View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
draganm
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 8990 Location: Colorado
|
Link Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm obviously brain dead when it comes to this sh*t. Please help an old guy out.
I want o watch HBO series , Tour de france (any bicycle racing actually), and possibly drop my block buster subscription and download all my movies as well.
I'm willing to buy a box and pay some reasonable amount to either stream or download. What should I do?
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
draganm
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 8990 Location: Colorado
|
Link Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
just checked, GOT does NOT appear to be on Netflix.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom.W
Joined: 09 Mar 2006 Posts: 6637
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 15909 Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
Link Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tom.W wrote: | You have to have a cable provider password to view HBO due to contractual reasons as already mentioned but this might change in the near future which is why the cable providers are nervous they may lose their monopoly... |
Yeah, from HBO. But, you can also buy episodes on iTunes/Apple TV. But, some people bristle at the notion of paying 3.99/episode for a season of shows, or what... $40?
The flip side is that you don't have to pay a thousand dollars ($75/month all year long) to watch say 5 shows that you really like that you could buy (and own) the episodes for $200. Paying $40 to buy the shows doesn't seem so bad when you have twice that much in your pocket because you're not paying for satellite and cable.
I'm not quite ready to jump there yet, but seriously... 2013 might be the year I say goodbye to DirecTV. I'll have almost a grand a year back in my pocket that I can decide how/what to spend it on for entertainment.
Tom.W wrote: | Free movies on Crackle. |
Crackle is nice for a living room or bedroom TV, but you get what you pay for... Crappy not-quite-DVD SD quality. But, hey - it's free.
SC
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
draganm
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 8990 Location: Colorado
|
Link Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ecrabb wrote: | Yeah, from HBO. But, you can also buy episodes on iTunes/Apple TV. But, some people bristle at the notion of paying 3.99/episode for a season of shows, or what... $40?
SC | the 5 disc set is $56. to buy on BD disc and you get all the extra's, making of, actor interviews, etc. So yeah, $99. for an Apple TV box + $40. for season one kinda sucks really. Myabe you can justify it if your getting it day after it airs on HBO but something tells me this isn't reality either?
I guess I should just quit bitching and wait for the BD disc to arrive from BB, ohh say sometime in December
I should get discs 3 , 4, and 5 and hang onto them for 6 months for payback to the ******* who aren't returning discs 1 and 2.
Or cancel my useless BB monthly subscription, go buy season 1, and it will pay for itself in 2-1/2 months.
I do appreciate all the info though, I had a feeling there wasn't really a good solution to this problem or "everyone would be doing it".
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
draganm
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 8990 Location: Colorado
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
draganm
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 8990 Location: Colorado
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
garyfritz
Joined: 08 Apr 2006 Posts: 12024 Location: Fort Collins, CO
|
Link Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
ecrabb wrote: | I've been watching this situation for several years now, and things are just about to change. Here's the wildcard: Apple. Apple will be the one to bust the gridlock.
I give it a year or two, and the TV landscape will be very different. 2013 is when it starts to change. |
Interesting theory, Steve. Do you think Apple will change the streaming-content issue any?
Netflix, BB Online, etc all have crap selection for streaming because the studios will only give them the crap. Maybe Apple already doesn't have this problem because they're selling episodes instead of selling flat-priced all-you-can-eat plans?
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 Posts: 8508
|
Link Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Guess we know why torrents are so popular....
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 15909 Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
Link Posted: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's exactly right, Mac. Remember Napster and Limewire? Those were hugely popular before iTunes came along and made it easier to buy music than it was to steal it. The record companies had to learn that lesson the hard way. It decimated the record industry, yet apparently the TV content owners are incapable of learning a damn thing from that very public experience.
SC
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 15909 Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
Link Posted: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's an interesting court decision that could have an impact on this discussion...
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/07/12/apple-is-a-winner-for-now-in-the-aereo-online-tv-ruling/
Quote: | Apple is a winner -- for now -- in the Aereo online TV ruling
By Philip Elmer-DeWitt July 12, 2012: 7:22 AM ET
A court's decision not to block live local streaming to iPads could affect Apple TV negotiations
FORTUNE -- The victory Aereo won in a New York federal court Wednesday is only temporary, but it threatens to undermine the delicate contractual structure of American television in a way that could give Apple (AAPL) a boost.
Aereo is a start-up funded by ex-Fox CEO Barry Diller's IAC (IACI) that streams the local broadcast signals of TV stations via the Web to iPhones and iPads for a $12 monthly fee. It's been available since March in New York City, but there's no technical reason it couldn't work nationwide.
Even before it began operations, Aereo was sued by a small army of big content providers, including CBS (CBS), NBC Universal (CMCSA), Disney (DIS), News Corp. (NWS) and WNET. Claiming they would suffer "irreparable harm," if Aereo were allowed to sell their copyrighted material without sharing the revenue, the content providers sought a temporary injunction that would have shut Aereo down.
On Wednesday, Judge Alison Nathan denied the injunction. The case now goes to trial, which could take some time.
It was a setback for the networks. It was a big, if temporary, win for Aereo. It was also a win for the cable and satellite TV providers who pay a small fortune to the networks for access their content. "I don't know if it's legal or not," Time Warner Cable (TWC) CEO Glenn Britt told the Wall Street Journal. "But if it is we should do it too."
So how does it affect Apple?
For starters, it allows Apple customers in New York City to get local TV content on their iOS devices -- bringing them one step closer to being able to "cut the cord" -- i.e., get access to a full complement of TV entertainment without paying a monthly cable or satellite bill.
But in the long run -- assuming a jury finds in Aereo's favor -- it could reboot the negotiations with content providers that Steve Jobs started but was unable to complete before his death. Jobs' dream for Apple TV was to provide, for a monthly fee, the best of television without the rest of the 500 channels that most viewers never watch.
The content providers -- particularly those owned by cable companies -- had no interest in giving Jobs what he wanted, and as long as they held all the cards there was no reason for them to give an inch.
If Aereo and companies like it (see here) are able to sell that content without paying for it, all bets are off. In a business environment where there are no retransmission fees to be collected, a deal with Apple -- which unlike Aereo is willing to share revenue -- might suddenly look more attractive.
Below the fold: A video interview with Aereo CEO Chet Kanojia that CNNMoney's Matt Stuart produced in April |
Not sure I understand the court's decision, but it's very interesting.
SC
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|