I'm curious how often this has actually occurred in the App Store? I can't think of too many apps that Apple has released that have many competitors. Sure, there are the built in apps (which you can remove) but I certainly haven't seen any lack of To Do or weather apps on the App Store.
It's an issue for Spotify vs Apple Music for instance. Apple wants a cut of Spotify's fee, and also had APIs for Apple Watch etc only they themselves could use.
This is patently false. Most "streaming only" tv shows do get dvd/blue-ray releases. But this is a bad-faith argument anyway, imagine all the times this has been said about new formats of any kind. Streaming is an option and does not prevent people from owning things and it isn't hurting you so maybe just let the people who want to stream things...stream them?
I really have to ask: Is everyone in the comments apart of an organized troll? Because I feel like I’ve lost my mind reading most of these comments.
It seems like everyone here thinks torrenting is as easy and simple as using streaming services actually is, and that streaming is as complicated as torrenting actually is.
I used to torrent stuff all the time. Constantly. I have several HDs laying around filled with torrented movies and tv shows. Why? Because I was in college and couldn’t afford them.
The day I started making enough money to just sign up to services and buy copies of the movies I wanted I stopped torrenting forever. It’s easy and I’m not stealing.
> It seems like everyone here thinks torrenting is as easy and simple as using streaming services actually is, and that streaming is as complicated as torrenting actually is.
Would be weird if people here didn't find torrenting easy and simple. And depending where you get your torrents from, it could be significantly easier than streaming.
I don't think that follows. I'm technically savvy and am fully capable of torrenting files, but the amount of effort I have to exert to get it done problem free (and the amount I have in the past) means it is not easy or simple. Just because you have the ability to perform an action, even if you find it easy to do, does not mean it is intrinsically easy or simple.
And it definitely is never easier than opening an app on your smart tv/console/etc and clicking play.
> And it definitely is never easier than opening an app on your smart tv/console/etc and clicking play.
It is. For everyone who cares about privacy, security implications of using an app on a smart tv, for everyone who doesn't want to own a smart tv or a console, for everyone who already knows how to do it with torrents. And so on.
Easiness is subjective. Simplicity isn't, but streaming apps are not simpler in any way.
We're not discussing how a luddite is going to watch a movie at home. That's a completely different discussion. And if you are genuinely worried about privacy or security there are other ways around that that don't involve stealing.
This is what happens when management still thinks they can just instill "loyalty" in their employees and we'll happily putt along without raises as they slowly cut more and more benefits and throw more "pizza parties" to compensate.
Apple isn't doing anything to drive development of "free-to-use ad-driven apps that prey on user tracking data...", that would be people being unwilling to pay more than 99 cents for anything and believing subscriptions are a rip off.
I'm going to start this comment by saying that I don't agree with or approve of most of/anything Facebook has been doing. Security and Privacy are very important to me when it comes to the internet. I don't have a Facebook account.
So now I'd like to point out that the article has a couple mistakes. You don't actually need to provide anything but a phone number to use Facebook Messenger, but not many people know this, it seems. Related to this is a lot of hand-wringing about "oh no this will mean Facebook is watching us in all these apps now". Well, I'll address this in a second. I want to talk about this quote in the article:
"Matching Facebook and Instagram users to their WhatsApp handles could give pause to those who prefer keeping their use of each app compartmentalized."
This is already impossible. WhatsApp and Instagram collect information on you whether you have a Facebook account and whether or not you are logged in if you do have one. They know who are you are (this is the reason why I don't really care how encrypted WhatsApp is, I'm not going to use it). So if this really bothers people, well, I've got some bad news.
I used MoviePass when it was a little younger and just a warning to any considering it, there are a lot of hidden restrictions. I know some things could have changed since a couple years ago when I was using it but you were unable to see new movies and some movies would be restricted for their entire theater run.
They also presented it as a monthly service that you could cancel when you were done, but it was actually an annual service that you paid for on a monthly basis and trying to leave before the year was up would cost you. A lot.
There was also some weird business about having to send new cards (they sent you a card you had to use in person at the theater to pay for your ticket) without warning and until you got the new one you were unable to use the service you were paying for. In addition to that, sometimes the cards would just not work. This happened to me on at least 3 occasions.
Also take into consideration, there are some movies you'll want to see in 3d (maybe) or IMAX (more likely) and these are completely excluded. And if you're like me and you like to buy tickets ahead of time with fandango so you can skip lines and be sure the movie you're going to see isn't sold out, using this service means giving up that convenience.
Granted, this is all a much better deal now that it's $10 instead of $30.
On the relaunched site today it says the restrictions are:
You can see one movie every day.
You can see each movie one time.
You can see only standard 2D screenings.
It even points out you can go on opening night and the T+Cs point out there is a month to month plan now, but it's a bit confusing.
I do think it's a good offer for $10/month. Cineworld in the UK offers something similar for about £20/month (~$25), but also has an annual commitment and is restricted to one chain of cinemas, none of which are close to me.
I think that's likely. The combination of the guaranteed income and the fairly low chance that many subscribers will actually use their pass every day means it isn't a big risk for the theaters.
Well, and the likelihood that the subscriber will bring at least one friend who would pay full price for a ticket makes this less risky. Also, popcorn and other concessions are the real profit drivers for theaters, so losing a bit on tickets isn't as big a deal as it might seem.
I used it in the US for $30 for two years with my wife and we were quite happy with it. We went about 4 times a week, not all theatres were supported, and their mandatory webapp sucked big time, esp. their GPS location tracker. I often had to walk around 100m until the app let me get the ticket.
Other than that a good deal. More people should go to the theatres.
