Apple In Talks To Bring $0.99 TV Rentals To iTunes 274
An anonymous reader writes "On September first, Apple will reportedly announce a new iPod Touch with a front facing camera, a refreshed Apple TV, and more interestingly, the arrival of $0.99 TV episode rentals on iTunes."
Subscription service (Score:4, Insightful)
$0.99 is way too much for a single episode rental. With the same price you can buy the whole season from store and get a physical product with extras too.
Why not a subscription based service like Spotify, but for TV episodes? I would gladly pay $10 a month if I could stream any tv show and episode I wanted to. I already do for Spotify and seriously, I haven't felt the need to get mp3's since I started using it because frankly, it's just so convenient and easy. Hell, you can even offer an ad-based service too. Just have it huge library, don't delete old episodes or shows and add the new episodes there right after or when they're showing on TV.
Re:Subscription service (Score:4, Insightful)
I was doing the math on this too and it's insane, especially for rental, to have it be $0.99. If we assume only 2 hours a day at 30 minutes per episode, that's four episodes a day. Times 30 days in a month equals 120 episodes, or $118.80. While it may be convenient for one or two episodes a month that you missed on your cable subscription, it is insanely expensive to think about.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My list: Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Lie to Me. That's three hours a week. MM and BB I buy through iTunes so that they're waiting for me to watch at a convenient time (I don't get AMC) and I watch Lie to Me on Fox.com for free. I'd probably do the same with BB and MM if they offered high quality streaming versions, but last I checked, they don't. My total is about $40/year with zero broadcast TV beyond the occasional news show or sporting event.
When I have some spare time, I've be
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I don't watch any TV, I was basing it off my experience with my family while growing up. They watched a ton of TV all the time and I spent my time in my room with my three computers learning how to network and program. Now my siblings struggle to pay the rent every month and I live comfortably as a programmer. Huh, go figure.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I assume they'd be smart enough to have a season pass the way $0.99 songs have albums, and the price of the album is not $0.99 * number of songs. I'm guessing the $0.99 is exactly for those one episode customers. Alas, I expect this won't be available here as no TV, movies or anything of the sort is available over iTunes here. Just music...
Re: (Score:2)
Worse, really, is if 22 minutes shows cost the same as 44 minute shows.
That said, 2 hours a day sounds like a lot. I pay about $60/mo total for my cable TV, but I bet I watch 6 hours per week. If Apple gets all of the shows I watch, rental prices would be worth it even if it's $0.99 across the board. If it's anything less for 22 minute shows, it's an even bigger win. Drop cable and save at least $12/mo? Definitely.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Subscription service (Score:4, Insightful)
With the same price you can buy the whole season from store and get a physical product with extras too.
I don't think I've bought a non-clearance DVD of a TV season and averaged $.99 per ep.
That's beside the point, though. Maybe you're paying that 99 cents because you've never seen the show before and you're just curious. Or maybe you're paying that because you're really into a show and happened to miss one ep.
It's not a matter of cost, it's a matter of value. With all due respect, any geek or nerd should understand this. When have you ever heard one say: "I saved money by not upgrading my 2x CD burner. All I have to do is wait longer!"
Re: (Score:2)
>>>I don't think I've bought a non-clearance DVD of a TV season and averaged $.99 per ep.
As with anything it depends what you buy. I just got Hercules season set for $20 or about $1 per episode. Star Trek still costs around $50 or about 2 dollars per episode..... but even then it's still a good deal because you can watch it as many times as you want over the next 10-20 years time. If you watched it four times, you've effectively reduced the cost to 50 cents
And if you get sick of the show, you c
Re: (Score:2)
As with anything it depends what you buy. I just got Hercules season set for $20 or about $1 per episode. Star Trek still costs around $50 or about 2 dollars per episode..... but even then it's still a good deal because you can watch it as many times as you want over the next 10-20 years time. If you watched it four times, you've effectively reduced the cost to 50 cents
And if you get sick of the show, you can sell it on ebay for about $25.... further reducing your episode cost. It's almost always cheaper to buy then rent.
Yes, in one case, it doesn't make as much sense.
