# I loves me some 99 cent rentals



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

The weekly 99 cent Amazon Unbox rentals are becoming a regular thing at the pdhenry household. I just put _Last King of Scotland_ and _Music & Lyrics_ into the download queue.

Even the $3.99 purchase specials they ran a couple of weeks ago didn't tempt me the way the 99 cent rentals do. I think Amazon has found the rental pricing sweet spot.

Anybody else?


----------



## fritolayguy (Oct 31, 2002)

Wholeheartedly agree. I eagerly anticipate the Amazon 99c rental e-mail in my inbox so that I can enjoy my cheap movie for the weekend.

Rocky Balboa was the first 99c rental (which lived up to "You get what you pay for"  ), and has started a weekly tradition in our household.


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

pdhenry said:


> The weekly 99 cent Amazon Unbox rentals are becoming a regular thing at the pdhenry household. I just put _Last King of Scotland_ and _Music & Lyrics_ into the download queue.
> 
> Even the $3.99 purchase specials they ran a couple of weeks ago didn't tempt me the way the 99 cent rentals do. I think Amazon has found the rental pricing sweet spot.
> 
> Anybody else?


 Same here. I find myself checking every weekend for what's on special. And I typically grab a couple.


----------



## ohendo (Jun 27, 2005)

How do you get on the email list?


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

ohendo said:


> How do you get on the email list?


It's probably automatic once you download a program, but you can go to your Amazon Account page, select "Your Amazon.com Delivers E-Mail Subscriptions" and then "Browse All E-mail Subscriptions." You want "The Download" which is in the *Unbox Video Downloads* category. It was a bit late this morning so I just surfed over to http://unbox.amazon.com and browsed the specials from there.


----------



## ohendo (Jun 27, 2005)

Thanks for the info. I've downloaded maybe 10 videos, so I'm signed up...just never received one of these 99 cent special emails. Looking forward to it!


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Thanks. Just added it. Cool!


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

I just rented The Last King of Scottland, Music & Lyrics and The Painted Veil for 99 cents each. THANKS! I had no idea. Signed up for the email too.

If they continue offering these 99 cent rentals, I can see myself doing this a lot!

My only complaint is that you only have 24 hours to watch the movie once you hit play. I rented Last King of Scotland a couple of weeks ago (for 3.99) and fell asleep while watching. By the time I was able to sit down again the next day to try to finish it, my 24 hours was already up and it was gone. I wish they would consider making the watching period longer. 

But the ease of clicking download and having it available right there on my TiVo is great!


----------



## hockeyinsd (Sep 23, 2005)

Love the 99 cent rentals. I might pay 3.99 for a movie I really, really want to watch, but 99 cents if perfect for the "hmm, that might be interesting, its only 99 cents." I also forsee many rentals at 99 cents. The 24 hour thing isn't too big of a deal for the 99 cent rentals. I do agree that for the 3.99 rentals only having 24 hours can be a bit of a downer. Go amazon, 99 cent rentals rock!


----------



## mtchamp (May 15, 2001)

I've also rented those .99 movies. So far I havn't watched any because of the 24 hour rule. I'm afraid I won't be able to finish it before 24 hours is up. I'm waiting for the right time when I've got 2 hours to spare. Amazon has to change this. I would like to be able to watch half one night and half another. We just don't have enough time to commit to watching the whole movie. We know once we start the movie, it expires in 24 hours. I'm trying to adjust, but it's TiVo and I've always had control of what and when.


----------



## supasta (May 6, 2006)

Just got Fast Food Nation started downloading. 
Thanks for the heads up on the special this week!


----------



## crayboy (Apr 28, 2007)

Did not see this mentioned in this thread - but when I searched for "tivo unbox" on google there was an Amazon ad (1st item) offering a $15 credit for signing up - I clicked through, did not see any info on the credit, but my first rental came up 99c with a 99c promotional credit.


----------



## fritolayguy (Oct 31, 2002)

crayboy said:


> Did not see this mentioned in this thread - but when I searched for "tivo unbox" on google there was an Amazon ad (1st item) offering a $15 credit for signing up - I clicked through, did not see any info on the credit, but my first rental came up 99c with a 99c promotional credit.


This was part of the initial unbox download that I received as a message on my S3. I was offered a $15 credit for signing up, and downloaded "The DaVinci Code" for free. Pretty sweet!


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

I pay far less than $.99 per movie when I rent them via Blockbuster Online. I probably average about 40 movies per month for only $18.89. This includes the full commercial DVDs with all the extras, including Dolby Digital soundtracks, widescreen releases, and all the extras. 

I don't know what kind of quality you get with Unbox but if the movies are compressed in any way then you're getting ripped off. I haven't heard any discussion regarding picture quality with Unbox but I gave up on PPVs from DTV years ago because they were crap in this respect. Am I correct in assuming that Unbox downloads are standard definition only? Based on what I've read about Unbox I didn't see anything that would make me want to download squat. Different strokes I guess. 

Can anyone with a hacked Tivo and TyTools installed report on the file sizes of movies they've downloaded from Unbox? I'd be curious to see just how much they've compressed the movies when compared to DVD releases. According to the Amazon website the picture quality is supposed to be as good as recordings made at the best setting. I own a S3 and record everything from digital sources so I don't use a best setting. I use to own a S1 SA Tivo and the best setting wasn't as good as the recordings I got from my DTivos with DirecTV, and the standard definition quality from DTV is totally inadequate when compared to HDTV. At least a DVD release is watchable on an HDTV.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

captain_video said:


> I probably average about 40 movies per month for only $18.89.


I guess this explains your username!

I think that renting so many titles skews your per price much farther than the average consumer. You are spreading your fixed cost over a large quantity.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

I dropped Netflix for the second time when I realised that even the 2 at a time plan meant I had to be watching DVDs every weekend or I'd be spending 4 or 5 bucks per movie. For someone _*with a life*_  pay-as-you-go at a buck a pop is very cost-effective.

No need to hack - the file size appears on the TiVo info screen for the program (it's there for regular TiVo recordings as well). _Music and Lyrics_ (1:44 duration) is 2.20 GB and _The Last King of Scotland_ (2:03) is 2.59 GB. As a comparison, _Boys on the Side_ (2:00) that the TiVo picked up today as a Suggestion is 2.39 GB in High quality. Sure there are some motion artifacts in the Unbox stuff (I think the transcoding might be getting better, though) but It's Just A Movie after all. I feel that I've paid a fair price for a good quality product.

