DL bonanza!
post #12 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by NTropy View Post

Countdown to another blind, irrational Rupert Murdoch hate-fest in 5432

There's nothing irrational about hating Murdoch. The man is pretty much pure evil, and has spent his life spreading a noxious mix of sleaze and far right ultra nationalist propaganda. Oh, and influencing/buying elections all over the world, let's not forget that.

Here in the UK he owns most of the media (print and TV) and so reports news VERY selectively. ie. anything which he doesn't agree with, mysteriously vanishes. He's also on a mission to destroy the BBC.
post #13 of 58
I would not mind $0.99 rentals if they offer entire seasons and series runs as well. Still I don't think Apple is going to debut new Apple TV hardware. More than likely this will be purely an addition to the new iTunes software and another plus incentive for iPad/iPhone/iPod Touch owners.

Apple is serious about content and they know that is what is going to sell their mobile devices and launch people to buy Macs. At this point no other vendor can match the one stop shop that iTunes and the App Store has become. I just wish they would jump into a web based iTunes soon. The iTunes software needs to be streamlined.
post #14 of 58
I want a solution to the problem of cable and Satellite. That is - it's BS we have to endure paying an access fee and on top of that we still get commercials. It should be one or the other.

These rentals are .99. Fine, but I'd like an option of free with commercials or iADs.

People want cable ala carte. That is, just pay for the networks they're interested in.

So, renting just individual shows, especially ones that are free anyway, is a very limited step towards solving the cable stranglehold - if a step at all. Rent The Office? Really? The convenience of taking it mobile is fine, but most people most of the time have no interest in doing this. So where's the value?

I want to subscribe to whole networks, subsidized in part at least with ads - but it has to save me money over cable - or there's no point.
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
post #15 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post

rent a TV show? for 99 cents? i thought you could buy episodes to watch forever for $1.99. isn't this even more of a rip off?

so you have to pay $99 for an iTV and then pay for each TV show you want to watch? these aren't even cable shows, these are network television that you get for FREE over the air with BETTER HD QUALITY than streaming OR cable.

if you replace your high end digital cable (let's say $60/month) and completely move to iTV, you'll end up paying the same price and you'll be limited to watching two shows a day. The average American watches something like 4 hours of TV a day.

Can you see how media companies are already ready to shoot themselves in the foot with streaming IPTV? If they don't give us a real deal, people are just going to resort to free online streaming video (piracy).

Network TV shows should be FREE. Cable TV shows should be available for a very small cost. Not 99 cents for every episode you watch.

Exactly. Right now I get free Over THe Air in HD - better PQ than cable. Then, all I want is the Discover family of networks. It takes a $60 package just for that - so I forego it and DL the shows from TPB. Give me those networks for $20 over AppleTV and I'll pay. Otherwise.. forget it.
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
post #16 of 58
I'm getting the feeling this will be US exclusive, or at least only cheap in the US :/
unless it has safari or a BBC iPlayer app- in that case count me in!
post #17 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

He's also on a mission to destroy the BBC.

Good I hope he wins. I hate the BBC.
post #18 of 58
Unless HBO is available, I'm going to have to stick with cable.
post #19 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by NTropy View Post

Countdown to another blind, irrational Rupert Murdoch hate-fest in 5432

It's not irrational to hate Murdoch. Anyone who would hire Roger Ailes to run a news network is someone intent on ruining the very concept of news journalism. He's ruined journalism, ruined choice, ruined news, and now he's trying to ruin the interweb. He's a fucking disgrace.
post #20 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post

rent a TV show? for 99 cents? i thought you could buy episodes to watch forever for $1.99. isn't this even more of a rip off?

so you have to pay $99 for an iTV and then pay for each TV show you want to watch? these aren't even cable shows, these are network television that you get for FREE over the air with BETTER HD QUALITY than streaming OR cable.

if you replace your high end digital cable (let's say $60/month) and completely move to iTV, you'll end up paying the same price and you'll be limited to watching two shows a day. The average American watches something like 4 hours of TV a day.

Can you see how media companies are already ready to shoot themselves in the foot with streaming IPTV? If they don't give us a real deal, people are just going to resort to free online streaming video (piracy).

Network TV shows should be FREE. Cable TV shows should be available for a very small cost. Not 99 cents for every episode you watch.


You obviously have no respect for the content creators, or the work of those who bring the film/tv show to your screen. Remove the advertising revenue and it's necessary for these companies to charge for their work in order to pay their staff and invest in new programming.

Why on EARTH should network shows be free - do you give away your work free of charge?

