User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » Speculation and Rumors »

Apple OnDemand TV


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
Apple OnDemand TV
Thread Tools
davidbaldwin
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Florida
 
2006-02-26, 01:02

I original wrote a thread about Apple having an IPTV service, while that seemed logical at the time, but with the realease of Apple TV Show download service via iTunes, I have seem to reworked where Apple might go with a TV service and I thought it needed a new thread as it is two similar, but different ideas.

Apple will NEVER realease a "DVR" in the form that we think of one today..
Recording telvision from a source, just like a VCR.

No
Steve Jobs thinks the Cable commanies are Monopolies (which they are), thus it seems illogical that they would ever realease anything that would get more cable subcribers.
Plus
Television Networks HATE DVR boxes. Why would they like people "skipping" commercials..
If Apple released a DVR I could see every TV network they have partenered with to instantly pull out of iTunes. They are not going to support a company who is hampering on there profits.
So, even though you might LOVE to have a TIVO-killer, it's not giong to be from Apple...

Do not expect the "updated" Mac-Mini to even have a TV Tuner.

Instead
Apple is going to create a whole new TV service, they are acually already in the creation process.
Apple has resently added TV shows to the iTunes music store.
This is important, because everyday they are adding more TV networks to there line up.
At the time of this writing Apple currently has 13 networks in the iTunes Music Store. There is also ABC, NBC, and rumors of CBS. If CBS and FOX were added, all Major broadcast networks would be added and the service would be Gold.

Apple will continue to add TV content to the iTunes music store until they are satisfied with the number of TV networks they have established relationships with.

Then
Apple will unviiel a Completly OnDemand TV Experience
This would be a completely different way to watch TV.
There would no longer be "Channels" everything would be OnDemand.
This service would work very similar to the way the iTunes Music Store Serive works

Apple would integrate it completely into the Front Row Software so every show availible could be watched at the touch of a button.
All TV shows/broadcasts would display in a List that can be changed, for instance one could browse by what is on, what shows are newest (like iTunes), or by Network, Show, Genere, etc., etc,
Apple would most likely opt for an "all you can download" price model most likely costing around the $69 dollar mark and and extra $10 if one wanted the HD Programming. The reason apple would do this is that TV is not like Music or Movies where people buy the things they really like, TV is something that people watch a lot of different content and each show usually comes on everyweek. This could add up to a huge bill at $1.99 a pop even for the causual TV watcher
All TV shows would be in 640x480 where the HD programming might start out at 480p, then 720p, and then eventually (as bandwith increases) 1080p. If someone opts for the HD networks all of the programming will instantly be replaced (when availible) with the HD programming eliminating confusion.
All TV shows would be availible 1 minute after the broadcast ends and would be Commercial Free (2nd best selling piont)
If one wanted to watch a show live/delayed (shows, news, sports, etc.) they would have to watch the commercials.
At the price point, you would recive 1 live stream, and as many downloads to up to 5 computer as you wanted, or as many Apple TV Boxes that you wanted.

Any show can be downloaded for an unlmiited amount of time (as long as you have the service) and can be put/streamed to up to 5 computer and put on as many iPods as you want.

Having this set up would be the Best for the networks because
1) Having the commercials on Live/Delayed broadcasts would make it easier on the networks because they wouldn't have to show a blank screen to just Apple users, and they would also have the revenues of the commercials
2) Nobody watches the commercials once it's on there DVR. Something like 60% of US hosehoulds have a DVR and that number is quickly growing, so why keep beating around the bush?
3) Cable Companies dont pay Networks ANYTHING because the Network should be Happy that they are on the cable network. Cable companies also have to pay for the infrastructor which Apple dosn't have to since it already exsits and your already paying for Broadband internet service. Under this Direct over the Net model from Apple, Apple could keep something like 10-15% like they do on iTunes and then divide the rest by the most downloaded networks. So, the better/more content that a network produces, the more likely they are to recive a bigger check from Apple at the end of the mounth.
4) The Network providers are going to have to respond quickly to changes in technology if they do not want to suffer the same fate the Photo Labs have (or the ones that did not embrace the digital era). If they do not, there advertisers will continuly stop there televsion adertisments. The more people with DVRs or Bittorrnet, the less people watching the Ads.

