|
paying extra to get rid of ads just tells them they can gouge you to remove something that never should have been there in the first place.
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 14:02 |
|
|
They need to pay licensing fees. There are two ways to do this: charge the customer or use ad revenue.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 23:39
|
|
|
Arkane posted:I'll be at a wedding on Saturday night, and would like to record a college football game from my hotel room. Is this game on a broadcast channel, or ESPN? If it's ESPN the best you're going to do in a hotel room is a lovely standard-def recording. And even being able to get that depends a lot on how weird your hotel's TV system is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:Anyone who's ever bitched about ads on hulu drat well better put up the extra $48 a year the no commercial option costs. There's no clearer way to drive home the message that ads suck and are ruining everything. Done. I'll give it a try and see how much better the experience is, or if I even notice that they're gone now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:Yeah, that's not the way things work. You pay for cable too and see ads, this is a OnDemand version of that. I am amazed that people don't realize that Tivoing and skipping the ads is a better experience then Hulu. You can watch it same day, skip the ads, and either pay about the same for No ads Hulu, or a lump sum. Hulu is a racket.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
blugu64 posted:I am amazed that people don't realize that Tivoing and skipping the ads is a better experience then Hulu. You can watch it same day, skip the ads, and either pay about the same for No ads Hulu, or a lump sum. Hulu is a racket. This is assuming you have cable. If you don't $12/mo for no-ads hulu is a hell of a lot cheaper than cable. Yes, there is a lot of stuff that Hulu doesn't have, but it's also a hell of a lot cheaper than even a basic cable package.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:This is assuming you have cable. If you don't $12/mo for no-ads hulu is a hell of a lot cheaper than cable. Yes, there is a lot of stuff that Hulu doesn't have, but it's also a hell of a lot cheaper than even a basic cable package. Or that you can get all the channels OTA. I can't get CW, and my daughter loves the Flash. Hulu has that, Comedy Central shows, Cartoon Network shows, Raw, and a couple of other assorted shows that our family watches. It would be nice if it was the same price as Netflix without ads, but it's just not. I did test it just now without ads, and it was seamless. I have a TiVo, and I do use it for OTA, but now with this option, I might just stream all non-CBS shows that I currently DVR. No need to skip ads at all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
It would be nice if Bing Rewards covered the $12 Hulu plus set up with their free month (especially since it just jumped in cost from 450 points to 680 points last month). When I was able to get 18 months of Netflix for $30, the credits were applied as monetary value (I actually start paying again this month so  ) When Netflix offered the ability to stream to more screens at the same time, I could have switched to 4 screens instead of two and I would have used up my credits in 12 months instead of 18. Hulu, on the other hand, only just credits as a month and never mentions the monetary value of my credits. I do not know what happens if you add services to your already paid for months (I am paid up for Hulu until June 2017).
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 02:57
|
|
|
Bizarro Kanyon posted:Hulu, on the other hand, only just credits as a month and never mentions the monetary value of my credits. I do not know what happens if you add services to your already paid for months (I am paid up for Hulu until June 2017). Reddit to the rescue. some human being posted:DONT DO IT IF YOU ARE ON BING REWARDS!
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
Time to state the obvious about Hulu ads. It is very interesting to watch it at someone else's place because the commercials are hyper tailored to you and you don't realize how much until that point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:Reddit to the rescue. Thanks for the information. I really do not find the commercials to be bad at all. It is extremely short (90 seconds at most) and it sometimes gives a quick piss break. I am mor than willing to pay $8 a month to watch major prime time shows like a DVR as well as movies. Comparing that to $100 for cable/satellite still makes Hulu with commercials as an amazing deal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
It really confuses me how angry people get about Hulu because it's not a Netflix clone. Advertisements are the price of getting episodes as they air rather than a year later. And there are still way fewer of them than on the much-more-expensive cable. Besides, don't you have a smartphone? Commercials are your chance to refresh the Awful Forums App! Or whatever! Chillax!! Bass Bottles fucked around with this message at 08:18 on Sep 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 08:16
|
|
|
Agreed and well said!