One of the advantages of still watching TV on a SD Tube is that average quality video looks pretty good. I've seen a regular commercial DVD on an HD set and didn't really like it.


----------



## moxie1617 (Jan 5, 2004)

pdhenry said:


> ....... Sure there are some motion artifacts in the Unbox stuff (I think the transcoding might be getting better, though) but It's Just A Movie after all. ..........


I noticed pretty bad motion artifacts when Unbox first started, in The Illusionist and Jet Li's Fearless. I rented several films with the 99 cent promos and there seems to be much less of this occurring. Until I read this post I thought it was just my lyin eyes. Maybe it has it gotten better.


----------



## meglet (Sep 13, 2004)

Ooh, thanks for the reminder. I put Unbox on my Media Center PC, and am very impressed with the video quality even on a 47" widescreen tv. Time to find a movie for the weekend!


----------



## yunlin12 (Mar 15, 2003)

Thanks for the tip! I didn't know the 0.99 rentals are a weekly thing, also signed up for the email.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> I dropped Netflix for the second time when I realised that even the 2 at a time plan meant I had to be watching DVDs every weekend or I'd be spending 4 or 5 bucks per movie. For someone with a life pay-as-you-go at a buck a pop is very cost-effective.


During the summer I probably watch a DVD per day once my regular shows have gone on hiatus. Considering the average movie is about 1-1/2 to 2 hours, that's not really a lot of time spent watching TV. I make backup copies of every DVD I rent so I can watch them at my leisure, and also so I can have a life. I may never watch all of the movies I rent but I have a multitude of choices available whenever I want. I also get new releases the day they come out so I don't have to deal with damaged discs.

I'd be willing to bet that the number of choices available to me are much greater than what Unbox can offer. I used to burn copies to DVD-RW discs and reuse the discs for future rentals but I've been so swamped with new rentals that I've started copying the files to my HTPC for playback instead. I get free rentals with each movie that comes in the mail when I return the mailing envelope to a local Blockbuster store. I've gotten to where I no longer return the movies for free rentals but simply put them in the mailbox and return them. There just aren't that many good movies available that I want to watch. However, I have been able to pick up titles I wouldn't normally have rented online, mainly because I hadn't heard of them, but seeing them in the store allows me to pick out some good sleeper hits that I would have otherwise missed.



> No need to hack - the file size appears on the TiVo info screen for the program (it's there for regular TiVo recordings as well). Music and Lyrics (1:44 duration) is 2.20 GB and The Last King of Scotland (2:03) is 2.59 GB. As a comparison, Boys on the Side (2:00) that the TiVo picked up today as a Suggestion is 2.39 GB in High quality. Sure there are some motion artifacts in the Unbox stuff (I think the transcoding might be getting better, though) but It's Just A Movie after all. I feel that I've paid a fair price for a good quality product.


That is some serious compression going on there. They're probably only using about half the original bitrates which means you're losing a lot of detail. I suppose if you're happy with less than DVD quality then Unbox will work for you. In this day of HDTV becoming more widespread I find it hard to believe that some people will settle for less (and in this case, much, much less). I guess our definition of what constitutes good quality varies considerably.



> One of the advantages of still watching TV on a SD Tube is that average quality video looks pretty good. I've seen a regular commercial DVD on an HD set and didn't really like it.


Based on that philosophy it makes one wonder why you're not still watching VHS videotapes since you seem to be content with poor quality video. I watch DVDs on my HDTV all the time and, while it may not be as good as watching HD material, it's still pretty darn good. It's definitely much better than watching DVDs on a SDTV set. It's also better than watching material recorded on a SD Tivo.

I recently made the foray into HTPCs and have discovered that DVD playback using ffdshow, properly tweaked of course, yields results far better than watching DVDs on a standalone DVD player. I also rent HD-DVDs from Blockbuster online whenever possible so I get a lot of my movies in HD for the same price as regular DVDs. I think most people would agree that once you've gone HD it's very difficult to settle for anything less. If and when you replace that SDTV with an HD model you'll understand what I'm saying. You'll wonder why you waited so long to make the switch. Now that I have I just see Unbox as a giant step backwards.

Once more people have switched to HDTV, Unbox will quickly become a thing of the past. I find it highly unlikely that Unbox will be able to deliver HD content without compressing the heck out of it. My HD-DVDs are about 15-20GB, minus any extras. HD movies recorded from my FIOS network are about 5-6GB per hour, and sometimes more.

You realize I'm just playing devil's advocate here.  I'm not trying to ridicule anyone's choices as I'm sure a lot of folks haven't made the transition to Hi-Def out of monetary or other reasons, which I can certainly relate to. I'm just trying to point out that for the same money or less you can enjoy better quality than you're getting with Unbox.


----------



## mick66 (Oct 15, 2004)

captain_video said:


> I make backup copies of every DVD I rent so I can watch them at my leisure, and also so I can have a life.


Shouldn't this have been the first post in a "Is this stealing" thread?


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

captain_video said:


> I'm just trying to point out that for the same money or less you can enjoy better quality than you're getting with Unbox.


I choose not to violate copyright.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> I choose not to violate copyright.


As do I. Perhaps you can explain to me how making a backup of a DVD for timeshifting purposes (on erasable media, no less) constitutes any form of copyright violation? There would have to be intent to distribute for any illegal action to occur. I watch it, then erase it, period. I don't give it to my friends or family, upload it to the internet, sell copies, or distribute it in any way. What's the difference between doing what I do and recording a PPV movie on my Tivo or downloading an Unbox movie and watching it later? If that's a copyright violation then you're all as guilty as I am so get over yourselves. We just had an extensive training course at my company regarding intellectual property so I'm fairly up to date on the subject.

