or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › NBC strongly opposed to Apple's 99 cent iTunes rental model
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NBC strongly opposed to Apple's 99 cent iTunes rental model - Page 2

post #41 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak View Post

NBC Universal has been making boneheaded decisions for ages now. The worst was probably putting Zucker in charge of programming. I'll never forgive him for destroying Surface by pre-empting it half the time. It wasn't the greatest show, but it had potential and momentum, at least before they screwed it up.

I liked that show too. That one scene, shot from above, where the giant sea monster swallowed the fishing boat whole was classic. And Lake Bell?
post #42 of 88
So are these the same shows Amazon will be selling for 99c?

You know for Android tablets and such?
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #43 of 88
Going to be cancelled before season 1 finishes.

Seriously, what thick fuck refuses 99 cents for a 48 hour pass to an episode when the sell it for 1.99 for unlimited viewing?? Are their advertisers pushing them to refuse rentals on iTunes? Do advertisers think that anyone actually watches adverts anymore?
post #44 of 88
A few random comments:

1) Mr Zucker, go ask your bean counters if any other distribution channel will pay you 70 cents per viewing per episode (assuming Apple takes their normal 30%). I'll save you the trouble...none do.

2) What we need to keep in mind is that this isn't just about shows on the NBC network. This includes all of NBC Universal's channels which includes USA Network, SyFy (which has also gone down hill recently), a couple of news channels and a handful of others.

3) This is another example of why Apple needs to focus more on getting the hardware into living rooms and not worry about near term content profits. NBC isn't really losing that much money because there isn't much of a customer base yet. Apple's made big steps towards this by pricing it at $99 and including Netflix. But I think they need to go further. Let the AppleTV play any video content FrontRow can, including video_ts so it can play my DVDs (Western Digital and others allow this on their media extenders). Or make an external DVD player to plug into the USB port so I can play my discs. Sure, they might lose a little short term profit; but when Apple can offer NBC an addressable markets of 20 million AppleTVs, they'll be more willing to play ball. I'll say it again and again, the iPod would have been a failure if there had been no way for me to play my existing music content on it and I had to rely 100% on purchasing (repurchasing) everything from the beginning.
post #45 of 88
NBC is a crappy network with nothing worth a dollar.
post #46 of 88
The issue isn't so much if NBC has great shows or crappy shows - the issue is paying for something you already paid for - the vast majority of content downloaders aren't going to cancel their cable or sat service because there are too many programs and categories (news, sports), that don't fit a download model.

So I already pay stupid money to Cablevision and DirecTV - which in turn pays the networks for the content - how much more does NBC think I'll pay just for a convenience factor to see what I've in essence already paid for?

The difference with music was that downloads were instead of CD purchases - it was an alternative product, so there was no double dipping required by the consumer; TV shows are, in many ways, a duplicate product, and its a double dip - and that is not of interest to many except when you're in a pinch to watch a show you missed, or want to load up your laptop or iPad with some content when you're traveling..

In defense of the networks, they're caught between the old and emerging model - I'm sure everytime they strike deals like this with companies like Apple, they get hammered for diluting their product and the providers likely push for lower compensation....

Print is going through similar struggles...
post #47 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

What we need to keep in mind is that this isn't just about shows on the NBC network. This includes all of NBC Universal's channels which includes USA Network, SyFy (which has also gone down hill recently), a couple of news channels and a handful of others.

All three channels are crap nowadays. I haven't watched SyFy in quite a while, mainly because they rely on second-rate shows now like Stargate Universe and Sanctuary, as well as their invariably awful Sci-Fi Original films. USA hasn't had anything worth watching since Monk went off the air. Chiller isn't bad, but it's relatively new. Another five years and it'll be down the crapper, too.
post #48 of 88
Wow. Zucker is more clueless than I thought.

$.99 is still too much. I'll stick to DVRing everything from OTA broadcasts. Why spend a dollar to watch an episode just once, especially when I can record it in better quality for free?
post #49 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

How is Apple TV different from TiVo? TiVo can record shows automatically and people don't need to rent the shows. I'd rather have a DVR than Apple TV regarding TV shows.