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 12:44
|
|
|
*shrug* I just loving hate commercials and if I want to take a poo poo or check the forums I have a pause button for that. Also it seems that most of the stuff I watch that I get commercials forced on me plays the same loving commercial over and over again. AMC's online streaming in particular is terrible for this. It's bad enough when it's one of the rare ads that I think is mildly clever, but loving horrible when it's a really annoying one. I also tend to watch the majority of TV in bed with my wife at the end of the day, so I'm comfortable and don't really want to get up and do something else while one of those loving insurance ads with the lady in the white apron plays for the thousandth time. Some people don't mind them, others hate them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Bass Bottles posted:It really confuses me how angry people get about Hulu because it's not a Netflix clone. Advertisements are the price of getting episodes as they air rather than a year later. And there are still way fewer of them than on the much-more-expensive cable. I don't like commercials and I don't want to see them on any service. If that means paying more for the service then I'm ok with that. I would rather have all of those bits of my life back to either watch more things I like or heck even do something productive as opposed to absorbing poo poo about insurance, body spray or diet pills. I think you confuse annoyance with anger by the way. Commercials don't make me angry, I just don't like them and unlike prior years where TV was the only option at least I can do something about it now. The business side of producing content is another persons problem. I understand the difficulties the content industry is facing but I don't work there, I'm just a consumer and I know what I like and what I don't. The Gunslinger fucked around with this message at 17:18 on Sep 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
I like watching 3 shows per hour rather than 2.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
porkface posted:I like watching 3 shows per hour rather than 2. This. Once you figure out that most non-HBO TV is either 20 minutes or 40 minutes long you really, really get annoyed at how much time you're wasting watching insurance ads.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
The Gunslinger posted:I don't like commercials and I don't want to see them on any service. If that means paying more for the service then I'm ok with that. This, 100 times. Once you get used to no advertisements, it's pretty jarring to have totally unrelated advertisements in the middle of your show. If I have the option to turn it off, I will take it. Which is why I've never bothered subscribing to Hulu. The only time I see advertisements on TV is at a family member's house where we're watching some event like the Macy's Parade or the Superbowl, New Years Eve stuff etc. I'm not thrilled about going back to a world where 1/3rd of the video is advertisements again. I would just throw away the TV at that point, I have literally anything else to do.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
The only time Hulu ads bother me is around election season. Every commercial break having some obnoxious attack ad is too much for me. That and having an ad spot right before the credits.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
It's obviously fine to not like advertisements but some people seem REALLY ANGRY that Hulu isn't Netflix. I just don't see the purpose in creating another Netflix competitor when they all have the same content anyway. Hulu does something different and gives you another option. I don't watch all that much TV anyway so I don't mind a few extra minutes to browse the internet while catching up on current episodes. If I weren't looking at my phone while ignoring commercials I'd probably just be looking at my phone anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 17:43
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:The only time I see advertisements on TV is at a family member's house where we're watching some event like the Macy's Parade or the Superbowl, New Years Eve stuff etc TiVo or some other dvr that lets you start watching while its recording. Added bonus, you can 2x between plays and knock out a game quick.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
Bass Bottles posted:It's obviously fine to not like advertisements but some people seem REALLY ANGRY that Hulu isn't Netflix. I just don't see the purpose in creating another Netflix competitor when they all have the same content anyway. Hulu does something different and gives you another option. I don't see anyone that worked up about it. What differentiates services is content and features. Advertisements are not content or features to me. I don't know how Hulu lacking them in any way lessens it or makes it a Netflix clone. Considering its owned by all of the content companies themselves, I suspect it will find a way to license its content and survive even if this ad free tier takes off in popularity. You spoke about options, that's what the ad free tier is. I don't see the problem if you're all about options. If you don't mind ads then fair enough but other people might feel differently.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
