You only asked what country makes it a right to have internet access. What does that have to do with rape, genocide, slavery, or piracy? I was answering your single question. Several countries have made it a right to have internet access.
I think this is a win for Netflix. An artificial 28 day window does suck, I will agree with that. But personally, my fiance and I are not so worked up over seeing a new movie that we planned on netflixing that an extra 28 days is going to matter. If we want to see a movie bad enough/it seems worth it we'll hit the theater. Otherwise, we just add it to our queue and wait for it to be available. If this move gets more new releases available for streaming after the 28 day wait period, that's fantastic news to me. I think (hope) Netflix is just using this as a foot-in-the-door scenario. I doubt it'll be difficult for them to show WB how much opportunity they are missing out on by not just making this stuff available immediately.
And yet, here you are trying to generate some discussion on what's wrong with the format. Isn't it great that you potentially have a voice in it instead of being fed the content in a way you have no control over besides consume or not-consume?
I am pretty sure Steve Jobs has went on the record as saying something to the effect of "Streaming music services will never be something the general public cares about."
Granted, his/Apple's position could have changed on that but maybe they just don't see any threat from these streaming apps, are not working on a competitor to it, and didn't block is because they aren't afraid of it.
If you want to look at a game company that understands its customers and how to make money, take a look at Valve & Steam. It's amazing how easy that make it to impulse-buy new video games by offering frequent sales where you get huge value packs of games for as low as $5-$10.
Reading over the quick blurb on the WSJ, it actually contains a quote from the "head of a P2P trade organization" which tells people to keep their software up to date for security features. The quote by Arts+Labs guy includes "But if you insist, he says to take the time to understand how the software you downloaded works."
I definitely agree with the general idea of this post, but I don't think the WSJ article is really that big a piece of FUD. It seems more to be saying "P2P could be used to share things you don't want to share if you aren't careful." I have a hard time not agreeing with that stance.
BestNetTech has not posted any stories submitted by Jim J.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I wonder
You only asked what country makes it a right to have internet access. What does that have to do with rape, genocide, slavery, or piracy? I was answering your single question. Several countries have made it a right to have internet access.
Calm down dude you're going rabid here.
Re: Re: Re: I wonder
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_access#Internet_access_as_right
Netflix User that isn't mad
I think this is a win for Netflix. An artificial 28 day window does suck, I will agree with that. But personally, my fiance and I are not so worked up over seeing a new movie that we planned on netflixing that an extra 28 days is going to matter. If we want to see a movie bad enough/it seems worth it we'll hit the theater. Otherwise, we just add it to our queue and wait for it to be available. If this move gets more new releases available for streaming after the 28 day wait period, that's fantastic news to me. I think (hope) Netflix is just using this as a foot-in-the-door scenario. I doubt it'll be difficult for them to show WB how much opportunity they are missing out on by not just making this stuff available immediately.
Anxiously waiting The Anti-Mike's spin on this one.
Re:
"Keep up the good work Mike."
Hey at least you said SOMETHING I can agree with. I give you a point for that.
Re: speculation much
And yet, here you are trying to generate some discussion on what's wrong with the format. Isn't it great that you potentially have a voice in it instead of being fed the content in a way you have no control over besides consume or not-consume?
Or maybe they just aren't at all afraid of Spotify
I am pretty sure Steve Jobs has went on the record as saying something to the effect of "Streaming music services will never be something the general public cares about."
Granted, his/Apple's position could have changed on that but maybe they just don't see any threat from these streaming apps, are not working on a competitor to it, and didn't block is because they aren't afraid of it.
All speculation of course...
Valve's Attitude
I think it's worth pointing out that Valve has had this opinion all along.
http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/news/valve-pirates-are-just-underserved-customers/?biz=1&page=1
If you want to look at a game company that understands its customers and how to make money, take a look at Valve & Steam. It's amazing how easy that make it to impulse-buy new video games by offering frequent sales where you get huge value packs of games for as low as $5-$10.
WSJ story hardly registers on the FUD-o-meter
Reading over the quick blurb on the WSJ, it actually contains a quote from the "head of a P2P trade organization" which tells people to keep their software up to date for security features. The quote by Arts+Labs guy includes "But if you insist, he says to take the time to understand how the software you downloaded works."
I definitely agree with the general idea of this post, but I don't think the WSJ article is really that big a piece of FUD. It seems more to be saying "P2P could be used to share things you don't want to share if you aren't careful." I have a hard time not agreeing with that stance.