I'm saying that renting DVDs through Blockbuster or even Netflix will provide you with better quality videos at a comparable or lower price. Whether you watch them live or back them up for later viewing is irrelevant. If you choose to get your movies from Unbox then knock yourself out. Personally, I got into the home theater hobby so I could enjoy the best picture and sound quality I could afford. If I knew I could enjoy a better quality product at or below what I'd pay for a mediocre one I know what my choice would be. I'm certainly not holding a gun to your head and telling you otherwise. Life's full of choices and I'm just providing you with one of them. What you do with the information is up to you.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

captain_video said:


> As do I. Perhaps you can explain to me how making a backup of a DVD for timeshifting purposes (on erasable media, no less) constitutes any form of copyright violation? There would have to be intent to distribute for any illegal action to occur. I watch it, then erase it, period. I don't give it to my friends or family, upload it to the internet, sell copies, or distribute it in any way. What's the difference between doing what I do and recording a PPV movie on my Tivo or downloading an Unbox movie and watching it later? If that's a copyright violation then you're all as guilty as I am so get over yourselves. We just had an extensive training course at my company regarding intellectual property so I'm fairly up to date on the subject.
> 
> I'm saying that renting DVDs through Blockbuster or even Netflix will provide you with better quality videos at a comparable or lower price. Whether you watch them live or back them up for later viewing is irrelevant. If you choose to get your movies from Unbox then knock yourself out. Personally, I got into the home theater hobby so I could enjoy the best picture and sound quality I could afford. If I knew I could enjoy a better quality product at or below what I'd pay for a mediocre one I know what my choice would be. I'm certainly not holding a gun to your head and telling you otherwise. Life's full of choices and I'm just providing you with one of them. What you do with the information is up to you.


A DVD is not a download. The fees collected by the rights owners are different. A DVD can only be played on one DVD player at a time. If you maximize the number of DVD players on which it can be played by letting people make "backup copies" of a rental, even if they play it just once and destroy it, it permits that one original DVD to visit more DVD players than might be typical in the lifetime of a rentable DVD.

If you're going to be picky about it, what you're doing is really no different than someone downloading the movie to watch it but who had gone to see it at a theater but had to leave 10 minutes after it started. You can justify it all you want in all sorts of different ways, but it's still a copyright violation.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

You got a law degree to back that up, Doug? Copyright infringement only takes place when there's unauthorized distribution or at least intent to distribute. If simply making a backup copy of copyrighted material was against the law then anyone here who ever made a backup image of their Tivos is a criminal according to your definition. Show me one documented case of anyone making a backup copy of a DVD for one-time personal use was ever prosecuted and I'll bow to your wisdom. 

Making a backup copy of a rental DVD may be considered a violation of the law, but only if I intended to distribute it. A single copy is fair use. Multiple copies is intent to distribute. Since I'm only making one then guess which category I fall under? I paid the rental fee for the right to watch the DVD. If I choose to watch it later then who does it hurt? What copyrights have been violated? The proper fees have been paid legally so what's the frickin' difference?


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

captain_video said:


> You got a law degree to back that up, Doug? Copyright infringement only takes place when there's unauthorized distribution or at least intent to distribute. If simply making a backup copy of copyrighted material was against the law then anyone here who ever made a backup image of their Tivos is a criminal according to your definition. Show me one documented case of anyone making a backup copy of a DVD for one-time personal use was ever prosecuted and I'll bow to your wisdom.
> 
> Making a backup copy of a rental DVD may be considered a violation of the law, but only if I intended to distribute it. A single copy is fair use. Multiple copies is intent to distribute. Since I'm only making one then guess which category I fall under? I paid the rental fee for the right to watch the DVD. If I choose to watch it later then who does it hurt?  What copyrights have been violated? The proper fees have been paid legally so what's the frickin' difference?


See, that's all part of your justification to enable yourself to believe you're not doing anything wrong.

I'm not saying I wouldn't do the same thing, but technically, by the letter of the law, you're violating copyright by making a copy. It doesn't matter if the copy exists for only 3 seconds and then was destroyed. That might mitigate any damages someone could possibly get through a court, but that doesn't mean you still didn't violate a copyright.

Will anyone bother to prosecute you for this? Highly unlikely. It's not cost effective to spend tens of thousands on legal fees against an individual violation. It is cost effective to go after people redistributing copyrighted work, because the potential damages you could seek are that much greater than "one."


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Also, I choose not to threadcrap.

But since you brought it up, duplicating a DVD you've only rented *is* unauthorized distribution. At the minimum when you return the rented DVD and you still have a copy; but probably as soon as you made a copy. Your argument only possibly holds water if you had bought the DVD. But I'd argue that even then you've violated DMCA.

Ever read the little message at the beginning of the movie?


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> Ever read the little message at the beginning of the movie?


Yes. It explicity addresses illegal copying AND distribution. Look, I'm not trying to get into a pissing contest here because I'm no lawyer either. Perhaps you think I'm trying to justify something that you believe is illegal. Perhaps it is under the letter of the law but the bottom line is that nobody really cares if you make a copy as long as you're not trying to sell it or circumvent the rights of the artist's or the studios. If it doesn't infringe on their profit-making ability then they couldn't care diddly. Don't even get me started on the DMCA. 

Based on the arguments against what I've stated, I have no doubt that everyone here has violated copyrights in some form or another. Can you honestly say you've never downloaded an MP3 or a shareware program and never paid for it? I'm not saying it's right but let's get realistic here. I'm seeing a lot of pots calling the kettle black.

All that aside, as I have no desire to hijack this thread by getting into a long drawn out discussion on something that is decidedly off-topic, I don't think anyone can argue that Unbox provides you with a better product than DVD rentals. I have already shown that renting online can be more cost-effective, regardless of whether you "timeshift".


----------



## rambler (Dec 3, 2005)

Unbox needs to add captions! Come on, it can't be that hard!


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Captain_video has a very interesting legal argument.

The receipt of the rented DVD is very analogous to a broadcast, OTA or Cable. The recording of the latter is very similar to the duplication on recordable media for later viewing of the DVD.

As C_V describes his application, he watches it once and destroys it, which is less than recording a show/movie and watching it multiple times before deleting it.

However, it is necessary to circumvent the DVD's encryption to accomplish the duplication.