Why this is best for us:
1) Possible cheaper than Cable and more choices in HD content.
2) Increadible amound of Indepent content never availble before.
3) Commericals already removed, so there is no FastForwarding required
4) Wont have to pay any more for a show to be on my iPod and to take it with me, it will automaticly be there for me.
5) You would have the ablitily to download anyshow, anytime. Just like the iTunes Mucis Store is with TV shows, you would no longer have to wait for a show to be on a re-run, if you forget to record it or watch it, all you would have to do is find the show and download it (downloading would take place in the background). Anougher great feature about this would be if you had a buddy that told you how great "LOST" is and you had never seen it before, you could easlity start from the begining of the story, with the 1st episode.

The iPod would dirve the service as more and more people have iPods more and more people would prefer to take all there shows with them and just like the iTunes Music Store, the only way to do that would be sining up for Apple's Service.

Some obsicals to this service are:
1) Bandwith. Apple, yes, would be spending a fortune on Bandwith and this does present quite an obsticle, but I think Apple could manage a way to do it especially since there is roughly 2 songs downloaded every Second from the iTunes Music Store....
In all reality though, the point of the service would NOT be to make money, but to Sell more iPods! YAY! "Of course I want to put all my TV shows that I didn't get the chance to watch last night on my iPod." "Now I can watch all my TV shows on the beach and have it instantly updated."
2) Download times. This is a current obsticle that I belive Apple is trying to figure out...
I remember Apple working on some new streaming technology, I dont remember where I read it though...
For all of us with the Cable and DSL the 640x480 show shouldn't take too long in H.264, even so, one could opt for the lower quility 320x240 (iTunes) and it would still look better than analog TV. This would download much faster..
Now the new school kids with 3G Internet Services such as Verizon Fios they would be able to download Full HD conent with no thought at all to time.
Schedualed downloads would also help a bundle, because I could just set a show to download as soon as it's availible or at a certain time, and I would have it when I needed it.
Anouther possible would be to add more servers around the US, this would/should increase the download speed as there is a shorter distance between me and the servers.
I've ginen some Ideas to how Apple would conquer the dowload time, I am not really sure how they would do this though...
3) Local "Porgramming" like the Local News would be a challenge for a while. This would most likley be unavlible with the realease of the service which would be a major bummer to most people. Apple would slowly role out local programming as quickly as possilble. Apple would most likely focos on getting as many local channles and not worrying about it being in HD until they had all/most of them added.

Right now, would be the best and the worst time to realease such a service...
Best, because Apple has recently released a Video iPod and is expected to realease THE video iPod in the omming mouths...Having a service like this would put any iPod that played video at the top of everybody's "TO BUY" list. The devices from Echo Star and other devices that work with TiVo would be no match for any iPod that plays video and the Apple OnDemand TV service. It's also a great time because braodband speeds are increasing everyday and markets for 3rd generation Internet such as fiber-optics are grwoing everyday, so everyday download times would become less of an issue...
Worse, Everyday more and more people want EVERYTHING in HD, this is bad for Apple because it means more bandwith and increaed Download speeds, hence the extra $10.

I can see Apple realease a Front Row Apple TV Box, this would be similar to a DVR box but would have no TV tunner and be for full use on with the Service. The Service could be used with any Apple computer with Front Row, but having a dedicated box would make ones life a bit easier, especially if they had an Apple notebook.
You would mostly likely see a Unltra thin box with an Apple remote currently used with Front Row (no number buttons needed because there are no channles). Probobly a 250 GB hard drive and an HDMI connection with Adapters to go to oldershool connections. Also Airport would be built in (maybee 802.11n by then) and Bluetooth (Apple would later add the ability to transmit a TV show in a smaller format to a Bluetooth cell phone with iTunes). The TV box would work "BEST" with an Apple computer (drinvg Mac sales) but would also work with PCs
Since this is a device and not a computer, you might even find it in Retailers like Circuit City (which would be an awesome achivment, considering that Circuit City sells more TVs than any other Retailer.)