In the case of you not being so interested in the show that you want to buy the DVD, or the DVD isn't available, or it's really the one ep you want to watch, you're wasting a ton of money to catch it.
Having choices is better. Funny enough, that's a common theme on this site.
Re: (Score:2)
>>>Having choices is better.
Agreed. Unless they eventually eliminate the option to buy (which many record companies and TV studios have been trying to do for years), and you have no option but a 99 cent rental. Remember DIVX discs? We're lucky it flopped but now they have a new opportunity to force us into rental-only model.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. Unless they eventually eliminate the option to buy (which many record companies and TV studios have been trying to do for years)
Actually the TV and Movie industry had exactly that model for decades. It wasn't until the 80's (late 70's?) that you could purchase home movies and TV seasons on DVD is a recent thing, too. In fact, television shows on DVD have resurrected several shows.
For all the silliness these industries have put us through, it still boils down to supply and demand.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think I've bought a non-clearance DVD of a TV season and averaged $.99 per ep.
You mean more than 99 per ep, right? Because I have a couple of hundred TV seasons and I'm sure I haven't ever paid more than 99 cents per episode.
Some else mentioned the gilmore girls - all seasons are currently available for $20 each at vendors like Barnes & Noble - that's less than 50 cents an episode.
I've bought almost all seasons of 24 and they were under $15 each at the time.
etc
etc
It's not a matter of cost, it's a matter of value
That's what the MAFIAA says... until sales fall through the floor when people actually take them at their word and re
Re: (Score:2)
That's what the MAFIAA says...
Uh, no, that's what *I* was saying, describing my own purchasing habits. It's also the sort of purchasing decision *you* make, too. Afterall, you purchased the Gilmore Girls when you could have saved money by just watching them when the aired, right?
At 22 episodes/season, that's a fair price (Score:2)
That works out to $22 for a 22 episode season, vs. over $30/season to buy box sets.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I never re-watch shows, so renting is better. But then for 13.99/month, you can rent about 32 episodes through netflix (that's 4 DVD's per week through the 2-DVD-at-a-time plan, with 4 episodes on each DVD). And that's not counting any "watch instantly" (streaming) series you might be interested in, which are also included in that price. Selection is limited but there is some good stuff in there, e.g. Dexter seasons 1 and 2.
Re: (Score:2)
I already do buy some TV shows on iTunes at the $1.99 price. The $0.99 price will probably get me to watch more shows than I do now. But neither is exactly a cheap price so I tend to only buy shows that I know I like enough to watch multiple times and aren't available through Netflix or streaming online.
A subscription model would often be a lot more appropriate, especially for shows like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. Currently I watch both of those on my computer for free on Comedy Central's sit
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So what you're saying is you'd like to have access to unlimited TV shows, as they're aired, for a quarter or less of what cable would cost you? Yeah, me too.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So for the discount, you don't get to keep the product.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Depends on the show really. Star Trek TNG was over $100 per season when it first came out, and it's still at $50+ new on Amazon. Compared to that, these are cheap. On the other hand, Charmed runs about $18-25 for a season on Amazon, and I've seen them in Wal-mart for $15 per season. Compared that that, this isn't so great.
Now personally, I'd expect a discount for a digital only version where there are no packaging, discs to press, inventory to track, or items to ship to a store. That's for a digital co
Re:Subscription service (Score:5, Insightful)
If it's a rental only? I'd expect a (significant) further discount again
For a digital copy I don't even get to keep, well, I'd expect not to have to pay. The "watch this but don't keep a copy" model has been ad-supported on aerial TV for decades, and on YouTube for the better part of one. What makes them think they deserve any customers by stepping back onto a pay-per-play system? And isn't this the kind of shit that DRM alarmists were diligently warning everyone about back in 2003?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that requires them to have obnoxious disruptive ads. Some of us would be willing to pay to get rid of those ads, today you don't really get that option. Or you do on torrents but no ads and no pay means no income for those who made it. I welcome the possibility to pay my way out of ads, it's a choice I think I like. If it really turns out that I'm wrong, that I value it less than the advertisers so be it. Then it's my choice to watch the ad edition, which I'm quite sure will remain available...