There would be a strong basis for arguing an extension of the Betamax decision if it were litigated.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

captain_video said:


> During the summer I probably watch a DVD per day once my regular shows have gone on hiatus. Considering the average movie is about 1-1/2 to 2 hours, that's not really a lot of time spent watching TV. I make backup copies of every DVD I rent so I can watch them at my leisure, and also so I can have a life. I may never watch all of the movies I rent but I have a multitude of choices available whenever I want. I also get new releases the day they come out so I don't have to deal with damaged discs..


aside from DMCA violation, which I agree does not address fair use - you are violating the agreement with your DVD rental source. They are in the business of letting you get and then watch the DVD. Their pricing is based on their being a day or so at least in which you watch the DVD. So you instead copy the DVD and send the original right back and thus get 40 or so a month which as you point out reduces their revenue per disk considerably.
It works for you because not everyone does that. Of course the company is not going to waste resources on sending people around to see what is going on and just deal with some accounts that turn DVDs around so quickly. But you well know you are scamming the DVD rental company and that if we all followed your advice then the rental company would have to raise their rates or go out of business. So good for you and it is no big concern to me but your pleas of fair use are just smoke blowing around

on-topic - my more typical use of Netflix brings movies in at around 1.50 when I am actively watching them. the current PPV type pricing and restrictions on UNBOX do indeed make it a less attractive deal. the 99cent rentals I hit each weekend and if they keep up then they compete with Netflix much better. They do still need to lift that 24 hour to watch crap. though. At least make it 72 hours.


----------



## minckster (Aug 31, 2006)

Doesn't Blockbuster throttle their high-volume customers? My understanding it that Netflix aims for about $2/disc - or about 9 discs a month for the $18/month plan - and throttles the loss-generating customers after that, hoping that they'll cancel and go away.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

I can't believe that anyone could think copying rented DVDs would be OK. This is not your DVD to make backups of, it is the property of the rental store who allowed you to borrow it for a fee. It is especially outrageous when the said copier is spinning through the library of the store at a clip of forty movies per month on a fixed fee basis.


----------



## minckster (Aug 31, 2006)

From Blockbuster's Terms and Conditions (emphasis added),


> Fraud, Abuse or Piracy.
> Fraudulent or abusive practices such as repeatedly falsely reporting DVDs as damaged or stolen may result not only in cancellation of your BLOCKBUSTER Online membership account and charges to your Payment Method, but also in actions by Blockbuster for recovery of civil damages as well as referral for criminal prosecution. DVDs provided by Blockbuster are for personal, non-commercial use only. *Blockbuster does not condone unauthorized copying, distribution or other infringement of protected intellectual property of Blockbuster or of third parties.*


 I'm surprised the TOS aren't more explicit in banning copying the DVDs. That sentence _seems_ to say, leave Blockbuster out of it. If you copy the DVD, it's between you and the owner of the intellectual property.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

ah30k said:


> I can't believe that anyone could think copying rented DVDs would be OK. This is not your DVD to make backups [temporary recordings/copies] of, it is the property of the rental store who allowed you to borrow it for a fee. It is especially outrageous when the said copier is spinning through the library of the store at a clip of forty movies per month on a fixed fee basis.


You can't follow the logic of a legal argument that parallels time shifting of broadcast TV having a reasonable chance of prevailing if litigated?



> I can't believe that anyone could think recording TV shows  would be OK. This is not your program  to make backupsrecordings of, it is the property of the content producer/network  who allowed you to view  it for a fee/free. It is especially outrageous when the said recorder  is recording large numbers of shows on a fixed fee/free basis


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

HDTiVo said:


> You can't follow the logic of a legal argument that parallels time shifting of broadcast TV having a reasonable chance of prevailing if litigated?


it falls apart becasue it is remedying something that needs no remedy.
You cam already timeshift a DVD by holding onto the actual DVD and then watching it when ready. I know with Netflix there are no late fees so there is also no penalty for holding onto the DVD save for not getting more DVDs while you hold onto the first one.

Seems like fair use of a rental DVD is built into the fact it is a DVD. There is simply no merit in the example provided.

I could see fair use of making a copy of an owned DVD so the original is safe from harm, and if the copy is on the home media network without physical form that is just another form of backup, but that is about all the fair use needed for a DVD.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

HDTiVo said:


> You can't follow the logic of a legal argument that parallels time shifting of broadcast TV having a reasonable chance of prevailing if litigated?


Yes, you are correct. I can't see the logic. If you rent a DVD, I don't see any logic that allows you to make a copy for any period of time longer than the original rental period. Folks are going to pull out all sorts of analogies now, but this just doesn't pass the common sense notion that you paid for a rental period and making copies to extend that rental period to a longer period is wrong. It was clear the original poster was cranking through 40 DVDs per month with the intent to keep those copies for later viewing at his leasure. In my mind, copying renting DVDs is not the same as timeshifting broadcast (or premium) shows. I'm not interested in arguing it.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

rambler said:


> Unbox needs to add captions! Come on, it can't be that hard!


+1; also, TivoCast. (There was a recent RocketBoom all about their captions... which weren't available on the very Tivo where I was watching it.)

Re: other ways to get cheap rentals, a nice alternative that's popped up recently is the Redbox DVD vending machines. They're $1 for 1 day's rental (or at least the one in my grocery store is).


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

If the local grocery had a Redbox machine I'd be very interested. For now the 99 cent Unbox specials each weekend address my needs.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

Rather than belabor the issue let me say this. Blockbuster allows me to rent DVDs online for a fixed fee based on a 3-at-a-time plan. They also allow me to turn in the DVDs I received by mail at my local Blockbuster store and get a free rental for each disc returned when I make the swap. I average between 6 and 12 DVDs per week using this method and it's certainly not an outrageous number of movies to watch in a week for some people, although it is more than most people would choose to watch. Even if you only watched the discs you receive by mail and never set foot inside a Blockbuster store you can get the cost per disc below $0.99. In other words, you can achieve the cost per disc rate without the need to make backup copies, thus reinforcing my original premise. If you ignore the prospect of backing up the discs it is still a viable and cost effective alternative to Unbox. In case you missed it, that was the point I was trying make before the thread got hijacked with a lot of finger-pointing. 

I also get a monthly coupon good for one free movie or game rental. I used to have NetFlix and they did indeed tend to stifle the quantity of discs you received per month. I have not seen this to be the case with Blockbuster.

I provide a faster turnaround rather than hanging onto a DVD for an unlimited amount of time which, in turn, allows Blockbuster to rent the DVD to other members, thus helping them generate more revenue. It also allows other members to have availability to more titles instead of looking at a blank shelf in the store when they want something to rent. It's a win-win situation for everyone.