Apple would also give you the ablitly to see any content downloaded on any computer or TV box in your house, since your only allowed one stream, you would also be allowed to view the same stream that anouther computer in your house is watching. It would be an awesome networking expericne, being able to view anyting in your house from either a computer to a TV box or vise versa. It would also give me the ablity to easy copy programs automaticly to a computer/device, so if I was taking my laptop on the road with no internet, I could take all my recorded shows with me, and if I hit a hotspot anywhere, I could download more shows directly from Apple. So, my slingbox would become useless with Apple's new service.

Then there's the iPod that plays video, which would be the number one selling point of the service. Having all of my shows with me all the time. This service would also incorporate well with a WiFi iPod that everybody talks about all the time, just like my Laptop I would be able to download an show while on vacation directly from Apple making the iPod a Truely Mobile TV. Having EVERY show availible from iTunes INSTANTLY avlible to my iPod would be incredible...



Apple's next Fronteer would be downloding of Movies, which would work similar to Music, where you would buy the Movie (in 720p or maybee even 1080p) for say $9.99 (since Apple likes those 9s) and you would keep it forever blah blah blah.....but all that is for anouther Post sometime in the future....
I could bet a Million dollors, however, that the first movie(s) will be Disney or Pixar films
  quote
MINK
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
 
2006-02-26, 07:29

On demand TV from a small number of big companies will never work long term.

People never DEMANDED that crap, they just watch it because it's the only choice. As internet TV spreads and more people make their own content, the need for big channels decreases and their shows look distant and irrelevant, not to mention the issue of "on demand advertising" being a total oxymoron.

TV only worked because you were forced to watch the adverts and too lazy to turn the thing off, you watch "in case" something good comes on that you can't miss.

With ondemand TV, you don't have to watch crap "just in case" because you can demand something else.

But if you are choosing, then the "choosing" part of your brain is activated and you will stop watching tv because you aren't hypnotised into halfsleep any more.

Mark my words! TV is dead.
  quote
World Leader Pretend
Ruling teh World
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Boston, MA
 
2006-02-26, 12:53

It does start to look like TV as we know it is dying off... It will be interesting how we will watch TV in the future!

The first post is also one of the longest single posts I have ever seen!
  quote
Robo
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
 
2006-02-26, 14:53

I guess I'm with MINK. I feel that "video podcasting" could be huge. I'd be able to, say, watch shows about video games that didn't completely suck (like G4TV does). They'd be lower budget, but that's not a bad thing. In fact, I think it would be kinda fun to produce an internet "show."

It'd be like the blogging revolution (I hate to say that, because it's super-cliche, but it's true). I think people will still watch "professional" TV, but the amatuer "stations" will be perfect for niches and underground crowds - those not served by current cable.

and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong
  quote
Doxxic
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Amsterdam
 
2006-02-26, 15:28

I think the most interesting point in your story is that Apple is not going to bring DVR to their Macs (the rest seems rather obvious I think) and I totally agree with you for all the reasons you gave.
  quote
TednDi
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Warm Glow of Steve's RDF
 
2006-02-26, 15:39

Here We go!!!

Ma Ma Ma MAX HEADROOM!!!

  quote
davidbaldwin
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Florida
 
2006-02-26, 20:58

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboman
I guess I'm with MINK. I feel that "video podcasting" could be huge. I'd be able to, say, watch shows about video games that didn't completely suck (like G4TV does). They'd be lower budget, but that's not a bad thing. In fact, I think it would be kinda fun to produce an internet "show."

It'd be like the blogging revolution (I hate to say that, because it's super-cliche, but it's true). I think people will still watch "professional" TV, but the amatuer "stations" will be perfect for niches and underground crowds - those not served by current cable.
I briefly mentioned All of the independent content that would be availible to everyone directly to there TV. The best part would be that the Independents would be able to compete directly with the Big Boys and recive a percentage of the pie (equiling there download percentage). So, in theory an indepnendent producter could get more money than a Professional TV Network. With the Independent Producers getting the same download percentage every would be forced to compete. The Independents would also get more money where they could spend it on upgrading there equipment or creating more content.

I personally like watching TV. As long as it's good TV. I get watching a show and I dont mind watching something in my free time...

This service would be different than just "video blogs" because you would have the ablitily to watch things LIVE. Even though the LIVE stuff would have commercials, you would still be able to watch that Football game at the same time everyone else does. Video Blogging cant do that. Of course, once the broadcast has ended the commercials will be removed from the "download" version....