Re:Subscription service (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
iTunes has had the ability BUY DRM'd TV episodes since December 2005.
http://www.macworld.com/article/48261/2005/12/nbc.html [macworld.com]
This is only news because it's a RENTAL, not because it's iTunes.
Re:Subscription service (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
And isn't this the kind of shit that DRM alarmists were diligently warning everyone about back in 2003?
I think you mean it's the kind of shit that DRM apologists were claiming was the incredible creation of new market models enabled by DRM.
Re:Subscription service (Score:5, Insightful)
In 1990 I watched as my mom died, and in her weakened state basically able to do nothing but watch TV, her precious seconds being used up watching ads for Wisk or whatnot. By 1993 I had stopped watching television completely (kept the VCR for movies though), because the fact is, advertising is a waste of life. Sure, the shows might be somewhat interesting, but just how much is your life worth? I decided mine was worth way more than I got from the annoyance of marketing.
Then came Netflix and TNG, DS9, and even Voyager on DVD. I thoroughly enjoyed catching up on these shows without commercials. Later, I picked up an ATV and I've enjoyed commercial free seasons of Dexter and True Blood and a few other things. The whole point of a device like the ATV, is to avoid commercials and let the marketers hit the unemployment line and languish there as could only happen in a truly just world.
Finally, I just can't believe how cheap people are. What does 99c get you anymore? A Snickers? A box of Tic Tacs? You know, even if you earn minimum wage (and who really thinks their life is only worth 8-something an hour), 15 minutes of commercials is worth $2. Why would you spend $2 of life, when you can get the show for a buck? It makes absolutely no sense to me at all. If you make $60/hr, those 15 minutes cost $15 -- a season would cost you roughly $360.
And one last finally -- if we can get away from the whole advertising model, then direct user supported shows would be possible. For example, Firefly couldn't cut it in the ratings game, but how many direct subscribers would it have taken to make it worth doing?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
>>>$1 an episode x 20 episodes = $20 ...About half or three-quarters of the normal price, right?
Unless you later sell the used DVD on ebay for $20 (~$40-20 == about $20 total cost of ownership), in which case there's no savings whatsoever to rent from Apple. Plus with a DVD set you can watch it now, then share it with friends at the next party, then watch it again next year or five or ten years from now.
Buying ends-up being cheaper than renting.
Re: (Score:2)
Ebay or anywhere that sells second hand DVDs for a reasonable price.
Re:Subscription service (Score:5, Informative)
Netflix.
With a two to three-day turnaround time, I can get a dozen DVDs a month of TV shows (entire seasons' worth) for the basic Netflix subscription. If I step up the subscription, I can have several dozen DVDs come through my house, which I can then load on to my iPod Touch.
Plus, I can watch as many of the online TV seasons as I want. It comes to much, much, much less than $0.99 per episode.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Nice, but quite probably illegal as making permanent copies of a rental goes far outside normal fair use and is a direct replacement for a dvd sale. You may call it timeshifting but I doubt the courts would look on it the same way they did with the VHS, after all you can keep your DVD longer or return it and get it later to timeshift. And if you're in the US you're breaking the DMCA etc. too, fair use or not.
Now, it's almost impossible to discover and thus ever prosecute but legally it's pretty much the sam
Re: (Score:2)
Who said anything about "permanent" copies? Who's got room to store season upon season of TV episodes? TV is a pop medium, meaning it's disposable.
I don't need to keep copies of anything, as long as I can get my hands on it again. And I would disagree that I'm "breaking the DMCA" if all I'm doing is watching the video I rented on a different screen than the o
Re: (Score:2)
Your math is off.
A 3-disc queue costs $20. You can theoretically get up to 22 discs a month (I have the calculation around here somewhere; not having sunday delivery in either direction really slows things down), so that's about $1/disc.
A disc has up to 5 episodes of an hour show on it, up to 6 of a half-hour show (I haven't seen more; some series may be more generous). So a whole season of 22-26 episodes will be 4-6 discs, or $4-6 of your subscription value.
But Apple wants you to give them $22-26 for it,
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with your math and don't plan on using Apple's service, but it's not really a very good comparison. Apple is talking about current shows, on TV now, current season. Netflix only offers shows that have been released on DVD (and a very few instant shows), a year later than they will be on Apple's service. If Apple were only renting TV shows that were already out on DVD, they'd be charging much less.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is talking about renting TV episodes for 99 cents. Do you believe last year's episodes are going to be a lot cheaper?