NBC is just missing out on free money. Idiots. I'd consider renting a show for a quarter and that still seems high for something I can record free with a DVR. Advertisements can be fast forwarded and deleted if the show is kept on a computer.

NBC... really stands for Nothing_But_COCKsuckers

and JEFF ZUCKER IS A REAL MODY DICK!!!!!

they are more irrelevant each and every day that passes... although i did like that new spy drama that came on tonight UNDERCOVERS.. its was really good and FREE!!!!

NOTHING BUT COCKsuckers
post #50 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightstriker View Post

Has anyone else failed upward the way Zucker has?

Ummm, Steve Balmer.
post #51 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak View Post

All three channels are crap nowadays. I haven't watched SyFy in quite a while, mainly because they rely on second-rate shows now like Stargate Universe and Sanctuary, as well as their invariably awful Sci-Fi Original films. USA hasn't had anything worth watching since Monk went off the air. Chiller isn't bad, but it's relatively new. Another five years and it'll be down the crapper, too.

I really love covert affairs on usa.
post #52 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

How is Apple TV different from TiVo? TiVo can record shows automatically and people don't need to rent the shows. I'd rather have a DVR than Apple TV regarding TV shows.

Another way they're different is you need a provider with Tivo. With AppleTV, it's plug and play. Anytime.

Based on my watching habits, I will be ditching cable and renting. It's gonna cost me about $13 for an entire season of any show. MUCH cheaper than the nearly $100 per month even if I don't watch a thing. If NBC wants my money, they'll agree to the 99 cent thing.
post #53 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak View Post

All three channels are crap nowadays. I haven't watched SyFy in quite a while, mainly because they rely on second-rate shows now like Stargate Universe and Sanctuary, as well as their invariably awful Sci-Fi Original films. USA hasn't had anything worth watching since Monk went off the air. Chiller isn't bad, but it's relatively new. Another five years and it'll be down the crapper, too.

Wow! TV series have become worlds better than they use to be. From directing, to acting to writing a the large budgets to support these extravagent investments. To season and series long hooks that run continue despite the episodic storylines.

Monk for example, is a show I like and is like many dramas on USA Network: simple. The storylines are predictable, most being a "How done it?" in the style of Columbo, instead of a "Who done it?". It had a very slight series long hook with a great series finale but it was a simple show and not one I would say required a great effort to work for, on any level.

I watched the season premiere of Castle last night. Creator and writer Andrew Marlowe did a an absolutely amazing great job with this week's script. As a wannabe script writer I wasnt just dually impressed, but triply impressed.

I have a long list of TV shows I watch (and analyze), but I'll spare everyone by not posting it.
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 #54 of 88
@Avidfcp Would you mind posting in English?
post #55 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avidfcp View Post

Yeah but can you really blame them???
If your not a consumer that buys but watches, you can go to almost any network site and watch the content for free. Thus the lack of flash on the ipad and iPhone. They could make it work if they wanted. Even if it meant plugging in your phone to an outlet, they could make it happen. In fact Tom Tom uses more battery than movies yet you never hear people complain and since the 3GS, the phone has been fast enough. With iPhone; it's a no brained. I hope many dint join and get HTML 5 to work as free is always better.

Blessings.

Just what, exactly, are you complaining about?

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #56 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandor View Post

that is exactly the point though - NBC/CBS/ABC/Fox are all **FREE** to anyone in the US who wants it. the fact that NBC's head is up their butt in terms of monetizing digital rentals is asinine.

79% of the US population lives in an urban area, that means that a relatively cheap antenna (less than one month's worth of cable) can get them about 20-25 channels, just like me. in HD. for no monthly fee.

two months cable subscription can get you an HD recorder for your free television:
http://www.amazon.com/Toshiba-DR570-...p_ob_e_title_0 i started with a similar device in 2006 when Philadelphia stations started to broadcast ATSC, and now i have a full blow computer-based DVR that blows the pants off Tivo, and allows me access to my music and photos and the web as well as ATSC "free" tv. http://www.sagetv.com

all together, i still haven't spent what a year's worth of Comcast would have cost me, and i have added an $8 a month Netflix subscription so i can get the HBO/Showtime series i want to watch as well.


