I may be of the minority, but I will take free with Ads that can't be skipped over pay without any day. Look at hulu. Some people think hulu works because it is on the computer. Frankly, I think that is its weakest link. Hulu works because you can catch up on your shows FOR FREE. And yes, hulu has ads.
So, if ABC doesn't want to lose ad revenue and they force ads on you, that is ok. If you don't like it, "record" it with your DVR.
The whole DVR thing is sort of like napster when it first started. A revolution in the distribution of media, but sort of a cheat. You watch what you want, when you want (well, sort of, but THIS was the revolutionary part), but you get to skip the ads (this is the part that is basically the "stealing" part. Whether you like it or not, that is how these programs are paid for. I like to skip them too, just like I like free music, but without the ad revenue, the shows will dry up).
Lets skip ahead to TV 2.0. Make EVERYTHING available on demand. Come up with some revenue models that make sense.
These might be:
1) Ad supported television (like your ABCs, NBC, etc) 2) Subscription based television (buy a "month pass to all HBO shows for $12", NO ads)
Or some combination. You can pay per show ($2-3 for HD) for NO ads, or you can just watch the ads.
Considering that TV "seems" free, we all get upset when it isn't. I don't like paying for a show I might not like, but that is where ads come in.
The Media companies need to get their heads out of the a** and come up with something that makes sense from a viewers point of view and the $$ point of view (I'll say it again, if everything was free with no way of making money, the shows will not exist, or if they do, the shows themselves will just be one big commercial).
“An engineer explained to us that hundreds of ear impressions were gathered in the name of research, and while each one obviously boasted its own unique shape and size, one single characteristic remained uniform across the board: the entrance into the ear canal is not a perfect circle, it's an oval.”
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I may be of the minority, but I will take free with Ads that can't be skipped over pay without any day. Look at hulu. Some people think hulu works because it is on the computer. Frankly, I think that is its weakest link. Hulu works because you can catch up on your shows FOR FREE. And yes, hulu has ads.
So, if ABC doesn't want to lose ad revenue and they force ads on you, that is ok. If you don't like it, "record" it with your DVR.
The whole DVR thing is sort of like napster when it first started. A revolution in the distribution of media, but sort of a cheat. You watch what you want, when you want (well, sort of, but THIS was the revolutionary part), but you get to skip the ads (this is the part that is basically the "stealing" part. Whether you like it or not, that is how these programs are paid for. I like to skip them too, just like I like free music, but without the ad revenue, the shows will dry up).
Lets skip ahead to TV 2.0. Make EVERYTHING available on demand. Come up with some revenue models that make sense.
These might be:
1) Ad supported television (like your ABCs, NBC, etc)
2) Subscription based television (buy a "month pass to all HBO shows for $12", NO ads)
Or some combination. You can pay per show ($2-3 for HD) for NO ads, or you can just watch the ads.
Considering that TV "seems" free, we all get upset when it isn't. I don't like paying for a show I might not like, but that is where ads come in.
The Media companies need to get their heads out of the a** and come up with something that makes sense from a viewers point of view and the $$ point of view (I'll say it again, if everything was free with no way of making money, the shows will not exist, or if they do, the shows themselves will just be one big commercial).