The guys at my local Blockbuster are fully aware that I make backups and couldn't care less that I do it. The whole issue of copyright infringement doesn't even apply here since I'm not distributing anything or profiting monetarily from my actions. Everyone is dwelling on the act of copying when the actual infringement doesn't occur until I pass it along to someone else. There are lots of people that record live sporting events but there's always a disclaimer broadcast during the game that expressly prohibits it without written consent, yet everyone does it without any thought to the legality of the situation.

There is the issue of circumventing the encryption which does tend to violate the DMCA. Legally, based on that ridiculous law and legacy of our man Slick Willy, this is not permitted since I do not own the DVD. Backups are permitted only if you own the original DVD according to the law so technically I suppose I'm a hardened criminal based on my actions and will no doubt have the Feds knocking on my door at any moment. 

The thing is, it's a totally victimless crime (and yes, I am rationalizing, but only because it's illogical to look at it any other may, IMHO). I pay for what I use. I don't profit from it. I don't distribute it illegally. I don't violate anyone's intellectual property rights. If you go by the letter of the law it is illegal. If you go by the spirit of the law and interpret it in the way it was intended, there is no crime being committed. The studios and music companies would ban the use of all methods for consumers to copy any material they (i.e., the studios, et al) own the rights to and it is their lobbyists that pushed the DMCA into existence. Everything they do is for their benefit and they don't give a crap about the consumer except that they want us to pay through the nose for their products. If they had their way, all music and video would be available on a pay-per-play basis so think about the rationale you're trying to defend here. Personally, I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!  

The DMCA is poorly written and left wide open to interpretation. The only reason it hasn't been challenged is that nobody is willing to prosecute anyone for copying discs for personal use. It's simply not worth the time and effort to do so. They're only interested in cracking down on the large scale pirates and bootleggers that are making counterfeit copies for profit.

I only offered this method as a possible alternative to lower your cost per disc. I don't encourage anyone to do this because it is illegal in the technical sense of the law. In reality, nobody really cares, except for a few of you apparently. OTOH, you are certainly welcome to your opinions and I don't admonish anyone for speaking their mind on this issue. It's a sensitive topic and open to much debate on both sides. Let your conscience be your guide. Peace.  

Bottom line: Blockbuster online = good; Unbox, not so much.


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

Even the forums for DVDFab have banned the discussion of use of their product with rentals. For good reason.

Similarly- this is like discussing how to steal service from Satellite or Cable. As everyone knows, I am not in the least fond of them but the rules of the game are that we respect property rights. You don't respect property rights and there are a huge number of victims.

A non polluting economy based on Intellectual Property cannot be sustained with this sort of attitude about property that can easily be stolen without anyone noticing or apparently caring. 

You take away the returns on entertainment, software and pharmeceutical products, and you it will cease to see future investments there. You think that is inconsequential? You will see a lot more workers on the street- a huge impact to america's economy.

Just buy the disk. I picked up Memento and some more Disney shows in the drug store rack for $7.99 each. Then I just rip them and my DVD is the backup- just like for the MP3s on my iPod.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

captain_video said:


> . If you ignore the prospect of backing up the discs it is still a viable and cost effective alternative to Unbox. In case you missed it, that was the point I was trying make before the thread got hijacked with a lot of finger-pointing.


so you maintain that the rental companies could maintain a 40 disc per month rate for most customers without having to raise their rates?


----------



## padmalinowski (Dec 21, 2005)

So anyways, have those of you who are frequent Unbox downloaders ever had any issue with your ISP's concerning the volume of downloading? 2-3 movies a week, all downloaded on the same day, times 2-2.5 GB per download, adds up to an awful lot of data. Do providers care about this anymore?


----------



## moxie1617 (Jan 5, 2004)

Haven't heard anything or noticed any throttling back using SBC in Chicago(now AT&T).


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> so you maintain that the rental companies could maintain a 40 disc per month rate for most customers without having to raise their rates?


If everyone did it, probably not. I'm more of the exception to the rule in this case. Then again, since I turn my rental discs around more quickly than most people I probably have less impact than those that keep their discs for weeks at a time. Besides, Blockbuster is the one that instituted the free rentals when returning to the store. If they couldn't absorb the hit at the current rates then they shouldn't have offered it. Chances are they'll see an increase in subscribers when the NetFlix members finally get wind of the deal that Blockbuster offers so it should work out well for everyone in the end. NetFlix has already lowered their rates in response to Blockbuster's campaign so the consumers come out ahead in either case, unless NetFlix keeps to their current method of limiting quantities.

Personally, I don't think you can go wrong with either rental plan. You'll get more discs for the money with Blockbuster but NetFlix has a deeper library of titles. OTOH, Blockbuster has beefed up their inventory considerably so they're quickly closing the gap with NetFlix on the number of titles they carry. That was ultimately what lead to my decision to switch over to Blockbuster.

In retrospect, I should never have mentioned the idea of copying rental discs due to legality issues so I apologize for stirring up such a controversial topic. Stick with a straight rent and return policy and you can still come out way ahead on all counts. DVDFab is just trying to cover their butts by not allowing such discussions, much in the same way talk of video extraction is banned from these forums.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

padmalinowski said:


> So anyways, have those of you who are frequent Unbox downloaders ever had any issue with your ISP's concerning the volume of downloading? 2-3 movies a week, all downloaded on the same day, times 2-2.5 GB per download, adds up to an awful lot of data. Do providers care about this anymore?


They are stealing service by using far more than is intended, and they are going to make everyone else's rates go up too. 

Wait 'til I unload on the folks who use my gym more than twice a month and the ones who take more than 3 2 minute showers per week at my condo.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

HDTiVo said:


> They are stealing service by using far more than is intended, and they are going to make everyone else's rates go up too.
> 
> Wait 'til I unload on the folks who use my gym more than twice a month and the ones who take more than 3 2 minute showers per week at my condo.


What the heck are you talking about. The OP had a legit question. The ISPs had been talking about penalizing high bandwidth users or limiting them. The OP's question is totally legit.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Anectodal evidence suggests that Comcast's secret limit is on the order of 600 GB in a month. You'd have to be an even bigger movie fan than captain_video to go that high. A typical Unbox movie is around 2 and a half GB. Eight or ten movies a month plus Vonage isn't likely to raise and eyebrows (I certainly hope  ).