The problem with DVD recorders is you can only input with RCA jacks (the red, white and yellow plugs.) No HD input. PVRs have no way to transfer the files to a computer. There is an IEEE jack on most, but I've been told the files are in a proprietary format which can't be viewed on a computer. I'm no expert, but the only way I know to get HD video from TV on to your computer is with the Elegato HD TV device. I don't have one, but I understand they 'record' in real time.
post #57 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

They are okay with $1.99 for a TV show sale, but not okay with a 99¢ TV show rental. This isn’t unique to NBC! Doesn’t this say that these networks aren’t really expecting much in the way of repeat viewing?

It makes perfect sense to me. Its a 100% increase in revenue. Whether you buy it to own or rent it you'll most likely watch it only once, so why not make double the money? Btw just because it makes sense doesn't mean I agree with it.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #58 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by irnchriz View Post

Do advertisers think that anyone actually watches adverts anymore?

Don't Apple put commercials on TV?
post #59 of 88
The market for music and video is much different. When everyone was downloading pirated music from Napster et al, Apple came along and showed them a way to sell music. People flocked to it. Then the music industry got greedy and said 99 cents isn't enough. Some withdrew their music, and what did people do? They didn't go to walmart to buy CD's. They went back to 'stealing'. The music industry eventually learned that this is the way music is sold now. (There's still a few holdout like the Beatles, and who doesn't have Beatles music in their library? Some just don't get it)

A song is generally less the 5 minutes, so you'll listen to music over and over. How many times are you going to watch a 22 minute sitcom from NBC. 2 or 3 max. (unless you're a total loser and have no life) People spend 50 bucks for a season of whatever show and how many times do you actually watch them. I used to buy DVD movies because I liked the movie and after 300 or so (many unopened) I stopped. I was just collecting movies and they were just collecting dust. Like I said it's easy to listen to music over and over, but how many times are you going to watch full length movies and TV shows.

My daughter watches all her TV on the internet for free, so the content is out there. As far as renting TV shows go, if I were NBC, I'd take he money and run.
post #60 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stourque View Post

The problem with DVD recorders is you can only input with RCA jacks (the red, white and yellow plugs.) No HD input. PVRs have no way to transfer the files to a computer. There is an IEEE jack on most, but I've been told the files are in a proprietary format which can't be viewed on a computer. I'm no expert, but the only way I know to get HD video from TV on to your computer is with the Elegato HD TV device. I don't have one, but I understand they 'record' in real time.

My Tivo HD can transfer shows over my home network to my MacMini (though I had to buy Toast to get the software). This includes over-the-air shows and shows from Comcast Cable. Toast can play them or can transcode them to something iTunes can handle.
post #61 of 88
The question they should be asking themselves is:
It will take threefold rentals at $1 to equal $3 purchases. Will total business even out, or perhaps even increase?

Since they don't have to pay any distribution costs for selling or renting they shouldn't put sales against rentals - but rather bake it all together.
I think $1 for rentals and $3 for buying will probably loose some buyers - sure - but rentals will potentially boom! And if they roll it out worldwide it'll get crazy.
post #62 of 88
99 cents devalues the content? Isn't this the same content they broadcast for FREE over the air? What am I missing?
post #63 of 88
How can their content be 'devalued' at 99 cents when I can view it for free over the air?
post #64 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post

99 cents devalues the content? Isn't this the same content they broadcast for FREE over the air? What am I missing?

Or for free on their website.
post #65 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

Big surprise. NBC and Apple have been at odds for a long time. It will only get worse if the Comcast/NBC merger happens. Really bad for consumers.

Unless the cable model collapses -- which could happen but probably not in the next few years -- Apple is not going to get a comprehensive content deal without having the networks and the local cable providers on board. The networks don't want to sacrifice their retransmission revenue, and the local cable providers will squeeze the broadband cost if Apple goes around them.

So go to the networks and the local cable providers and make it happen.

