It doesn't matter. Too much money is made in TV because of ads. The studios would never do it. Netflix (and others) get content N time units later because then the studios can double dip...many times.

- They make money on the first run
- They make money on the 2nd run (summer months, syndication)
- They make money when Hulu Plus (or whatever it is called) shows it later (with ads or for a cut of the monthly fee)
- They make money when Netflix shows it to you streaming via licensing
- They make money when you rent it from VUDU for 7 bucks
- They make money on the silly people who still buy physical media of the show / movie

There is first run, and then there are alternate channels. The studios want as many of these things to exist at once. Therefore you will never see a "premium" service that will show you whatever you want on demand with no ads at the same time it has its first run. Because if that existed, all the other channels are obsolete.

No kidding.

I'm beginning to dread reading Slashdot. Crappy summaries. Crappy choices for summaries. And now truly vile comments about a project that some people got together to do for what seems like shits and giggles. Whatever happened to coding something because you thought it would be cool? Whatever happened for coding something because you could? Whatever happened to doing something different for the sake of being different?

Apparently this is what the community has degraded to. Personally I'd rather go on a date with Alyssa Bereznak while getting kicked in the nuts being forced to use apple products (after updating iTunes AGAIN) than read this Slashdot trash.

Angry much?

I, for one, am endlessly entertained by Netflix's streaming content and the DVD service is crazy convenient. The loss of Starz (if the deal is truly dead) is unfortunate. Some of the content I watch comes from there, though to be honest not a lot.

The Netflix clients are phenomenal, as is the streaming quality. I have never seen it crash once, so I suspect your anger at Netflix is misplaced here.

If you don't like the service, cancel your subscription and pay 2 - 3 times more elsewhere for less content. The choice is yours. God bless competition.

This is not too different than what Questia has been doing for years. I'm sure Amazon's service is more polished and integrates better with their reader, but this concept isn't new by any stretch of the imagination.

We're essentially talking about an online library for a premium.

Kinda like how the iOS runs all the other Apple apps.

Apple really screwed the pooch there.

Yes, but does it play Angry Birds?

1985

1) Get a Twitter subscription
2) Monitor #911
3) DONE!

Wow. All the comments and not one about how this was revealed and playable at PAX? For shame!

What about people with only one eye? The polarized glasses make it possible for those individuals to still view the movie, though in plain 2D.

I don't know much about the technology, but does the alternating eye thing have a distorted picture on the TV? If so then there are many people who won't be able to take part in the experience.

All this it to me is another way for cable companies to charge another 5 dollars a month for "premium" content, and then another 5 dollars a month for a special cable box to watch it (explain that). And don't think for a second that the 5 dollars a month for HD programming will go away.

I can't wait for the Comcast NBC deal to go through. Yet another way for content to be filtered and charged for.

Something is broken.