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

Deja Vu all over again. Will the content industry play it just the way they played it against ripping CD's?

A huge difference is that it is a whole lot easier to build up collections with DVD movie rentals.

Maybe it will be like Bill Murray in Ground Hog Day. With the benefit of knowing exactly what's going to happen, the smart move is to sell DVD quality content on Unbox direct to DVRs. The consumer is happy because they don't have to rip anything, and they don't have to run a video server in their home to store all the ripped movies. Unbox will archive it for them and they can free up the space on their dvr with the confidence that the movie will be restored anytime in the future they want it.

What does that get Hollywood?

the movie is never in an unprotected format
the number copyrighted files that are in electronic form under casual consumer security is kept to a minimum
Consumer has no motive to defeat the copy protection- they can move the content fluidly between devices.
Consumers prefer it over ripping because it is much more simple, convenient, and rapid compared to ripping.
Consumers prefer it because it is as cheap as buying dvds, possibly cheaper considering the savings in packaging, handling and distribution. 
Potential to see movie sales increase. New marketing models can experiment with promotions to spur casual buying. For example- the bandwidth has been paid for by an unbox rental, the consumer may well never rent this film again, let alone consider buying it on DVD- but they are in the mental space of having to part with this recently felt pleasant entertainment experience and so they are the most receptive to a buy pitch as the ever will be. So unbox gives them a last chance. This movie will not be deleted... but wait- today only for the first 100 customers we are offering you this one time money back chance to buy this movie for antoher $3.99.... At prices like that, people won't be thinking- I'm not going to buy because I think by brother has a copy of that. They are going to pop for it. Similar adverts can be inserted at the beginning of Tivo'd movies off of cable- You know like- hey- would you like to see this movie in full DVD resolution without commercial interuption?

So Hollywood- here is your moment in time when you can get in front of this thing. Later will be too late.

Don't dribble it out- Go big. Get aggressive about pumping online DVD quality movies out via Unbox/Blockbuster/Netflix. None of that lo res crap that Unbox is doing now.

Folks aren't stupid. It's a bother, but if they want to own, they will want the real deal, and will rip them just as they did their CDs. Check out the current rippers. In just two years they have radically changed. DVDFab for one is awfully darn painless.

Your move, Hollywood.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

captain_video said:


> If everyone did it, probably not. I'm more of the exception to the rule in this case.


 That is all some people are saying  and to your point BTW - sure I got in on good deals. I got roadrunner just as the courts were clsoing in on original illegal Napster. Still have about 30 gigs of MP3s I downloaded via that err umm service. Now I have rhapsody though as it is much easier, much better quality and my whole family finds it simple to use.

Note - I have downloaded 3 UNOBOXvideos at a time to 3 tivos. all went fast and nary a peep from Road runner and my web browsing or work VPN was not effected in the least


----------



## peteypete (Feb 3, 2004)

I love the weekend specials. Rentals are great but I bought one too. I even used unbox to send a rental to my laptop for travel which i would never have done without having been hooked on it from using my Tivo.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

captain_video said:


> The whole issue of copyright infringement doesn't even apply here since I'm not distributing anything or profiting monetarily from my actions. Everyone is dwelling on the act of copying when the actual infringement doesn't occur until I pass it along to someone else.


Saying it doesn't make it legal. You're wrong. The infringement begins with the act of copying something for which you do not have the license to copy. And as a renter of a DVD, you do not have any license to make a copy of any sort, backup or otherwise. And even if you did implictly have such license, as soon as you returned the original DVD, that license would end and your copy would be infringing on copyright.

Can you go to the library and make a copy of an entire book? No, because that'd be copyright infringement.

The only reason you can do what you're doing is that (a) the studios haven't figured out a way to prevent it; (b) you're small potatoes compared to those who distribute/redistribute multiple copies; and (c) the studios haven't figured out a way to identify people doing what you're doing so they can take legal action.


----------



## aztivo (Feb 23, 2005)

Actually if you notice the FBI warning has been changed and it state to the effect that even if there is no implied monitary gain that it is illegal.. So yes making a copy so you can watch it later is still a violation no matter how you look at it.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

dswallow said:


> Can you go to the library and make a copy of an entire book? No, because that'd be copyright infringement.


It would, but that's not why you can't do that. You can't do that because it would take many tedious hours and cost more than buying the book new.

No such problem with digital media.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Is the Unbox download quality the same as what's on the previews on the TiVo?

If so I might skip my resistance to it - i vowed not to rent until they have them in 16:9, but the 4:3 letterboxed preview I just watched looked surprisingly good. At least $.99 good.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

dswallow said:


> The infringement begins with the act of copying something for which you do not have the license to copy.


Oh well, anyone that ever recorded a show with a VCR or DVR infringed then.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

HDTiVo said:


> Oh well, anyone that ever recorded a show with a VCR or DVR infringed then.


I caught the wink, but the courts ruled back when VCRs came out that time shifting was fair use. No such finding for DVD copying (and I don't expect one).


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

The fact that the courts have ruled in favor of fair use is why I'm justifying my actions. Is it legal to make copies of DVDs I don't own? Absolutely not. The thing is, what's the difference between recording a digital broadcast from DirecTV, Comcast, or FIOS on my HD DVR or making a backup copy of a rental DVD and watching it later? The data is deleted after viewing in either case. The right to view the material has been paid for in both instances. The law already allows for timeshifting programs with the use of a VCR, which also extends to DVRs and DVD recorders.

According to some of the posters here, both actions should be considered illegal. The problem is that the law splits hairs on this issue and makes one action legal and the other not when they essentially amount to the same thing. The real issue is what is done with the material after it's been recorded or copied.

FYI - there's nothing that says I can't burn that show from HBO to DVD for my personal use so please explain to me how making a backup copy of the same copyrighted material would be considered copyright infringement when the other is not? The question here is not a legal issue but the sanity of the law.