Work out deals with Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Charter, etc., to create a cable package that works off the Apple TV platform and provides for live news, sports, and special event programming. Let consumers watch the content on their TV, their computer, and their Apple devices. Charge a premium for the product, and let the market decide if it's worth the cost.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stourque View Post

As far as renting TV shows go, if I were NBC, I'd take he money and run.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Whether you buy it to own or rent it you'll most likely watch it only once, so why not make double the money?

NBC is less concerned about the incremental revenue from iTunes rentals than making it easy for you to drop your cable. They want to price the episodes at a level where you WON'T rent every episode; they want you to watch most episodes on your local cable and rent only the few that you miss.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjlexky View Post

Or for free on their website.

You can't watch that on your 60-inch HDTV. I suspect the networks would cut way back on putting their shows online if they felt like it was causing a move away from cable. So far, people are supplementing their cable with online viewing, but they're not -- at least not in large numbers -- canceling their cable to watch shows on their computers.
post #66 of 88
It would be nice to know what the networks make per household now. The add rates from a few years back indicate middle of the pack shows get about $6 million per episode in total ads, some of that goes to affiliates of course. Top but not peak rated shows have about 8 million viewers. So right now the Networks are making under $1 per household, probably near $.50. So renting for $1 per show is more money that first broadcast gets them and for little added expense. One other question is how does this affect syndication rights and that sort of thing?
post #67 of 88
You don't get it for free on your TV. You pay with time. Time allotted for advertising.

Likewise, you don't get it for free on your PC. You get it with online ads.
post #68 of 88
As I understand it, the networks don't really make a profit on the first-run of an episode, anyway. Most of their profit comes through product placement, DVD/BluRay sales, syndication rights, etc.

Advertising these days has gotten so sophisticated, that commercials are structured so that even if you're fast forwarding it on your DVR, you still catch the gist of the ad. So I don't really understand how people paying 99 cents to rent a show to watch one devalues it.
post #69 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenaustus View Post

Hate to say it, but who really cares about NBC.

If they can't understand the limitations of a lot of consumers to add another $100 a month for television shows then there are other channels.

As long as NBC can keep their commercials in the shows to be rented why do they need 99¢ every time we want to watch something via AppleTV?



1. They won't be keeping their commercials. The files are the same ones used for purchases just with a slightly different flavor of DRM.

2. They make more money with OTA and are worried that one of the precious few will rent instead of watch and hurt them big time.

See typically you are looking at a minimum of 10k per 30 seconds of ad time on a show. And that's for a really crappy show that they figure won't go that night in the ratings. Something like American Idol that has really great numbers it's more like 100k per spot. Now that money is based on the show scoring a particular amount in the ratings, particularly in the sacred 18-35 demo. Which is the same group that buys tech like crazy and would have little issue with not buying a tivo and paying $40-50 a month for service and just rent the eps.

So what if a few folks do that right. i mean shows get millions of viewers. Actually they don't. The ratings is based on a sample of some 25k viewers whose OTA, Tivo etc is counted weekly. Those numbers are then used to guesstimate how many folks are watching. If even one ratings viewer doesn't watch something it can mean a drop of several thousand to hundreds of thousands for a show. Which means make good paybacks that are at least 1000x what said person paid to rent the episode (which the network only gets 70c from anyway). So the networks are freaking out.

Now that said, I'm not really keen on this censorship by a select few or that the networks are clinging to a 1950s way of life so hard. I want them to embrace the future and credit shows with all forms of income. If a show makes or beats it's budget, it stays. If not, buh bye. And stop treating folks like all (for example) hispanic males 18-25 think the same. Cause they don't. Demand a change in the ratings system. Get a better sample and better numbers. Give us better stuff to watch and here's a wild thought, you might make more money

Quote:
Originally Posted by VisualZone View Post

Heroes was the only show worthwhile on NBC for me. Now that it's canceled, NBC, you just don't matter anymore.

