iLounge

1

$20?!?!? good luck with that.

Posted by letmein on August 14, 2006 at 7:47 AM (PDT)

2

Why is $20 too much for a full length movie?

As long as it’s a comparible resolution to a standard DVD I’m all for it.

Buying multi-media content isn’t about getting something for cheap, it’s more about convenience.  Always available without leaving the home.  I’d pay $20 for that.  With gas prices these days it saves $ on the trip to Best Buy

Posted by LilAlienD in Maryland on August 14, 2006 at 8:41 AM (PDT)

3

$20 for Garfield, WOW

Posted by Jasper Johns on August 14, 2006 at 9:11 AM (PDT)

4

Apple cant be happy with that surely thats gonna kick them up the arse to get things moving via itunes.

Posted by boggis81 on August 14, 2006 at 9:16 AM (PDT)

5

Will all of the isps love the bandwith sucking up for these videos.? Do people actually pay $ 1.99 for a TV show ? I turned off TV 4 yrs ago.

Id rather buy a flick, copy it and store it with a MAC.

Posted by mango on August 14, 2006 at 9:31 AM (PDT)

6

Wow. Garfield?  Sad I’ll be missing that.

But iTunes already has “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia.”  This can’t be an exclusive thing, unless they’re going to pull “It’s Always Sunny” off iTunes.

Posted by alexarch on August 14, 2006 at 10:10 AM (PDT)

7

20 Bucks!... for a downloaded movie.  Yeah, that’s too much.

I’m sure the quality will not be comparable to dvd other wise it would take for ever to download a file that size.  I could by a dvd close to the same amount and be able to play it on my dvd player as well as anyone else not to mention I can convert for ipod or windows media or whatever I choose.
Paying $20 dollars for something that I can only play on my PC is not an option for me.  As a matter of fact, I don’t even watch TV’s or movies on my PC.

Posted by 3rdeye on August 14, 2006 at 10:33 AM (PDT)

8

$20 is $13.95 too much when I don’t own the media, extras, packaging, etc.

Posted by stark23x on August 14, 2006 at 11:16 AM (PDT)

9

Ohhhhhh… please, please, please sell me a Windows Media Player-only copy of a movie for $20!!!  It’s not like I couldn’t go out, buy the same movie on DVD for $15 and (because of my fair-use rights) rip it down to iPod, PSP, or whatever else I want for free…  Get a clue Fox!!!  Idiots.

Posted by Jimmy on August 14, 2006 at 12:28 PM (PDT)

10

“Why is $20 too much for a full length movie?”

It’s way too much when I wouldn’t even consider paying half that to actually own any of those on DVD. Seriously, Garfield? Why is it everytime a company starts doing something new with movies (download, Blu Ray, HDDVD) they release the worst ones first? How did they decide that was a good idea?

Posted by rainking187 on August 14, 2006 at 12:48 PM (PDT)

11

Rainking187: They probably release the worst ones first (or a motley batch, anyway) because they serve as guinea pigs. It’s a pilot project to see if the concept works. You wouldn’t go releasing all your best movies before knowing that the concept is viable.

Hmmm…although the first TV shows on iTunes were Lost and Desperate Housewives. Maybe they had more confidence for that project?

Posted by Dan on August 14, 2006 at 1:24 PM (PDT)

12

mango: I certainly don’t.

I too don’t really watch TV, but I use torrents and RSS to download all my favorite shows. I don’t have to worry about forgetting about a show or the air time, or the cable going out.. because it’s downloaded automatically as soon as it’s posted online. Gotta love uTorrent’s RSS reader.

Josh

Posted by Josh Powell in VA on August 14, 2006 at 1:36 PM (PDT)

13

It’s not like I couldn’t go out, buy the same movie on DVD for $15 and (because of my fair-use rights) rip it down…

In the U.S. and a whole bunch of other places, there’s no such fair-use rights for copyrighted video as there was for music, whether protected VHS/BETA before, or copy-protected DVD now.

Posted by flatline response on August 14, 2006 at 9:46 PM (PDT)

14

“They probably release the worst ones first (or a motley batch, anyway) because they serve as guinea pigs. It’s a pilot project to see if the concept works. You wouldn’t go releasing all your best movies before knowing that the concept is viable.”

I guess I still just don’t get it. I mean, if the service ends up failing couldn’t it just be that you didn’t give people anything they wanted? I mean, I know I’m not exactly burning with desire to pay $20 to download Garfield. And if you put up movies people like and the service still fails, well, you probably still made more money then you did off the terrible ones.

Posted by rainking187 on August 15, 2006 at 4:07 AM (PDT)

15

$20 = too much. Hello people, you can buy any new release DVD for around $15 at target or best buy and even some classics for $7.50. AND you own the disc, the packaging, and the ability to rip it to whatever you want. Who watches TV or Movies on their computer anyway. The only reason to have it on the harddrive for me is so that it can be on my video iPod. These exclusive deals kind of make me angry. Are we considering the wants of the consumer here?

Posted by killerb on August 15, 2006 at 6:05 AM (PDT)

16

For 20 bucks ill get the DVD version where i can play it on the computer AND Set top box’s

as its Garenteed that what they are selling online, ISNT burnable, and Compressed to ease a 5+GB download

Posted by Hell-In-A-Handbasket on August 15, 2006 at 4:24 PM (PDT)