What a selfish, cheap argument. 99 cents too expensive for 45 - 50 minutes entertainment for you? Here's hoping that no one thinks that whatever you do for a living is worthless, or you'd soon be out of a job. 99c IS a very small fee. This is an alternative, a cheap alternative - a series of 12 episodes for less than $12. That's inexpensive. Or you can download illegal content, cost the producers yet more loss of revenue and ensure these price points never reduce. Well done you.
post #21 of 58
Anything that can lower the cost of access to a quality signal is fine by me. But I have to say that if we're talking no cost reduction but just another way of getting content, who cares?

Right now I am taking advantage of the most important advance in TV delivery of the past few decades, namely the PVR. I watch what I want on my schedule and never find myself lacking in programming to enjoy. I pay a flat rate for the content.

What I don't like is that that flat rate is rather costly and that the quality of HD transmitted via my cable subscriber can be rather poor.

We have a multi-generational, multi-cultural household. That means programming in two languages and two very different consumers, one group computer savvy and the other gadget challenged.

I suspect Apple will be unable to offer my household a viable alternative to cable any time soon. On the other hand, there may well be households for which the model Apple appears to favour will make a lot of sense. Nothing wrong with that.
post #22 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe hs View Post

I'm getting the feeling this will be US exclusive, or at least only cheap in the US :/
unless it has safari or a BBC iPlayer app- in that case count me in!

This is rumoured to run iOS, in which case iPlayer is there.
post #23 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8CoreWhore View Post

Exactly. Right now I get free Over THe Air in HD - better PQ than cable. Then, all I want is the Discover family of networks. It takes a $60 package just for that - so I forego it and DL the shows from TPB. Give me those networks for $20 over AppleTV and I'll pay. Otherwise.. forget it.

So give me it free/cheap or I'll steal it. Interesting logic - does this apply to your grocery shopping too?
post #24 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

Good I hope he wins. I hate the BBC.

I also see BBC as very unbalanced.
But tax payers owns BBC, and R. M. is on his own way, he may be on your side today, tho.
But
post #25 of 58
Futurama, I would buy. Mad Men, rent. Now here's the quandary. My satellite TV already gives me episodes and movies, eg. FX HD, HBO HD, etc. But they're not the current seasons. And I'm outside the US. Do the studios not care about the direct-to-consumer model? Is this iTV hype going to be, as usual, US-only with crippled offerings in the UK, etc...?

I mean, if they are nervous about 99c rentals, boy, do they have no clue what happens on p*bay. Or they're just too worried to think about it.

Granted my satellite TV company (which is paid for) pays the big bucks for US and international (mostly US for English media, as you can imagine) TV shows and movies.

But even then... Think about how Internet streaming already will cut out the middleman, and imagine if the satellite TV companies did not need to manage all that infrastructure (transmission and reception stations, satellites, etc...) ~ I think the content creators are scared of pissing off the content distributors because the distributors in various countries have been their long term customers, not the viewer of the shows.

Like Steve said, studios need to ask, Who is My Customer? Is it my satellite TV company? Or ME? Why the international restrictions? Censorship is certainly a problem (Everything stronger than PG-13 is censored down to that level in Malaysia, and varies on countries across Asia, not sure about the Middle East...).

Where I am now has a developing economy with less than 30 million people. So maybe it's not too important... But let's take Europe, China, India, even the UK, surely these are huge chunks of direct-to-consumer markets with huge potential, and, also, countries which are the biggest file-sharers/pirates when it comes to TV shows and movies*

*On the topic of piracy... It's really confusing. Is it piracy if sometime later in the month my legal satellite/ cable tv station will air the episode (remember the huge delays, this is outside the US)? Is it not piracy if I VPN into the US IP addresses to watch Hulu and whatever, bypassing the geolocation? It's not piracy because I watch ads?

Then, I say, why don't the studios bundle the ads (smart, quick ones) into all their latest shows, for free-to-air TV or whatever, and then just seed that into the torrents? Imagine if HD 1080p and SD 480p official torrents with ads included are seeded on the torrent networks. People could skip through the ads, or they might watch them, in any case no different from TiVO, etc. Most high-level-seeders would not take the trouble to strip out the ads and reseed them because they'd have to fool around with the file formatting and in some cases lose quality with reformatting.

Movies, well, that's slightly different, but is a conundrum by itself. Because tons are being pirated, and so many movies are absolute shite nowadays. I mean, take "Salt". I was like, WHAT THE F**K IS THIS?????!!!??? Glad I didn't pay for the movie. I would have demanded my money back. Brand me a pirate, stealer, criminal. I tell you what's criminal, actually dreaming up that garbage plot.

