41–50 of 141 posts
Next they could add chromecast support / transcoding and they have a pretty good competitor for plex. After that a couple of mobile clients?
I'm working on a fork with Chromecast support. It works pretty well. Just a bit scared to open source it. Perhaps i will release it under a pseudonym or something. It's ridicioulous that people need to be afraid to release stuff but sadly enough this is the case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now, for morality to be on their side, they need to publicly advocate and work on a better way to remunerate the content creators. Of course, they could go rogue and act exclusively out of spite for big media, arguing parasitically that how the content creators make money is none of their business. But I really hope they don't.
"Morality" is self-defined. No doubt they have their interpretation of morality on their side.
More to the point, the economics are not relative to a point of view. Their project can only succeed, as it stands, if it is used marginally. If everyone used it instead of the competition, content creators would have to change the way they work drastically, and no new content would show up on PT.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's about volume. Sure the movie companies will be giving away their films for free. But if you give away enough films for free it becomes profitable!!
Amazon sells a number of things at a loss and still seems to be doing fine.
Editorialized title. I enjoyed the part where they berate the other fork for "ripping off" their UI, which exists solely to facilitate piracy.
You missed their point. They are angry about the ripoff because they include malware in it and try to pass for the real thing. Popcorn time does not pretend to be Metflix or something in terms of branding, so what's where your analogy ends
Popcorn Time previously just showed open domain films in the screen shots. The new one has pictures Game of Thrones and company. It looks like they have stopped pretending this is not for piracy. edit: clarification
Next they could add chromecast support / transcoding and they have a pretty good competitor for plex. After that a couple of mobile clients?
I'm working on a fork with Chromecast support. It works pretty well. Just a bit scared to open source it. Perhaps i will release it under a pseudonym or something. It's ridicioulous that people need to be afraid to release stuff but sadly enough this is the case.
I'm conflicted on this. The MPAA abuse their power regularly but it's hard to deny it's now easier and cheaper than ever to access and watch movies. That takes away a lot of the justification for piracy and creating tools that facilitate it.
Edit: And here come the down votes. Don't down vote if you disagree with someone - reply. If they add nothing to the conversation then down vote.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why?
Control of your audience, first and foremost: the mainstay of the movie business. If you can convince someone to sit still and watch your art for up to 2 hours at a time, you've got an audience. If you can't, you've lost the audience. Its an artistic thing - do you have access to, and can you know about, your audience? This has got to be better than not knowing and not having any control whatsoever - or worse, allowi…
What? iTunes, AppStore, and Netflix are stores. Universal isn't competing with them and doesn't need to. They exist to sell Universal's content.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Morality" is self-defined. No doubt they have their interpretation of morality on their side.
Sure, but many share a similar definition of morality. More to the point, the economics are not relative to a point of view. Their project can only succeed, as it stands, if it is used marginally. If everyone used it instead of the competition, content creators would have to change the way they work drastically, and no new content would show up on PT.
This does not logically follow from your argument.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazon sells a number of things at a loss and still seems to be doing fine.
What does Amazon sell for a loss?
Amazon actually shifted the pricing on books and e-books by selling them at below what they were buying them at for prolonged periods of times, and drove rival book sellers out of business by doing so... and then didn't raise their prices.