Heroes was a good show turned into a crap show by the end. And NBC was part of the blame. Season 1 was tight, well written and intriguing. The rest were a mess. In part because they lacked the time limit that season one had. It happens a lot with shows. The networks don't want to have to spend the money on new shows so they want to keep what they have for as long as they can, particularly when it is super popular. So they don't end date things and force the writers to drag out stories that shouldn't have been. The Nets just don't get that the age of I Love Lucy and her new zany trouble each week is gone. Tight mini series and extended minis do work. Not all seasons have to be 22 eps long. Not all shows have to be 10 seasons. Let the schedule serve the show, not the other way. That's something they haven't learned.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #70 of 88
Wow,
I just looked through NBC and ABC's listings and I dont watch a SINGLE show on either network. I admit I watch 3 shows on CBS (Big Bang, How I Met Your Mother, and NCIS), but the rest is SciFi - rarely anymore, Food Network, Travel Channel, History Network, etc.

I REALLY need to dump my Uverse and just go pure internet.
post #71 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak View Post

All three channels are crap nowadays. I haven't watched SyFy in quite a while, mainly because they rely on second-rate shows now like Stargate Universe and Sanctuary, as well as their invariably awful Sci-Fi Original films. USA hasn't had anything worth watching since Monk went off the air. Chiller isn't bad, but it's relatively new. Another five years and it'll be down the crapper, too.

I love those cheesy Saturday night movies on SyFy. I also find myself watching Eureka and Warehouse 13. I guess I like crap.
post #72 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

1. They won't be keeping their commercials. The files are the same ones used for purchases just with a slightly different flavor of DRM.

2. They make more money with OTA and are worried that one of the precious few will rent instead of watch and hurt them big time.

See typically you are looking at a minimum of 10k per 30 seconds of ad time on a show. And that's for a really crappy show that they figure won't go that night in the ratings. Something like American Idol that has really great numbers it's more like 100k per spot. Now that money is based on the show scoring a particular amount in the ratings, particularly in the sacred 18-35 demo. Which is the same group that buys tech like crazy and would have little issue with not buying a tivo and paying $40-50 a month for service and just rent the eps.

So what if a few folks do that right. i mean shows get millions of viewers. Actually they don't. The ratings is based on a sample of some 25k viewers whose OTA, Tivo etc is counted weekly. Those numbers are then used to guesstimate how many folks are watching. If even one ratings viewer doesn't watch something it can mean a drop of several thousand to hundreds of thousands for a show. Which means make good paybacks that are at least 1000x what said person paid to rent the episode (which the network only gets 70c from anyway). So the networks are freaking out.

Now that said, I'm not really keen on this censorship by a select few or that the networks are clinging to a 1950s way of life so hard. I want them to embrace the future and credit shows with all forms of income. If a show makes or beats it's budget, it stays. If not, buh bye. And stop treating folks like all (for example) hispanic males 18-25 think the same. Cause they don't. Demand a change in the ratings system. Get a better sample and better numbers. Give us better stuff to watch and here's a wild thought, you might make more money



Heroes was a good show turned into a crap show by the end. And NBC was part of the blame. Season 1 was tight, well written and intriguing. The rest were a mess. In part because they lacked the time limit that season one had. It happens a lot with shows. The networks don't want to have to spend the money on new shows so they want to keep what they have for as long as they can, particularly when it is super popular. So they don't end date things and force the writers to drag out stories that shouldn't have been. The Nets just don't get that the age of I Love Lucy and her new zany trouble each week is gone. Tight mini series and extended minis do work. Not all seasons have to be 22 eps long. Not all shows have to be 10 seasons. Let the schedule serve the show, not the other way. That's something they haven't learned.


Personally I think that nearly all TV shows over stay their welcome. I think 3 seasons is about the maximum I can watch anything. After that, they're just repeating themselves - over and over again.
post #73 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellacool View Post

Im confused though, ABC made an app that lets me go and watch all their shows, well at least the ones worth watching. Why would I even want to rent???

online with ads, or pay to ditch them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColinB View Post

What's wrong with these guys? Don't they get that the rental cost can be a downpayment?

