Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Cheaper Apple TV+ With Ads Plan a Possibility, Recent Job Hires Suggest
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ads are less objectionable in printed content. They don't flash. They don't take up your time. They don't unexpectedly interrupt you (unless it's one of those postcard-sized inserts that fall out of a magazine).
I've never had pay-TV.
lol you are all to blame. If people just point blank refused to use a service with ads then it would stop. Apple TV hardware isn’t cheap. Apple TV+ now isn’t cheap. They could do £4.99pm with no ads of any kind and STILL make millions in profit if they did no upfront payment for the creators and gave them £2.50pm split between all the creators.
No no no no no!
Where did I leave my tri-corner hat and black sails?
We've come full circle. Jobs's original winning argument was to make it as easy and pleasant to use as piracy without any of the downsides.
It's very clear that philosophy has been lost. And it's still true. Time to teach them the hard way again I guess.
And I say this as someone who hasn't pirated a thing in many years, and has given Apple far more money than they deserve based on how much I use it and how they treat me.
Where did I leave my tri-corner hat and black sails?
We've come full circle. Jobs's original winning argument was to make it as easy and pleasant to use as piracy without any of the downsides.
It's very clear that philosophy has been lost. And it's still true. Time to teach them the hard way again I guess.
And I say this as someone who hasn't pirated a thing in many years, and has given Apple far more money than they deserve based on how much I use it and how they treat me.
Yes, but they still exist. Again, I understand why people may not like ads (I'll add especially in television/streaming) but don't understand why some think content with ads should automatically be "free." A pay/ad hybrid model has been the norm in content delivery for ages.
Just because something has been a certain way for any period of time doesn’t mean we need to accept and be fine with it. Even if it’s something as trivial as this.
This is not really about accepting it or not. In this case, people don't have to accept ads as they have a choice of going with ads or ad-free. Again, I am not questioning why people may not like ads. I am questioning why they feel content with ads should absolutely be free.
I mean, I don't think paid content with ads should be illegal, I just don't personally accept it, and won't pay for it if the ads interrupt the content.
I'm not 100% consistent with not paying for content with ads. It's impossible to fully escape ads in paid content. DVDs and movie theaters often automatically play ads before the movie starts. Even the current Apple TV+ plays ads/trailers for other content on the service when you start a video. And the movie/show may have product placement.
I wasn't trying to imply that you or anyone else was suggesting that paid content with ads should actually be illegal. I get that people prefer content without ads and would also rather get something for "free" but I just don’t find a pay/ad hybrid model for content out of line.
While content with ads for free can be desirable, I don't think it absolutely SHOULD be free just because it has ads.
I know why people don't like ads and I know why people like things for free but I don’t know why people think content with ads absolutely SHOULD be free.