I bet of the entire catalog of episodes that are going to be on iTunes, current episodes will make up a small percentage.
Plus, with very very few exceptions, there is nothing on television for which I would pay a premium to see at the same time that it's broadcast. I don't do the "hanging around the water cooler talking a
Re: (Score:2)
Your reading comprehension is off.
The discussion started because Apple is "renting" individual episodes" of TV shows for 99 cents. On a single DVD, I can get a whole season of half-hour episodes, as you say, for $1. So doesn't that mean that I'm getting each episode for a lot less than 99 cents?
Re: (Score:2)
There is that, but I don't have my Roku yet (it's in the mail; woot.com had them for like $60 the other day) so I don't know what TV shows netflix does have; they don't have instant viewing on every item in stock. They should, but they don't.
Re:Subscription service (Score:5, Insightful)
There are exceptions, and I can see people buying episodes of a Firefly, or a Gilmore Girls ( embarassing confessiion ) for two dollars, if itcomeswith guaranteed future redownloads afterdrive failures and such. But the vastmajority of TV shows are far too ephemeral. Even the Sopranos, whichI greatly enjoyed... It was fun. It's over now. I'll never watch it again.
Re: (Score:2)
You can get a "multi-pass" to both the daily show and/or the colbert report from iTunes. It's $9.99 (for either show) and you get the most recently aired episode, plus the next 15 episodes when they are made available. It's one month's worth of full production, a total of 16 episodes, for $10. This comes out to $0.63 per episode. And I get to keep the ones I want forever and ever.
I do agree though... $0.99 for a rental of a TV show is bull. It should be more like $0.50.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it could be fine for catching up on shows you've missed, assuming the shows come to rental the day after they air. Hulu's usually a week behind. Of course, DVRs completely screw up the picture and make things like "catching up" almost pointless.
Apple needs to be dealing in volume. $10 for an entire 22 episode season rental, where the timer is per episode and doesn't start until you begin watching it. That way they get better revenue (people paying for entire seasons instead of individual episode
Re: (Score:2)
Let's see, in my TV watching season, my family watches two TV shows. So that's $2/week or $8/month. Assuming these episodes are HD, that's a bit cheaper than $80/month Xfinity for 300 channels I never watch. If I wanted to plan my movies (I don't) I'd add a $10 netflix subscription...and then just stream on demand netflix. So that's all the TV I need for $18/month.
Wait a second (Score:2)
I'm an apple customer -- we have quite a few macs, ipods, even two ipads -- but I won't watch TV for free, much less for .99/show. So let's not paint with too broad a brush, shall we?
Re: (Score:2)
>>>I won't watch TV for free, much less for .99/show
Why not? Don't you like a good drama like CSI? Or farout story like Fringe? Or medical show like House? ----- Not that it really matters: My point was not about liking these shows..... my point was that it's ridiculous how many Americans pay $80/month to see these shows when you can see them for free.
Re:Wait a second (Score:5, Insightful)
my point was that it's ridiculous how many Americans pay $80/month to see these shows when you can see them for free.
There are millions (and I mean millions) of cable subscribers in apartment building that cannot have 'free' TV of any quality. Rabbit ears != decent reception in most urban areas (I can't speak for suburban areas). On top of that there are condominiums and home owner associations that ban visible antennae. Free isn't an option for everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They cannot ban antennas, that would be against the law.
or... (Score:3, Insightful)
In the case of broadcast television...
A fool and his time are soon parted.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes and not all of us are stupid or gullible enough to think that something is worth what a company with a history of ripping people off is charging.
Cable/Sat TV around here is about $10 per month then add another $10 for STB rental, another $10 for the phone line.
If the rental model allowed for the release of new episodes on the same day as the original television air date, is their really any reason not to pay a dollar to watch it?
Yes. When I can get it for free and I feel its not even worth $1 to buy I'l
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes and not all of us are stupid or gullible enough to think that something is worth what a company with a history of ripping people off is charging.