Steve Jobs should personally sit all the major execs down at a conference table, and fire up some torrents. Then start to really talk about global, on-demand, streaming/downloaded NO DELAY, NO INTERNATIONAL RESTRICTION distribution of TV shows. You want money? Bundle the ads deep into the files. You want more money? Make these shows iAd like if watching through iTunes. Now, do the same for movies, except maybe no normal ads but just really engaging iAds for movies.

People argue to this day how effective iTunes Store for music is. But look at NO DELAY, GLOBAL availability of apps. Sure, people still pirate, but the only way to beat piracy is to offer reasonably priced media or just run it free with ads, people can pay for ad-free versions.

There is a lot of rethinking that needs to be done. Sure, I question my conscience from time to time, but where I am, to pay $0.99 USD per episode is really quite a lot, that's going to be five times my satellite TV bill, for just a single season of a tv series, and the single satellite TV payment is for my whole family..! For at least 20 US-content channels!
post #26 of 58
This will be an interesting experiment for Apple with video downloads to see what people will pay for. I am sure that Apple has done its research on this. The 99 cent model would seem like a good one, if true. Most people don't mind spending a buck on something to try it out. And if Apple is correct and most people don't want to watch their shows multiple times(like they listen to their purchased music), a cheaper rental model should be a good one.

I am sure that there will be some, especially those that do not have cable or satellite TV, that will pay for this type of service and use it a lot. I am also certain that there will be some that will not use it at all. I think I will fall into the occasional user category if the shows that I like to watch are available and I missed a show that I really wanted to see. In the end, it will depend on the number and proportion of the users in the previous categories.

Just hypothesizing here, it may be that those of us that grew up with free network TV may be a bit more resistant to paying for this type of content. But maybe a younger crowd might like this, having something instantly available when they want to watch something. And for them, 99 cents for an hours or so worth of entertainment might be/seem like a good deal.

But then we are all guessing on this. We will see what really is announced at 1 pm eastern

Neal
post #27 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

So give me it free/cheap or I'll steal it. Interesting logic - does this apply to your grocery shopping too?

: naughty, naughty!
post #28 of 58
99 cents ain't bad.
post #29 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

You obviously have no respect for the content creators, or the work of those who bring the film/tv show to your screen. Remove the advertising revenue and it's necessary for these companies to charge for their work in order to pay their staff and invest in new programming.

Why on EARTH should network shows be free - do you give away your work free of charge?

What a selfish, cheap argument. 99 cents too expensive for 45 - 50 minutes entertainment for you? Here's hoping that no one thinks that whatever you do for a living is worthless, or you'd soon be out of a job. 99c IS a very small fee. This is an alternative, a cheap alternative - a series of 12 episodes for less than $12. That's inexpensive. Or you can download illegal content, cost the producers yet more loss of revenue and ensure these price points never reduce. Well done you.

And lets not forget the production cost of those shows. Look at CSI Miami. That show cost tons of money to produce. Hell, the ones bit**** about 99 cents are pathetic!
post #30 of 58
This isn't really for full time watching as costs adds up and becomes even more expensive than cable or satellite.. It's good and meant for catching up on show episodes you miss especially if you're a busy person and that makes the $0.99 a reasonable price.
post #31 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8CoreWhore View Post

Exactly. Right now I get free Over THe Air in HD - better PQ than cable. Then, all I want is the Discover family of networks. It takes a $60 package just for that - so I forego it and DL the shows from TPB. Give me those networks for $20 over AppleTV and I'll pay. Otherwise.. forget it.

I really don't understand when people insist over-the-air is "free". Sure it's costs you nothing if you are willing to sit through commercials and if (this is the one you are all forgetting) you are available to watch the show when it's on and you won't be interrupted while it's airing. You complain about the $99 price of the rumored new AppleTV, but how much is the cheapest TiVo if you want to record that live broadcast so you can watch it another time or fast forward through commercials? I believe it's $300 + monthly subscription (around $15/month). That's a lot of 99 cent rentals!

My stupid Comcast DVR sometimes forgets to record a show it's programmed to record, or a friend will mention a show they watched last night that I might have wished I had watched or recorded, but didn't. Right now I'll usually try to find it on Hulu because $1.99/2.99 is an absurd price when 99% of the time I'm only going to watch the show once. But 99 cents puts it within consideration.