The Gunslinger posted:Considering its owned by all of the content companies themselves I suspect it will find a way to license its content and survive even if this ad free tier takes off in popularity. What will likely happen is carriage fees will rise again. That's why you see MSOs get into pissing contests with content providers and channels dropped for periods of time. So, you'll have cable people subsidize the streaming side. That will only work for so long though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:What will likely happen is carriage fees will rise again. That's why you see MSOs get into pissing contests with content providers and channels dropped for periods of time. So, you'll have cable people subsidize the streaming side. That will only work for so long though. That's already been happening up in Canada and I can't get worked up over it. The upward trajectory of cable bills over the years is a significant factor in the popularity of streaming services. Not the sole one by any means but economic conditions have lead to reduced discretionary spending and a fat cable bill is an easy target. Despite that fees have been continually hiked, up here anyway. I have every confidence the industry (content & carriers) will find a way through it and I'm sure they will do their best to pass the costs onto me. The music industry survived some rather absurd suicide attempts and worse conditions. That whole business model is going through a major restructuring over the next five years but that's not my problem to solve nor am I capable. I just like to watch TV shows and I don't like ads. If ad free stuff continues to proliferate then we'll probably see less shows made or more expensive internet. I'm ok with that as long as it all balances out fairly, there's a content glut right now anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
The Gunslinger posted:I don't see anyone that worked up about it. What differentiates services is content and features. Advertisements are not content or features to me. I don't know how Hulu lacking them in any way lessens it or makes it a Netflix clone. Considering its owned by all of the content companies themselves, I suspect it will find a way to license its content and survive even if this ad free tier takes off in popularity. I don't know why you think I'm against the ad-free tier? I think it's cool that they're offering it for people who care that much. Hulu would become a Netflix clone if they decided to make you wait a full year for new episodes. That would be the necessary trade-off to remove ads AND keep the subscription fee at $8/mo. The idea that they could still offer exactly what they do now, but for $8 is dumb and unrealistic. It's like when people complain about movies leaving Netflix as if paying a subscription fee means you own the entire Netflix library, and they're stealing from you. Also the "Hulu is owned by the money-gouging Networks" stuff is overblown considering how licensing works, and how many shows fail every year. If things were that good for Hulu you'd think they'd be able to afford better original programming than garbage like The Awesomes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
Bass Bottles posted:Hulu would become a Netflix clone if they decided to make you wait a full year for new episodes. That would be the necessary trade-off to remove ads AND keep the subscription fee at $8/mo. The idea that they could still offer exactly what they do now, but for $8 is dumb and unrealistic. It's like when people complain about movies leaving Netflix as if paying a subscription fee means you own the entire Netflix library, and they're stealing from you. I don't know why $8 is dumb but $11 is seen as fine but fair enough. I haven't done any research on the financial side of this nor do I care to. The armchair analyst stuff is fun when its light but when it gets into cost analysis I kind of tune out, especially considering I doubt anyone here is looking at financial statements and trying to break it down. Anyways I never argued Hulu would become a back catalog service nor do I think they need to offer the ad free tier for the same price as the regular subscription. For better or for worse its subsidized by ads so in that context it makes sense that it costs a bit more not to have them. quote:Also the "Hulu is owned by the money-gouging Networks" stuff is overblown considering how licensing works, and how many shows fail every year. If things were that good for Hulu you'd think they'd be able to afford better original programming than garbage like The Awesomes. You misunderstand. I think Hulu is kept on a short leash on purpose which has not exactly helped it compete and its easy to understand why when you look at who owns it. That being said the industry was smart enough to back off selling Hulu and I think that as the business model shifts they will start to embrace it more. I think the ad free tier is a good example of that. People have options now which is what matters IMO and more competition is always good for the consumer. If the ad free thing attracts some Netflix users and gets them to up their game a bit more that's fine with me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
cool I also agree that more options are good and the ad free tier is also good cool
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Netflix recently gave up a big catalog to Hulu of netflix-esque movies like Hunger Games and Transformers to focus on becoming an exclusive content producer/distributor like HBO; I'd argue that Hulu is trending more "netflix" than Netflix is these days. In ten years, being a 2009-era "netflix" is going to be a race-to-the-bottom commodity market as storage and bandwith just gets cheaper, and HBO/Netflix/Amazon Prime/Showtime/AMC is going to be where any actual profit is to still be had.
Hadlock fucked around with this message at 19:05 on Sep 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
Tyson Tomko posted:Time to state the obvious about Hulu ads. It is very interesting to watch it at someone else's place because the commercials are hyper tailored to you and you don't realize how much until that point. I only got the same five ads for poo poo I never would have watched or bought, so if they were tailored, they weren't doing a good job of it. Happily upgraded to ad-free! The biggest benefit of it really is time, though. Because of Netflix, I now think that a regular TV show is 20 or 40 minutes, not 30 or 60, and that colors my choices of what to watch when. Now Hulu matches up as well!