> The only reason you can do what you're doing is that (a) the studios haven't figured out a way to prevent it; (b) you're small potatoes compared to those who distribute/redistribute multiple copies; and (c) the studios haven't figured out a way to identify people doing what you're doing so they can take legal action.


a. They keep trying, though. The next generation AACS copy protection for HD-DVDs and Blu-Ray discs was broken weeks before it was even implemented in any commercial releases. If they spent less money on trying to prevent illegal copying they could lower the prices of the media they sell and still make a substantial profit. The pirates will always find a way to circumvent any copy protection they come up with but it's the honest consumer that takes the hit for it.

b. My point exactly. I've already tried to emphasize this several times.

c. This goes to point "b." I'm small potatoes and am not doing anything to threaten the company's bottom line, which is all they care about. I'm simply not worth the trouble. They'd also have to prove intent to distribute to make any sort of case. Having a single backup copy does not constitute intent to distribute, no matter how you spin it.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

pdhenry said:


> I caught the wink, but the courts ruled back when VCRs came out that time shifting was fair use. No such finding for DVD copying (and I don't expect one).


Really, gee. So if something is litigated sometimes the courts carve out rules that are not obvious from the plain reading of the law? That can't be. Making a temporary duplicate of a DVD for later viewing is absolutely illegal and that could never be otherwise under any circumstance, conceivable or inconceivable.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Don't know what your point is. I just said that the courts have not made any ruling regarding whether private copying of a DVD is within fair use rights, as they have regarding home taping of broadcast television. If you can provide a factual rebuttal go ahead.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

captain_video said:


> FYI - there's nothing that says I can't burn that show from HBO to DVD for my personal use so please explain to me how making a backup copy of the same copyrighted material would be considered copyright infringement when the other is not? The question here is not a legal issue but the sanity of the law..


actually there is a copyright flag that can be set by the copyright holder to prevent recording of premium content or as granular as copy once. The flag is usually not set so you are right that usually there is nothing preventing you.

It is easier and better _for them_ to get laws that say copying the material is just illegal, no matter what the use. So a DVD is like a book license. It can be viewed any private place by anyone who has it but from one source it can not be in multiple places. From the copyright holders perspective, that one DVD you made a copy of and then returned is now being viewed by two people but the rental company only had to get one DVD license to make that happen. this is the damage you cause the copyright holder and what they are trying to prevent.

IN the case of HBO or any broadcast - as long as it is timeshifted for your private use then there are not "two copies" being used at the same time and no damages to the copyright holder.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

pdhenry said:


> Don't know what your point is. I just said that the courts have not made any ruling regarding whether private copying of a DVD is within fair use rights, as they have regarding home taping of broadcast television. If you can provide a factual rebuttal go ahead.


There is nothing in doubt to rebut. I prefer to remain subtle and frustrate the obtuse.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> There is nothing in doubt to rebut. I prefer to remain subtle and frustrate the obtuse.


Here! Here! Well said.



> From the copyright holders perspective, that one DVD you made a copy of and then returned is now being viewed by two people but the rental company only had to get one DVD license to make that happen. this is the damage you cause the copyright holder and what they are trying to prevent.


That's absolutely absurd. How exactly does this damage the copyright holder? The DVD comes into my home and is then returned to Blockbuster. Regardless of what transpires while the DVD is in my possession, all affected parties receive the same compensation. The more times the DVD is viewed/rented by different people, the more royalties are being generated (or so I assume as I have no firm grasp on how this is handled through the rental of copyrighted material). My whole argument stems on the fact that nobody is getting shortchanged whatsoever. The material arrives at my home and is returned to Blockbuster without ever being seen by a third party (it's extremely rare that anyone is visiting while I'm watching one of my backup DVDs). This fully supports the spirit of the law as it was intended.

The law was put into place to protect the rights of the copyright holder and to ensure they are fairly compensated for their products. I have yet to hear a valid argument that indicates anyone is getting shafted monetarily through my actions. The proper fees are getting to the proper people whether I watch the DVD, make a backup for later viewing, or choose not to watch it at all. I have a lot of DVDs that I never got around to watching simply because they showed up on HBO-HD, or some other HD channel, before I watched the DVD. Those DVDs get erased without having ever been viewed.

Whatever I do with the DVD while it is in my possession is my business as long as I don't share the contents with anyone else. I can watch a 2-hour DVD 24 times within a 48-hour period (most new movies are 2-day rentals) if I choose to do so and not have to pay one penny more than for a single viewing. If I choose to use it as a coaster or a Frisbee I can do so, as long as I don't damage the disc. I think this has actually happend with some of the discs I've rented based on the condition I get them in. 

If I decide to invite 50 people to watch the DVD in my home theater, does that mean I'm violating any copyrights? Absolutely not, even though the copyright holder is being deprived of potential royalties and Blockbuster is losing out on all those rental fees. However, if I decide to charge admission or show it in a commercial establishment then it is a violation because I'm receiving compensation for someone else's work.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

captain_video said:


> Here! Here! Well said.
> 
> (it's extremely rare that anyone is visiting while I'm watching one of my backup DVDs).


That is of no relevance anyway. You could just as easily have a friend over when watching the actual rented DVD.



> I have yet to hear a valid argument that indicates anyone is getting shafted monetarily through my actions.


The rapid turnover probably leads to reduced actual DVD purchases by the renter, and may necessitate higher prices for such rental plans overall.

------------



> The proper fees are getting to the proper people whether I watch the DVD, make a backup for later viewing, or choose not to watch it at all.


Supreme Court Justice pdhenry has written, in an opinion supported by the majority, otherwise below...


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

captain_video said:


> I have yet to hear a valid argument that indicates anyone is getting shafted monetarily through my actions. The proper fees are getting to the proper people whether I watch the DVD, make a backup for later viewing, or choose not to watch it at all.


That's absurd. You have no right to a "backup for later viewing." The only permissible way to view it later is to rent it later.

I'm also a bit suspicious of your asserting or implication that you erase the DVDs after you've watched them.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

captain_video said:


> That's absolutely absurd. How exactly does this damage the copyright holder? The DVD comes into my home and is then returned to Blockbuster. Regardless of what transpires while the DVD is in my possession, all affected parties receive the same compensation. The more times the DVD is viewed/rented by different people, the more royalties are being generated (or so I assume as I have no firm grasp on how this is handled through the rental of copyrighted material). My whole argument stems on the fact that nobody is getting shortchanged whatsoever.


the rental company determines how many DVDs it will need based on demand. It then pays for siad number of licenses/buys that number of DVDs. the rental company then makes money by renting them out under various plans.

so as you say the rental company makes some revenue as two people are viewing the same DVD at the same time (more or less) but the copyright holder that makes money off the number of DVDs licensed to the rental company loses some revenue. Yes small potatoes for your one instance but still it is lost revenue


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> but the copyright holder that makes money off the number of DVDs licensed to the rental company loses some revenue.