No demand for TV content?
Yea, I suppose thats why Millions of people will pay $1.99 for a TV show.
TV is big buisness and it's not going to go away, but it is giong to change, and with competition for cash, I suppose it will change for the better.

-Baldwin
  quote
matt
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Phoenixville, PA
Send a message via AIM to matt Send a message via Yahoo to matt  
2006-02-26, 21:22

good points (initial post) but i hardly beleive that 60% of tv watchers have DVRs. i don't beleive that for a second. namely because i have asked around, before i read this post, and not as many people have them as i thought. plus DVRs are not available in every cable market segment.
  quote
doublem9876
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: In Seine
Send a message via AIM to doublem9876  
2006-02-26, 21:40

DavidBaldwin, you have written the longest post I have ever seen!
  quote
evan
Formerly CoachKrzyzewski
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Send a message via AIM to evan  
2006-02-26, 21:55

everything was good except the 60% DVR "stat"... that's completely unreasonable. it's probably closer to 60% of americans have cable/sat.!
  quote
ronmexico
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
 
2006-02-26, 22:03

I don't agree with the original post. The pay per show format is good in small quantities, but I do not believe people would want to pay for each show every time they watch tv. In fact, I heard a stat once that says the average viewer of the weather channel watches for 30 min at a time. No one watches intently for 30 min. People turn it to this channel and leave it there while they are working around the house for a half an hour. By buying each show, you can no longer casually watch tv...you paid for it, you better watch it. Most people enjoy flipping through channels, and like the fact that it feels "free" to watch tv on a sunday afternoon. If apple did a DVR type device, they could potentially make it so that you cannot fast forward through commercials.
  quote
torifile
Less than Stellar Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Durham, NC
Send a message via AIM to torifile  
2006-02-26, 22:36

So, Apple's going to eat the cable companies' lunches, right? How are people going to get the content into their homes without cable companies? The broadband companies are already trying to get google to pay for some of their bandwidth. Can you imagine what they'd try to do to Apple if they're directly competing with them?

Well, we've already seen what some of the media companies want to do. This isn't really tenable.
  quote
MINK
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
 
2006-02-27, 05:23

ronmexico.... exactly right....

the pay per view model just aint TV. it's video on demand. i never demand advertising or crap old movies. Now I don't even have a TV or miss it now it's gone.

i guess "channel guides" are the only places you can put advertising, and i would rather use independent channel guides from fellow humans than go to iTunesTV or whatever they call it. People like finding/making something cool and sending it to their mates...

this whole thing centers on the fact that enough people make their own content for FUN and don't need $1.99. There is already enough entertaining, free of charge (and free of advertising) video on the internet. Lots of it was made with iMovie. It doesn't need big budget production or distribution.

That's why Steve makes creative hardware. In a goldrush, it's best to make tents and spades.
  quote
davidbaldwin
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Florida
 
2006-02-27, 23:31

Quote:
Originally Posted by matt
good points (initial post) but i hardly beleive that 60% of tv watchers have DVRs. i don't beleive that for a second. namely because i have asked around, before i read this post, and not as many people have them as i thought. plus DVRs are not available in every cable market segment.
I appologize, I assumed with out using Google...
a Major No NO!

Ok, for a more realistic, look, or rather what most sights pull up when you use Google:
80-90% of Americans have Cable or Satilite Television.
5-10% of Americans have a DVR

So, this still proves a point...
Apple isn't going to make a DVR, because it hasn't caught on....yet.
but, with DirectTV, DIsh, and The cable commanies giving them away, I'm sure it eventually will catch on....
just like HDTV.

The media outlets know this and eventually they are giong to have to find some other form or revenue..
so, the fact that I put 60% is rather irrelevent..
to the Media Outlets, they need to start thinking like there are CURRENTLY 60% DVR, not 60% in a couple of years.

I just love that TiVo advertisment right in the Middle of "War of the Worlds" Dont you?

