Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA Reviews:
 ·SONIC.NET
| reply to b10010011
Re: I don't get it... I feel like I'm being swamped by both sides' ignorance, so I'm replying a lot. Sorry people. Here's another one:
said by b10010011:Why should we have to pay for something that was aired on broadcast television? I do not have to pay to watch it on TV. FWIW, that isn't true: you pay for TV and any systems necessary to deal with ads (such as watching the ads, doing what the ads want you to do, or having equipment and methods used to skip ads).
I do not have to pay to watch it later on my Tivo. One of the major reasons I don't have Tivo is that it is so expensive (you are wrong again). The pricing model may be better with Tivo than other methods, though, so don't get me wrong: proper pricing is important.
Why should I have to pay to watch it on an I-Pod? 
Just does not make sense? 
But really I can not remember the last time I watched a program on NBC. Maybe they are hurting for money. That's a pretty stupid way to get more money if they are the manufacturers, but perhaps the real manufacturers of the content had different pricing for iTunes vs no iTunes available, so it might not have been NBC.
Here's a clue for you NBC. It's not the internet that is hurting your bottom line. It's the lack of decent programming.  |
b10010011Whats a Posting tag?
join:2004-09-07
Bellingham, WA Reviews:
 ·Comcast Formerl..
1 edit | I would rather watch ads than pay for ad free TV. I can get up and go pee, get something to eat, or what ever. So it is a very small price to pay.
I paid $7 for my Tivo at a Goodwill It is lifetime subscribed so I do not have to pay Tivo a dime to use it.
I would rather have the I-pod version come commercials enact for free.
No "might" about it decent programming is everything. A show that sucks on TV is still going to suck when you pay 1.99 or 4.99 to watch it on an I-Pod. |