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
quote:Netflix recently gave up a big catalog to Hulu of netflix-esque movies like Hunger Games and Transformers to focus on becoming an exclusive content producer/distributor like HBO; I'd argue that Hulu is trending more "netflix" than Netflix is these days. In ten years, being a 2009-era "netflix" is going to be a race-to-the-bottom commodity market as storage and bandwith just gets cheaper, and HBO/Netflix/Amazon Prime/Showtime/AMC is going to be where any actual profit is to still be had. I agree Hadlock. It doesn't seem like a sustainable model with all of the consolidation thats happened inside of the content industry, they have too much leverage over streaming providers and a vested interest for those licensing costs to rise. In 2009 it cost Netflix 50 million to license its entire content library. In 2013 it was up to 2 billion. In 2014 it was up to 3 billion in just a year. Netflix has some pretty smart people there and I'm sure they saw the writing on the wall. The most optimistic user growth stats couldn't keep up with the licensing costs. It's actually cheaper for them to produce original content at this point and as a bonus original content tends to be a major factor in attracting new users.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
Yeah, I don't know why they did that. I don't think I've ever watched a movie on Hulu. (Though I almost never watch movies on Netflix, either.) If Hulu moves away from being a super-cheap streaming DVR I'll probably drop it. But original programming for the internet is getting better while good network television is getting harder to find so I'm not really sad about this trend.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
Did I read that right? Did Hulu recently introduce an option to watch TV without the ads? Maybe I missed that upstream.The Gunslinger posted:Netflix has some pretty smart people there and I'm sure they saw the writing on the wall. The most optimistic user growth stats couldn't keep up with the licensing costs. It's actually cheaper for them to produce original content at this point I'm sure they hired some data analysts and pretty quickly came to the conclusion that 50% of their bandwidth was going towards the same 200 TV shows like Battlestar Galactica, The Simpsons, West Wing, Sex and the City, etc etc and yeah they saw the writing on the wall. Also apparently documentaries are surprisingly popular on Netflix too. I'm thinking that Netflix and Amazon each are making as many "hit tv shows" as CBS or ABC are these days. Unsuprisingly, Netflix has started pumping out 10-20 documentaries a year, last time I checked, probably more now. Personally I'd rather watch a well made TV show than some big movie whose plot is designed to be translated in to as many languages as possible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:Did I read that right? Did Hulu recently introduce an option to watch TV without the ads? Maybe I missed that upstream. Yes, there's a $11.99 option that's inturruption free. Only caveat is that for 7 shows, they will have 15 second preroll ads and 30 second post credit ads. Those shows are New Girl, Scandal, How to Get Away With Murder, Grey's Anatomy, Once Upon a Time, Marvel's Agents of SHIELD and Grimm. Likely the contracts were structured in such a way to prevent the complete removal of ads. There will not be ads during the shows though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Whoa. I guess I can cross them off my poo poo list finally. $12 a month sounds like a lot but... how do I say this... this could be offset by going down one tier on my home internet subscription with the same net effect of video watching. It would be neat if they gave you an API key so you could feed it in to XBMC/Kodi directly instead of having to work through their interface, although I haven't used their website in years so maybe it's improved some.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
Silly Burrito posted:Get an HDHomerun, a router (can be local network, you don't need Internet) and use that with PVR software. There might be another quicker solution (USB antenna?), but that's just off the top of my head. Great Success! Hauppage tuner gets a great HD signal right to my laptop.  I even tried Hauppauge's "Scheduler" DVR, testing it for 1 minute, and it recorded it perfectly. The only downside is that it is a 99mb large file for 1 minute of recording. What I'm worried about if I try to record something for 3 hours is that the sheer size of the file causes problems. Should I record 1 hour at a time to try to minimize problems? What is paramount to me is making sure there is a recording, not necessarily the quality or splitting it into multiple files.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Great Success! Hauppage tuner gets a great HD signal right to my laptop. I'm not 100% sure, but the software itself may automatically split the file as needed (possibly in 4GB chunks). Is there anything in the preferences about it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Great Success! Hauppage tuner gets a great HD signal right to my laptop. HDTV is basically a bigass MPEG2. You're gonna see big file sizes. NTFS's maximum file size is something bonkers like 200 TB, so I wouldn't worry about it. It's just writing the transport stream to the hard drive, the entire recording isn't staying in memory or anything like that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 12:01
|
|
|
I wish I knew when the next Roku is coming out. I have thought about an Apple TV but if the Roku 4 comes out soon, I will wait for that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 23:41
|
|
|
Bizarro Kanyon posted:I wish I knew when the next Roku is coming out. I have thought about an Apple TV but if the Roku 4 comes out soon, I will wait for that. Only buy an AppleTV if it's the only streaming box you've ever owned. Otherwise the amount of poo poo it can't do will frustrate the gently caress out of you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 14:02 |
|
|
Bizarro Kanyon posted:I wish I knew when the next Roku is coming out. I have thought about an Apple TV but if the Roku 4 comes out soon, I will wait for that. Roku already refreshed their line this year. There isn't going to be a Roku 4 anytime soon. I'm actually more interested in the refreshed FireTV that's been spied in benchmarks. I picked up a FireTV stick awhile ago for my bedroom and I was pleasantly impressed by it. I'm getting the feeling that the best combo for streaming is a Chromecast and a FireTV. My Roku just feels so drat slow.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2015 04:45
|
|