Have a Good Day,
-Baldwin
  quote
davidbaldwin
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Florida
 
2006-02-27, 23:39

Quote:
Originally Posted by ronmexico
I don't agree with the original post. The pay per show format is good in small quantities, but I do not believe people would want to pay for each show every time they watch tv. In fact, I heard a stat once that says the average viewer of the weather channel watches for 30 min at a time. No one watches intently for 30 min. People turn it to this channel and leave it there while they are working around the house for a half an hour. By buying each show, you can no longer casually watch tv...you paid for it, you better watch it. Most people enjoy flipping through channels, and like the fact that it feels "free" to watch tv on a sunday afternoon. If apple did a DVR type device, they could potentially make it so that you cannot fast forward through commercials.
Saying something like that just makes you look stupid.
You obviosly did not read the original post...
but, just in cause you did and you misunderstood (which theres nothing wrong with that, because I do it all the time), let me rephrase...

This service would not be "OnDemand Pay-Per-View" it would be an OnDemand Subscription....
You can think of this as kinda like the Napster-to-Go Service, but For TV, with Anyshow availbile to Download and Any Live broadcast availible.
I put in the original post that this service would most likely cost $69 for EVERY Broadcast (think of it as having EVERY channel, plus original episodes no longer broadcasted for 1 price), and maybee having the HD Broadcasts costing $10 more.

This is NOT a PPV model where, Like iTunes, you have to Pay for everyshow.....
even though this isn't a PPV model, a PPV model has been pretty successful on iTunes...
but, I agree with you, nobody would like that because yes, I like watching the weather channel for 5 minutes let alone 30 minutes.

Since I searched Google and around 80-90% of US households have Cable or Satilite TV, I suppose for the 10-20% of Americans it is "Free", but ESPN cant be free.

WHY THE HELL would someone BUY a DVR that would NOT let them skip through the commercials?
HELL NO!
Thats why I Love DVR..
I only have to watch the Funny commericals!

-Baldwin
  quote
davidbaldwin
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Florida
 
2006-02-27, 23:40

Quote:
Originally Posted by MINK
ronmexico.... exactly right....

the pay per view model just aint TV. it's video on demand. i never demand advertising or crap old movies. Now I don't even have a TV or miss it now it's gone.

i guess "channel guides" are the only places you can put advertising, and i would rather use independent channel guides from fellow humans than go to iTunesTV or whatever they call it. People like finding/making something cool and sending it to their mates...

this whole thing centers on the fact that enough people make their own content for FUN and don't need $1.99. There is already enough entertaining, free of charge (and free of advertising) video on the internet. Lots of it was made with iMovie. It doesn't need big budget production or distribution.

That's why Steve makes creative hardware. In a goldrush, it's best to make tents and spades.
I NEVER said this was a PPV model...

-Baldwin
  quote
davidbaldwin
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Florida
 
2006-02-27, 23:54

Quote:
Originally Posted by torifile
So, Apple's going to eat the cable companies' lunches, right? How are people going to get the content into their homes without cable companies? The broadband companies are already trying to get google to pay for some of their bandwidth. Can you imagine what they'd try to do to Apple if they're directly competing with them?

Well, we've already seen what some of the media companies want to do. This isn't really tenable.
I see your point and it is a very valid one....when I think about it Time Warner owns a Cable Company too...
hmm.
I honestly dont know, but here is my spew anyway...

The Cable companies are going to go out of Buisness...
3rd Generation Internet Serivce (aka Fiber Optics) are giong to put them there
The cable companies could survive if they became just what you said...A Broadband company.

Plus, what can the Cable company do about it?
Nothing.
People are free to use there Bandwith in the way they want (ok, as long as it's not illigal).
If they attempted to block there users from using it people would either sue them or a better idea would be to switch to a different Broadband company.
I can see all the cable companies fighting Apple on this one...but they would eventually lose the battle...
the Cable company would have the choice of offering Internet Access or not offering Internet Access.

Again, I dont know, I just like to see how everything would work...

-Baldwin
  quote
davidbaldwin
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Florida
 
2006-02-28, 00:08

I suppose offering this service would not be a Major Blow at the time that it would be released.

First off, Apple would not have (in the begining), every channel in the current cable line up...
I suppose in the begining the Indepents would pick up where the other networks have left off...

This service also would NOT be a success over night, I can see it slowly growing like HDTV...
which would be a great thing for Apple with the switch over from Cable connection to Fiber Optics..
and the switchover from SD to HD TV..

Apple could even promote getting a Fiber Optics connection by offering HD channles only with Fiber Optic connections and there would be no additional fee for the HD channels. (this would simplifiy the price model and also make the viewers expecirnce much better)....

