Xbox iPlayer Deal Delayed Indefinitely
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
The Xbox would, of course, be yet another device that I wouldn't actually use iPlayer on, because mostly I use it to have something on to idly watch whilst I've got a game on.
Yes they are. They are winning the favor of all the gold members who pay thier 60 a year for features like this. What I don't understand is the problem. Why can't they make it for gold members. It isn't like they are paying directly for the service. It is just an extra.Crimsane said:
So would they be paying twice then (I mean the consumer)? Be paying 60 bucks a year and then paying X amount for the TV license on top of that? If that is the case then it doesn't make much sense for MS not to charge an extra fee of top of the license fee and open it to all. Although the discussion would be the same.Timelord91 said:
*EDIT* Wait a second. Does MS see any of that license money? Or are we to expect that they invest the time, money and bandwidth for free?
The BBC is paid for by taxes. It therefore doesn't contain any adverts or whatever because it doesn't need them and it's free. People don't want to pay double to watch it (I guess) and the BBC doesn't want to force them to.squid5580 said:
edit: Bugger, ninja'd
Actually you weren't ninja'ed. You answered a question I had in my second post. We already are paying MS "twice" for the same service. We pay for our internet we get through whatever companies we use. Then we pay MS for being able to use it that every other company gives away for free. I just can't fault MS for not offering a free service it would have to invest resources in to make available.jedstopher said:
Better Funk?
Exactly. I've got 2 PCs and 2 TVs, one has Virgin and one has Freeview, so I can watch Iplayer in four different places at the same time. Somehow. If you've got even basic cable or satellite on any TV in your house, you can get iPlayer.Danny Ocean said:
If you have a TV license, the likelihood is that you have access to Iplayer on your TV. If you have the internet (which you would, seeing as it would be on Live, you can access it on that. It doesn't matter. At all.shifty89 said:
There is more to the world than America, and a large number of users are Europeon on this site.Xzi said:
Do you hear the rest us complaining about the vast majority of content on this site being American? No?
Then shut up
I assume you have no internet connection or Tv in your house then, as if you do the BBC owes you shit loads. But then if your happy to give the BBC money for no return then I suppose they dont.Stubee said:
Microsoft deserves to eat all the dicks. It is very nice not paying for gold, the extra $60 feels nice.
Thank you the voice of reason - Shifty89.
You know, whilst I certainly don't begrudge anyone having this service if it's made available, what people outside of the UK (yes, we're looking at you America), don't seem to realise is that all that good stuff you got on XBL last year? We've only just got it (ie: watching a movie with your friends for instance). Whilst you were able to utilize Netflicks, we weren't and were stuck with crappy downloads that you could only watch on your own. I could go on.
Ok, I will.
The iPlayer service does concern me however, as I am convinced that this is nothing more than the BBC's way of clandestinely placing their services in any and every possible way into UK households and then increasing the License Fee because 'well, you have it on your house, it's not our fault you don't watch it' - because THAT my friends is how it works over here.
You see, until about 3 months ago before the national switchover to digital, we had 5 'terrestrial' broadcast channels available to all:
'BBC1'
'BBC2'
'ITV'*
'Channel 4'*
and 'Five'*
*These last three are not publicly funded, and raise their revenue like most American tv stations via advertising. Regardless of whether you ever watched one of those BBC channels during those 365 days, we are required (by law) to pay the BBC £139:50 a year (approx $230), no arguements, that's it. This is on top of any seperate plan you may have taken out (ie: satelitte or cable services with other companies due to most of the BBC's programming being sh*t or repeats).
You should also be aware that the BBC has such a hold (due to it's 'Royal Charter', that they only managed to renew a few years ago by the skin of their very teeth), that if you ever purchase a new TV here in the UK you are required by Law to register your address and have it confirmed before it leaves the store - this is for their infamous 'TV Detector DataBase'.
The BBC's greed knows no bounds - about 2 years ago the BBC even tried to push thru a new bill that would ensure that rather than charging an annual £139:50 ($230) per houshold, it would begin charging PER TV SET. The British public were of course up in arms about this (not helped either by the fact that the BBC squanders much of these publicly raised funds on crap every year - something that happened to come to light around that time, giving them major bad press), and it never came into law, but it was close - such is their sheer arrogance.
So you see, my issue is the fact that America inparticular never gives a stuff when the British or any other country starts complaining that they can't obtain a certain service that Americans have (Hulu is another good example that we couldn't access, along with youtube starting to follow the trend of late to a ridiculous extreme) - yet as soon as you see someone else with something shiny that you don't have, you kick off.
My fear is that because the BBC's iPlayer is available online should people want it, and because it may very well end up on gaming consoles (like the PS3 for example), that WE will be paying for it.
So hey, kick back, enjoy.
Don't worry about us.
You know, whilst I certainly don't begrudge anyone having this service if it's made available, what people outside of the UK (yes, we're looking at you America), don't seem to realise is that all that good stuff you got on XBL last year? We've only just got it (ie: watching a movie with your friends for instance). Whilst you were able to utilize Netflicks, we weren't and were stuck with crappy downloads that you could only watch on your own. I could go on.
Ok, I will.
The iPlayer service does concern me however, as I am convinced that this is nothing more than the BBC's way of clandestinely placing their services in any and every possible way into UK households and then increasing the License Fee because 'well, you have it on your house, it's not our fault you don't watch it' - because THAT my friends is how it works over here.
You see, until about 3 months ago before the national switchover to digital, we had 5 'terrestrial' broadcast channels available to all:
'BBC1'
'BBC2'
'ITV'*
'Channel 4'*
and 'Five'*
*These last three are not publicly funded, and raise their revenue like most American tv stations via advertising. Regardless of whether you ever watched one of those BBC channels during those 365 days, we are required (by law) to pay the BBC £139:50 a year (approx $230), no arguements, that's it. This is on top of any seperate plan you may have taken out (ie: satelitte or cable services with other companies due to most of the BBC's programming being sh*t or repeats).
You should also be aware that the BBC has such a hold (due to it's 'Royal Charter', that they only managed to renew a few years ago by the skin of their very teeth), that if you ever purchase a new TV here in the UK you are required by Law to register your address and have it confirmed before it leaves the store - this is for their infamous 'TV Detector DataBase'.
The BBC's greed knows no bounds - about 2 years ago the BBC even tried to push thru a new bill that would ensure that rather than charging an annual £139:50 ($230) per houshold, it would begin charging PER TV SET. The British public were of course up in arms about this (not helped either by the fact that the BBC squanders much of these publicly raised funds on crap every year - something that happened to come to light around that time, giving them major bad press), and it never came into law, but it was close - such is their sheer arrogance.
So you see, my issue is the fact that America inparticular never gives a stuff when the British or any other country starts complaining that they can't obtain a certain service that Americans have (Hulu is another good example that we couldn't access, along with youtube starting to follow the trend of late to a ridiculous extreme) - yet as soon as you see someone else with something shiny that you don't have, you kick off.
My fear is that because the BBC's iPlayer is available online should people want it, and because it may very well end up on gaming consoles (like the PS3 for example), that WE will be paying for it.
So hey, kick back, enjoy.
Don't worry about us.