So you pay 99 cents to rent an episode. You like it. You'd like to see it later, over and over again, but your claim to the show has expired. But no need to sniffle, because NBC will sell it to you, for only an extra buck.

doesn't work like that. You can't pay the difference and get the regular copy. If you pay a buck it will be to rent it again. Or you'll pay the full $1.99 to buy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post

99 cents devalues the content? Isn't this the same content they broadcast for FREE over the air? What am I missing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjlexky View Post

How can their content be 'devalued' at 99 cents when I can view it for free over the air?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjlexky View Post

Or for free on their website.

Do you pay for cable. For internet access. If yes, then you aren't getting it for free. And that's without considering the ads.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #74 of 88
Very simple, NBC is getting a lot more than $1 per viewer per episode from the advertisers. Maybe show producers should sell/rent their shows directly to end users instead of going through the networks.
post #75 of 88
Let NBC and everyone else dictate the price; more precisely, let NBC dictate the wholesale price to Apple, then let Apple mark it up to the selling price. It's their product, Apple is only the distributor. This is how it works in the capitalist world with most products.

Of course, NBC will do very poorly with their higher pricing. They'll have to match everyone else if they want to make sales. Either way, we're better off with an overpriced option rather than no option.
post #76 of 88
"doesn't work like that. You can't pay the difference and get the regular copy. If you pay a buck it will be to rent it again. Or you'll pay the full $1.99 to buy"

It doesn't work like that now. It could though, that's my point.
post #77 of 88
While watching 30 Rock tonight, I noticed the commercials during the broadcast advertising that you can watch the very same episode at NBC.COM.

I watched this episode, for free, on an over the air HD broadcast.

So, then the stuffed shirt comes out and says that a $.99 rental via iTunes for the same episode is devaluing content that is available for free via multiple routes? They want me to buy an episode of TV show for $1.99 that I will never watch more than once? Is this guy a moron or what?

This sounds to me like simply a land grab where they want you to watch on their website. But do they really make more than $0.99 per episode if we watch on their website and view their ads?

What are these TV execs smoking? Sorry, I disagree with Steve Jobs, a lot, but this is bordering on insanity.

Message to NBC, take the $0.99 that you would not have been getting from people who don't know that they can watch the same episode from your website for free.
post #78 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by bohannjn View Post

While watching 30 Rock tonight, I noticed the commercials during the broadcast advertising that you can watch the very same episode at NBC.COM.

I watched this episode, for free, on an over the air HD broadcast.

[]

Message to NBC, take the $0.99 that you would not have been getting from people who don't know that they can watch the same episode from your website for free.

You cant say its the same basic content and leave it at that. There are differences in the services provided.
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 #79 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

Do you pay for cable. For internet access. If yes, then you aren't getting it for free. And that's without considering the ads.

Uh, it streams for free over the air.
post #80 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandor View Post

that is exactly the point though - NBC/CBS/ABC/Fox are all **FREE** to anyone in the US who wants it. the fact that NBC's head is up their butt in terms of monetizing digital rentals is asinine.

79% of the US population lives in an urban area, that means that a relatively cheap antenna (less than one month's worth of cable) can get them about 20-25 channels, just like me. in HD. for no monthly fee.

two months cable subscription can get you an HD recorder for your free television:
http://www.amazon.com/Toshiba-DR570-...p_ob_e_title_0 i started with a similar device in 2006 when Philadelphia stations started to broadcast ATSC, and now i have a full blow computer-based DVR that blows the pants off Tivo, and allows me access to my music and photos and the web as well as ATSC "free" tv. http://www.sagetv.com

all together, i still haven't spent what a year's worth of Comcast would have cost me, and i have added an $8 a month Netflix subscription so i can get the HBO/Showtime series i want to watch as well.

US population in urban area:
http://wwwcf.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/census/cps2k.htm

That's a smart way to get a lot of TV without paying a lot of money, but too few people are doing that to move the needle.

That fact is the networks make as much money from cable retransmission fees as they do ad sales, and they're not going to worry much about people getting digital antennas and ditching their cable until a measurable number of people actually do that.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › NBC strongly opposed to Apple's 99 cent iTunes rental model