Oh, you mean to tell me that paying for a gazillion streaming services individually is somehow more expensive than bundling them all together with cable? Who could have seen that coming?
I don’t know if you were old enough to pay for cable when that was normal. But I have never felt so ripped off as I did when I was paying $100/month for 50 channels when 10 of them were news channels, 10 of them were church channels, 15 of them were shopping channels, 10 of them were in Spanish, and the other 5 I might watch sometimes but 95% of what was on was junk and they ALL played more commercials than actual content.
I went from that to piracy. Then the streaming services came and they became more convenient. I am more than ready to raise the black flag again and dig my peg leg out of the closet.
Cable wasn’t exactly popular where I was growing up. I mostly watched movies in theaters or through DVD’s.
I remember a time when all the Disney content used to be on Netflix. That was the first time I actually invested in a streaming service. But, then they decided to make Disney+ and I went, “Well it’s time. Argh Matey!”
The Netherlands. And by popular, I mean in my locality. Growing up, going to the theater was a luxury experience. I had a friend who was better off and he and I shared CD’s of movies and video games and so on.
But in the Netherlands you always had a good selection of free TV right, so cable/satellite was more a luxury than necessity. I think in the US the normal channels are unwatchable/don’t exist? Not sure.
Free TV was mostly politics, news and religious stuff (maybe I remember it that way because my Dad mostly used the TV). About the only time I was really invested in television was when the 2006 World Cup aired.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@lemmy.world
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Oh, you mean to tell me that paying for a gazillion streaming services individually is somehow more expensive than bundling them all together with cable? Who could have seen that coming?
I don’t know if you were old enough to pay for cable when that was normal. But I have never felt so ripped off as I did when I was paying $100/month for 50 channels when 10 of them were news channels, 10 of them were church channels, 15 of them were shopping channels, 10 of them were in Spanish, and the other 5 I might watch sometimes but 95% of what was on was junk and they ALL played more commercials than actual content.
I went from that to piracy. Then the streaming services came and they became more convenient. I am more than ready to raise the black flag again and dig my peg leg out of the closet.
Cable wasn’t exactly popular where I was growing up. I mostly watched movies in theaters or through DVD’s.
I remember a time when all the Disney content used to be on Netflix. That was the first time I actually invested in a streaming service. But, then they decided to make Disney+ and I went, “Well it’s time. Argh Matey!”
Where are you that cable wasn’t popular?
The Netherlands. And by popular, I mean in my locality. Growing up, going to the theater was a luxury experience. I had a friend who was better off and he and I shared CD’s of movies and video games and so on.
But in the Netherlands you always had a good selection of free TV right, so cable/satellite was more a luxury than necessity. I think in the US the normal channels are unwatchable/don’t exist? Not sure.
Free TV was mostly politics, news and religious stuff (maybe I remember it that way because my Dad mostly used the TV). About the only time I was really invested in television was when the 2006 World Cup aired.