Now, I guess I'm looking into the not so distant future when there are Fiber Optic Internet streaching in more places than Cable TV.

So, I suppose if the service was released that The Cable Commanies would be worried at first but after 6 mouths or so they would stop worring, because they would think, like the networks did with DVR, that it would be a success overnight...
I cannot recall anything in Entertanment Equipment that was a success overnight...

Microsoft thought there "Media Center Edition" PC Expericne would a be a total success overnight..
I have people come into Circuit City and they dont understand why they would ever hook up a computer to a TV.

This is why Apple would call it a "Front Row Set-top Box" not a Computer...
But, Apple would have to realize that change is slow in the Entertanment Equipmnet field...not like the Computer/Mp3 Player Field...

-Baldwin
  quote
RyanPaige
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
 
2006-02-28, 00:11

Apple isn't going to make a DVR because 5-10% of households is considered not having caught on yet, but they are going to make an entirely new device that requires adding a relatively expensive subscription to get less than what they get now?

Why would FOX go along with this when they own such a significant stake in DirecTV? Why would Time Warner go along with this when they have significant cable holdings? You've knocked off a significant portion of what people get with their cable systems if you take away Time Warner programs and channels and FOX programs and channels.

Inventing an entirely new way for people to watch television seems like a quick way to lose a lot of money. While perhaps the future of broadcast television, it's not exactly a product that's ready for prime time, as it were.

And 480p is, by definition, not HD.

And, I have FIOS, and it isn't fast enough to download true HD content in a matter of minutes. It would still be time consuming (An episode of Lost on iTunes now takes several minutes).

I think it's something that is likely what the future holds (and it would be something I would be moderately interested in when the bugs were worked out), but we're going to see some interim products before then.

Last edited by RyanPaige : 2006-02-28 at 00:22.
  quote
Banana
is the next Chiquita
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
 
2006-02-28, 00:22

FWIW, I have observed various media companies trying to consolidate their products. Cable companies would try to push bundles including phone, internet, and cable TV all in one (one company, one bill, one service slogan). Qwest (a telco) is trying to sell DirectTV along with DSL and phone bundle, too.

So do I think cable will die off? No.

Telco companies will wither? No.

Network companies? Possibly, but unlikely.

This won't be quite same as "BetaMax v. VHS" because there's lot of companies pushing their preferred method, be it DSL, cable, FO, wireless, or some kind of alien technology so the market will be full with fairly diverse offering. (This doesn't necessarily mean the present monopolies will be broken, as I believe they are created by a different set of factors)

The bottom line? I am not going to wait for a Tivo-killer or a TV-killer. I really don't think TV will be mircosofted.
  quote
MINK
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
 
2006-02-28, 05:45

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidbaldwin
I NEVER said this was a PPV model...

-Baldwin
So what?

Video on demand is not TV and is very bad for big TV companies even though they don't really know it yet. Watch them get all confused and litigious just like the record labels (and the canal companies vs railways etc etc etc etc etc throughout history)

TV is turning your brain OFF and flicking channels, and watching programs at the same time as everyone else. that is the only reason it feels sociable even though the viewing experience is isolating.

VOD is turning ON your brain and making decisions, and totally timeshiftable which kinda destroys the watercooler banter.

whether PPV or subscription, the big TV companies will struggle to adapt, because they think people actually LIKE THEIR CRAP, while all the time we were just vegetating and we had no choice.

Here in Lithuania I have no TV and i enjoy going to other people's houses and seeing what they have downloaded. It's more fun. We talk about it. We pause and replay it. We go to the toilet whenever we like. It's great
Now if i go somewhere with a TV the room seems kinda dead as everyone respectfully shuts up and obeys the demon box.
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cum sEE my SiLLy tHreaD and mOCK mE 4 it!!!1!1! chaos123x Speculation and Rumors 90 2006-10-05 13:22
Jobs is on the cover of Time SKMDC General Discussion 22 2006-04-29 12:50
Press event set for Oct. 12th propheci Speculation and Rumors 1344 2005-10-12 14:35
OSX Subscription? chaos123x Speculation and Rumors 4 2005-06-09 09:56


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:24.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2020, AppleNova