|reply to tranle |
Re: [HD] HD costs extra?
said by tranle:Well, that's the difference between ownership and renting, which most people realize without the help of car or appliance analogies. I'd FULLY EXPECT replacement on anything I was renting (obvious misuse and human damage notwithstanding). The person from whom I'm renting isn't doing me any favors replacing it when it dies. That's what renting is all about. said by Joe12345678:
But $200 is better then $8 /m for ever.
Your $200 purchase does not last for ever either. If you want a new version you need to re-purchase another box.
But in the meantime, a purchaser of one's own (theoretical, at this point) DVR would have had (for 2 years, maybe three tops, sure) a REAL DVR with REAL functions of his or her choosing: editing, high-speed dubbing, chaptering, bookmarking, splitting, joining, dumping to DVD, channel lineup editing, title changes, add-on storage capacity, the ability to schlep it someone else's house if necessary, etc: whatever things one's heart desired and the free market offered.
Comcast "DVR" service, OTOH, is nothing but rudimentary time-shifting service. When Comcast's saints "gift" you with "new" hardware, it's simply because no one in their right mind will rent something which doesn't work.
And that "new" hardware is still nothing but an appliance which permits rudimentary time shifting. The DVRs available in 2003 and 2004 put Comcast DVR features to shame. So for some people - yes, they'd absolutely rather blow $400 and have great fun for two years, even if it culminates in a fried hunk of metal, than spend $192 renting a rudimentary time-shifting appliance for the same amount of time.
Apples and oranges.