NBC to Offer Free Video Download Service

Damocles the Elder writes "Apparently NBC realized that people on the internet do watch TV, because after breaking up with Apple over iTunes pricing schemes, they're setting up their own free service." From the article "NBC first contracted with Amazon to offer its programs for sale to downloading devices like MP3 players. Now it is establishing its own downloading service, which NBC executives say they expect to become a viable competitor to iTunes. "With the creation of this new service, we are acknowledging that now, more than ever, viewers want to be in control of how, when and where they consume their favorite entertainment," said Vivi Zigler, the executive vice president of NBC Digital Entertainment. "Not only does this feature give them more control, but it also gives them a higher quality video experience."

Comments

Re:Yeah, whatever...

[TheRaven64]

I don't mind the producers making money, but they won't make any from me unless they sell me the product I want. For downloaded video, it has to be more convenient than renting the DVD. This means:

• Quick access. What I want, when I want it.
• No adverts. Adverts are the reason I stopped watching broadcast television.
• No DRM. Part of the convenience means allowing it to be played on portable devices. Unless your DRM supports Mac, iPod and Nokia devices, (and will support all future devices I might buy) it makes the content less valuable to me.
• No region restrictions.

I would love to pay a (reasonable) flat rate, in advance, for seasons of TV shows I want to watch, and have them automatically downloaded every week, but this seems not to be something the studios want to sell me. Until then, I'll stick to renting DVDs, typically some years after the shows have been created.

not free

[goombah99]

Also notice that the service only free till "mid 2008". And It also has commercials. The videos dont come out till a week after airing and expire 7 days after you download them. Finally what can we expect for the "real" price in 2008. Well some details have emerged on the price NBC wanted apple to charge. You may recall the price they wanted apple to charge was said to be $4.99 but NBC denied this vehemently. Well it turns out what they wanted was to force apple to purchase bundles of shows. SO to get a popular show like Heros apple would have to buy one episode of heros and 2 episodes of some re-run. The equivalent price of those 3 shows was 4.99. But apple could only charge 2.99 for the Hero's. This would have left apple with a net loss for all the re-runs it could not off load to other customers for 99 cents.

Re:Yeah, whatever...

[TheRaven64]

The product needs to be equal or better than what you can get "for free" over the air. A few years ago, I'd have agreed with you. About five or six years ago, my father stopped owning a TV, and I thought this was really odd. At the end of the month, our TV license expires and we're not planning on renewing it, and quite a few of my friends have also ditched the TV. It's still by no means a majority who have no TV, but it's no longer regarded as particularly unusual.

Broadcast TV has a lot more competitors now than it used to. The internet is a good source of entertainment, as are rented DVDs (through the post, no hassle, no adverts). Computer games, including consoles, are starting to become a lot more mainstream too, and TV viewership figures have been dropping a corresponding amount for some years. A big reason there are more adverts in TV shows these days is that the income per viewer has remained roughly constant, but the number of viewers has dropped. This increase in adverts then drives more people away, perpetuating the spiral. It's not enough for a new service to be as good as TV, because TV is already starting to lose out. It has to be better.