Then don't buy it. No one is forcing you to consume that content.
Cable/Sat TV around here is about $10 per month then add another $10 for STB rental, another $10 for the phone line.
I don't know what the local cable company charges for basic cable or phone around here since I don't purchase either or really have any desire to do so. There're really only a few shows that I'm interested in watching, and most of them aren't on basic cable anyhow. I already own the ones I'd ever care to watch more than once, and Hulu usually allows me to satisfy my curiosity for anything I might be interested in, so I don't know if the rental
Re: (Score:2)
Where the hell do you live where cable costs $10 a month!? I call bullshit on that.
Maybe for broadcast only, but your average cable bill is usually one of the most expensive bills of the house. I spend almost $120 a month for Comcast (digital + HBO). Even if I dumped HBO I'd still be looking at $100.
So tell me, where and how are you getting cable for so cheap?
Re: (Score:2)
Why not? It works for politicians...
Hmm (Score:5, Interesting)
What I will care about is when Apple starts to exclusively lock down certain shows making them impossible to get through other services like In Demand, Netflix, etc
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You are being a little paranoid, that is not going to happend
Re:Hmm (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You are being a little paranoid, that is not going to happend
Why not? Logically it's a pretty good move for Apple and they have the means to make it happen.
Torrents? (Score:2)
I mean... If it's worth watching it will turn up on torrents anyway, right?
Even sooner if it isn't.
wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And log your IP address on login so the RIAA can find you.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that's all you're downloading. Right.
RIAA, MPAA, Cap Cities, Viacom, the NFL, etc.
Pick your plaintiff.
Re: (Score:2)
>>>They all asked for exactly 99 cents? Weird! It's almost like they all got together and colluded...
Or more likely, they simply did what I did: Looked to see what Apple's charging, and decided to match that price for my ebay sales. It isn't always collusion - sometimes it's just using your eyes.
Also:
A lot of these shows, even when owned by different studios, are negotiated by the same Actors Union. It's why actors will get a fixed price per airing of an episode, whether it's shown on Sci-Fi or
Sept 1st, actually (Score:2, Informative)
TFA seems to have the date wrong, at least: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/08/25/apple_sends_out_invitations_for_sept_1_special_event.html [appleinsider.com]
TV needs to be free!!! (Score:2)
Re:TV needs to be free!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Why the hell would you pay for it again?
Because you have an iProduct, a dollar, and a need for instant gratification.
Re:TV needs to be free!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I cancelled my sat-tv about 2 or 3 yrs ago. been on netflix since then.
now, I only pay for shows I want and I'm not stuck with ANY bundling. yay!
I'm not ever going back to cable to sat-tv. their business model is all wet.
apples is also wrong, though. I don't blame them for trying, but a dollar for a watching of a tv show is insane! think about it: its already been 100.0% paid for via commercials on first run and even more than 100% on re-runs.
in fact, the content should be 'free' by now, after its gone
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My DVR failed. not epically but it went out with a CLICK WHIRRRR CLICK WHIRRRRRR of hdd failure. Even if this was my box and I wasn't renting from the cableco, it still meant i fucking missed mythbusters. >:(
Re: (Score:2)
Only a complete and utter moron actually pays for cable. What a fucking waste of a life. At least we know who to round up come the revolution, all the fat lazy pigs watching their tvs all days*
(*Except for ESPN)
I wish that Apple actually wanted to end DRM... (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's a quote from something Jobs said [apple.com], but with s/music/media/.
Perhaps those unhappy with the current situation should redirect their energies towards persuading the media companies to sell their media DRM-free....Convincing them to license their media to Apple and others DRM-free will create a truly interoperable media marketplace. Apple will embrace this wholeheartedly.
Like any big company, I think that Apple will run with a plan if it can make them money. Unfortunately, Apple doesn't have the power to get big media to distribute their content DRM-free. (And even if Apple could, would they bother?)
Re: (Score:2)
Why bother going DRM-free?
because paying developers to keep up with new DRM requirements and patching fixes with DRM holes costs money.
Bottom line business decision. Making users happy would be just a fringe benefit.