The other scenario is if it allows me to not eliminate cable but drop to a lower tier of programming. Most series have maybe 15 new shows a year. So if renting 4 shows ($60/year) allows me to save $10-15/month on my cable bill, that's a good deal. The only problem with this is it requires the cable network's shows to be available as those are the ones your cable company uses to force you to upgrade your programming (USA, BBCA, TBS, SyFy, etc).
post #32 of 58
I can see renting tv shows...as I rarely watch them more than once....not sure if .99 is the sweet spot. If the itv is ios based, wouldn't iads be better?
post #33 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post

rent a TV show? for 99 cents? i thought you could buy episodes to watch forever for $1.99. isn't this even more of a rip off?

Not to me, I prefer a 50% price cut for a watch once option. I dont need to rewatch them, but even if I do I can still rent them again and it will be the same price has if I bought them. Not gonna watch a show more than twice. Maybe cartoons could be bough since kids tend to watch the same things over and over again.
post #34 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm5150 View Post

This isn't really for full time watching as costs adds up and becomes even more expensive than cable or satellite.. It's good and meant for catching up on show episodes you miss especially if you're a busy person and that makes the $0.99 a reasonable price.

This is the way I view it too (also, I hate cluttering my iTunes with too many TV shows.... already they're taking up to much space. But perhaps Apple will allow one to convert a 'rent' to a 'buy' for an additional $0.99 if one decides that a particular episode is a keeper).
post #35 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post

these are network television that you get for FREE over the air with BETTER HD QUALITY than streaming OR cable.

I have yet to see an OTA Disney broadcast.
post #36 of 58
99c TV show rentals is a good step. But it's a long journey to global, no-delay accessibility to the latest content. It's still a huge amount when you're talking about a whole season though.

Give me Mad Men Seasons 1, 2 and 3 on iTunes Store rental for $19 and I'm there. Am I being too demanding? $19 for reruns! Is that too much to ask?

On that note, even in the US iTunes Store, what is up with not all movies available for rental? What do the studios gain by trying to sell them only instead of renting? I mean, some movies you just want to watch to see, oh, what was that about. But I ain't watching some of that again, and they need to drop most rentals to $2.99 or even $1.99.

That said, at least an increasing number of new-to-DVD titles are ready for rental. Just paid $3.99 for Repo Men (I know, I hear it's a crap movie, wanted to check it out anyway). Because I can't be bothered finding and downloading the DVD-rip (doesn't seem to be seeded anyway) on P*Bay.
post #37 of 58
I don't understand this strategy... ABC already gives away its stuff for free on the ABC player, and virtually everything on FOX (for the last 20 years) is available on Hulu Plus, which is $9.95 a month - 10 rentals in a month, and you're losing out.

TV rentals is the worst idea Apple has come up with since the Pippin.

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply
post #38 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

99c TV show rentals is a good step. But it's a long journey to global, no-delay accessibility to the latest content. It's still a huge amount when you're talking about a whole season though.

Give me Mad Men Seasons 1, 2 and 3 on iTunes Store rental for $19 and I'm there. Am I being too demanding? $19 for reruns! Is that too much to ask?

On that note, even in the US iTunes Store, what is up with not all movies available for rental? What do the studios gain by trying to sell them only instead of renting? I mean, some movies you just want to watch to see, oh, what was that about. But I ain't watching some of that again, and they need to drop most rentals to $2.99 or even $1.99.

That said, at least an increasing number of new-to-DVD titles are ready for rental. Just paid $3.99 for Repo Men (I know, I hear it's a crap movie, wanted to check it out anyway). Because I can't be bothered finding and downloading the DVD-rip (doesn't seem to be seeded anyway) on P*Bay.

There is still over Apple doing to video what it did to music (even though it made the digital downloads a viable business for music) and a fear over digital in general, even though its much easier to rip from a PVR or optical disc.

So.. is $19 feasible for Mad Men. In, say Blockbuster, how much would it be to rent an entire season of this show on 480p DVD? Isnt in 3 to 4 episodes per disc for a 40-44 minute TV show?

Excluding the aforementioned fears, is the ability to keep these downloads for a presumed 30 days and play for 48 hours after first starting it not a benefit for the users? What about the ability to move from devices easily and take with you in ways that streaming services and physical media cant? Surely these attributes appeal differently to different consumers but I think those traits would be considered in the pricing model for this service.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #39 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

I don't understand this strategy... ABC already gives away its stuff for free on the ABC player, and virtually everything on FOX (for the last 20 years) is available on Hulu Plus, which is $9.95 a month - 10 rentals in a month, and you're losing out.

TV rentals is the worst idea Apple has come up with since the Pippin.

Why would copying what the others are doing be better for Apple than using their strengths to offer services that the others can not?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #40 of 58
What about us who already have an apple tv. Are they upgradeable or must we buy new?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Fox, ABC agree to 99-cent TV rentals