Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Davide Pogue makes some good points about a 27-hour "day": http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/the-27-hour-day/

I agree with this 100% - even if for slightly different reasons.

Apple movie rentals aren't here yet, but I've tried the similar 24 hour service with Xbox Live. I almost always watch any movie I like twice, often catching up on details/plot lines I missed the first time. To do this with a 24hour rental, I found myself watching the movie later than I'd like so I could watch it a second time the following day.

With a 27 (ish) hour rental, this wouldn't be an issue. It'd certainly remove a big impediment from me renting movies online again.
 
I am amused at all of the effort people go through to tell me that if I don't like the 24 hour limit, just shut up and use Blockbuster. And then there are the folks who seem to think that I should not criticize the service without first using it. And there's that looney who is trying to compare the experience of a theater to downloading a movie rental. Or others who are thinking that COMCAST and COX have all the answers and that APPLE shouldn't bother trying to do it better. You'll never change our collective (parental) minds, so let's enjoy trying to solve the problem instead of denying there is a problem.

I'll say it again. I'm a parent who can't always sit through a 2-2 1/2 hour program. If I sit down and start watching at 8pm for 1 1/2 hours and then go to bed, I am going to have to begin watching the rest of the movie no later than 7pm the next day.

Now I'm going to get people complaining that I go to bed too early! Believe me, it's not unusual in a household full of young kids. And if you don't understand me, then you have just as much right to complain along with your pimply-faced friends.:D

On top of this, I made the mistake of buying HD-DVD and cannot rent from Netflix. So I'm earnestly trying to evaluate whether to spend $$$$$ on a bluray player or $$ on an APPLE player. In both cases I will be renting the content. I vowed that if HD-DVD loses, I will amortize my losses by waiting for a very inexpensive BLURAY player. But that is not likely to happen this year since they killed the only competition with a reasonable HW cost.


Howzat?
 
Too short

For me, it's not about fairness but convenience for the customer. My wife and I frequently rent movies from DirecTV, and store them on our DVR so that we can watch them over 2-3 nights (I believe DirecTV deletes the movie from our DVR after 30 days). We have kids that go to bed around 8:30, so we find it difficult to watch a movie in one sitting. This has also been a problem for me when watching movies while flying. I watch most of a movie on the outbound flight, but can't watch the rest 1-2 days later on the return flight. If this policy is designed to force people to rent a movie more than once, it's customer-unfriendly to say the least.
 
Ehh, there are times when a little more time would have been nice, but I've always finished.

Over all, not a deal breaker for me
 
I really honestly can't believe some of you rent from the iTunes Store for $3-$5..you pay a $4 premium for just being too lazy to go to a red box. Even if the movie isn't new, movie rental stores are cheaper and you get to watch it for longer.
 
I rented the Thomas Crown Affair 3 days ago, watched it the day i downloaded it and i still have it

Admittedly i fiddled around with the file and might have broken the rental coding by accident and now get to keep the film permanently, i'm not sure
 
I really honestly can't believe some of you rent from the iTunes Store for $3-$5..you pay a $4 premium for just being too lazy to go to a red box. Even if the movie isn't new, movie rental stores are cheaper and you get to watch it for longer.

It isn't laziness, it's convenience. There's a difference.

BJ
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.