Apparently they have never heard of netflix (Score:5, Insightful)
Netflix, all the streaming you want(if you can tolerate the drm) for $10 and dvds in the mail. I will have watched all of dexter season 4 in 1 week. That means I paid about $5 for the whole shebang as I pay around $20 a month for my 3 disc plan. Thus that is the price I am willing to pay. At ~12 episodes that works out to ~$0.42, less than half what they are suggesting. Mind you this is a Showtime show, a normal cable show might be worth half of that.
Re:Apparently they have never heard of netflix (Score:5, Insightful)
They've heard of Netflix. And if they are charging more per unit viewed than Netflix, they can return more to the copyright holder than Netflix can, which gives the copyright holder a reason to prefer them over Netflix.
So, if people are willing to pay for this, expect more shows to not be available for Netflix streaming, and to be available only on this or similar pay-per-view systems. Or, perhaps, to be delayed in getting to Netflix and similar services for a period, where they are available on pay-per-view systems like this, and then later move to Netflix.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Apparently they have never heard of netflix (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I use netflix as a cable replacement. I have no cable. This means even watching less tv than most, it still works out damn cheap. In addition, when my life gets busy I go down to the $10 one at a time plan.
Sept 1st... (Score:2)
Why would the people who make (Score:2)
tv shows want to do this? they could go to hulu and make more money with advertising. The simpsons makes more money per views on hulu then TV.
TV shows are far more throw away them mp3s.
I'll watch Lost on hulu, but I sure as hell wouldn't pay 99 cents an episode.
this has been done, but freer. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm confused (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How do you Tivo something for free? There's the cost of the Tivo, and, unless it's over the air, some form of subscription service.
Re: (Score:2)
Same reason why people who grow garden vegetables usually don't buy them at the store.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your Tivo and subscription to the premium channels these shows are on are both free? Cool, where can I get that hooked up?
But it's only a dollar! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Good parenting will be cheaper and more effective over a long period of time.
If your crotchspawn knew there would be punishment for making a ruckus in the doctors office, eventually they will learn to stop doing it. Instead you have fallen back to the cathode teat of TV in order to replace your responsibility of raising a healthy child.
You could just try, you know...
Talking or playing wit
Re:But it's only a dollar! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately with the state of child rearing in Australia, the standards of authority are quire low. If parent's didn't let their "little darlings" run amok in shopping centres, public transport, aeroplanes, offices and so forth then referring to them as "crotchspawns" would be quite unreasonable.
But this is not the case, worse yet parents over here seem to be rewarding this kind of be
Haha, ok (Score:2)
Assuming 3 hours of TV time per day, I could watch about 90 hour-long TV episodes on Netflix for just $9/month. Apple wants me to pay 10x that? No thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes but you're also waiting on netflix to get the disc in, and then put the disc online.
Compare that to buying the episode just after it airs.
Re: (Score:2)
I actually prefer to watch a show after it's cancelled so if I like it I don't have to wait for new episodes.
Re: (Score:2)
There is more stuff to watch than you have life left. You can watch something else until the disc arrives.
I like this over what I currently do (Score:2)
I currently buy 2-3 season passes per year for shows that I really like. It's cheaper then cable, and better then dealing with an unreliable DVR that records commercials and sometimes clips the beginning / end of episodes. Rentals are a lot nicer because most shows I get I only watch once. I'm also less concerned about DRM when content is disposable as opposed to something that I own.
Scandal and intrigue! (Score:2)
I was about to RTFA; but got to the word "Antennagate" and closed the tab out of disgust.
Outside the U.S.? (Score:3, Informative)
The article fails to mention anything about the annoying problem that all of these services (iTunes included) don't allow those of us outside the U.S. to view any of these shows. Stupid exclusive deals for possible future foreign releases prevent worldwide distribution and force many expats to turn to bit torrents.
If it's greed that drives the producers (and copyright holders), I do hope that they someday realize that they can earn more by allowing people outside of the U.S. timely access to their shows through legitimate channels (like iTunes, Hulu, etc.) than through exclusive tie-ups with other dinosaur companies that think the same way they do.
Re: (Score:2)
Hell you can go to Hulu and watch a good majority of recent TV free.
Free, after you install a proprietary worm relay [adobe.com] and allow them to reprogram your brain with ads.