In the Betamax decision the Court didn't say you can't use your Betamax because the copyright holder is going to lose some money. They said it is reasonable for you to use your Betamax and cost the copyright holder some potential revenue.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

HDTiVo said:


> In the Betamax decision the Court didn't say you can't use your Betamax because the copyright holder is going to lose some money. They said it is reasonable for you to use your Betamax and cost the copyright holder some potential revenue.


so is it fair use for the rental company to get 10 DVDs - make a copy of each and send 20 DVDs out? It just costs some potential revenue is all.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Is the Unbox download quality the same as what's on the previews on the TiVo?


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by captain_video
> I have yet to hear a valid argument that indicates anyone is getting shafted monetarily through my actions. The proper fees are getting to the proper people whether I watch the DVD, make a backup for later viewing, or choose not to watch it at all.
> 
> That's absurd. You have no right to a "backup for later viewing." The only permissible way to view it later is to rent it later.


The "right to backup for later viewing" has already been determined to be illegal under the letter of the law. Let's just let that one die for now and move on.



> I'm also a bit suspicious of your asserting or implication that you erase the DVDs after you've watched them.


Whether you believe me or not is absolutely irrelevent, at least to me.  Based on the number of DVDs I rent, I would literally have thousands of discs with no place to put them. It's simply more cost effective for me to use erasable DVDs rather than use DVD-Rs. Like I said, I see very few movies that are worth a 2nd viewing. I spring for the legit copies if I want to keep one for the long haul. Besides, you don't always get the extra discs with the rentals. If I'm going to buy the DVD I'd like to have the liner notes and extra discs that come with it.



> the rental company determines how many DVDs it will need based on demand. It then pays for siad number of licenses/buys that number of DVDs. the rental company then makes money by renting them out under various plans.
> 
> so as you say the rental company makes some revenue as two people are viewing the same DVD at the same time (more or less) but the copyright holder that makes money off the number of DVDs licensed to the rental company loses some revenue. Yes small potatoes for your one instance but still it is lost revenue.


Based on these parameters, the quick turnaround should eventually have an impact on the number of titles ordered by my local Blockbuster outlet as well as BB online, resulting in higher revenue for both the copyright holders and the BB store. If they see more copies being rented out they would be more likely to order additional copies of any given title, at least in theory. In fact, with the new rental agreement with BB online and the ability to get free rentals at any BB store, I would expect them to beef up their inventory to meet the increased demand. My local store literally gets hundreds of copies of the latest releases and the shelves still get cleared out in a hurry. When I can't find any new releases to rent I start looking at the more obscure titles that sit and gather dust. I've discovered a lot of sleeper hits this way that would otherwise go unrented. I still don't see a downside to this.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> so is it fair use for the rental company to get 10 DVDs - make a copy of each and send 20 DVDs out? It just costs some potential revenue is all.


Very different question and most likely no. Not sufficiently analogous to the current case.

The Court did not rule that it was ok for Blockbuster (any commercial entity) to record episodes of the Sopranos on its Betamax(es), make copies and rent them out.



> I'm also a bit suspicious of your asserting or implication that you erase the DVDs after you've watched them.


Apparently Chief Justice pdhenry has also ruled that since he doesn't believe you are doing what you say you are doing, what you say you are doing is therefore illegal.

I don't think Judge pdhenry is getting promoted out of the District level at this point in his career.



> If they see more copies being rented out they would be more likely to order additional copies of any given title


No, you are accelerating the turnover rate beyond the need for additional copies to rent, even to the point of the need for _less _ copies.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

HDTiVo said:


> No, you are accelerating the turnover rate beyond the need for additional copies to rent, even to the point of the need for _less _ copies.


Yep, in court it would be very different if Blockbuster made the copies of course but Blockbuster making the 10 copies and renting out to 20 people at once is no different to the copyright holder who got paid for 10 DVDs than if they rent to 10 people who make a copy and give it right back and then 10 more people get the movie.

anyway you slice it captian_video the overall impact is a negative for the copyright holder and thus is why things like the DMCA and money spent on trying to make better copy protection continues. It is not the copyright holders and those that abide by copyrights that create the environment for these draconian laws but the people that constantly rationalize their circumvention. Have fun with that. Peace out.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

MickeS said:


> Is the Unbox download quality the same as what's on the previews on the TiVo?


I think so. But then I watch on an SD TV with 2 speakers so I am not the most exacting judge. Overall I find the Movie plays well with no macroblocking on my 32" Toshiba SD tube TV and the audio quality is even with no need to fiddle with the sound. True I am not trying to break it out to 5 speakers though.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> Yep, in court it would be very different if Blockbuster made the copies of course but Blockbuster making the 10 copies and renting out to 20 people at once is no different to the copyright holder who got paid for 10 DVDs than if they rent to 10 people who make a copy and give it right back and then 10 more people get the movie.


Who said anything about Blockbuster making copies to rent out? Every DVD I've ever rented a DVD it has been a commercial disk in the case or one that's been stamped for rental only and not for retail sale.



> anyway you slice it captian_video the overall impact is a negative for the copyright holder and thus is why things like the DMCA and money spent on trying to make better copy protection continues. It is not the copyright holders and those that abide by copyrights that create the environment for these draconian laws but the people that constantly rationalize their circumvention. Have fun with that. Peace out.


Sorry, but I'm not buying that logic. Based on what was posted earlier it sounds like Blockbuster buys a fixed number of copies from the copyright holder for rental purposes. My guess is that the copyright holder gets his money upfront based on the sale of discs to BB and other rental outlets and not royalties based on the number of times a disc is rented. I could be offbase on this but I'm going by what the rest of you experts are telling me.

That being said, once BB has the discs in hand, any money they make from rentals goes into their coffers and not the copyright holder's pocket. The number or times a disc is rented is therefore irrelevant with respect to any funds the copyright holder will garner from the sale of said discs. BB is the one that sees the profits from a higher turnaround since they can rent a DVD more times within any given period as a result.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

captain_video said:


> That being said, once BB has the discs in hand, any money they make from rentals goes into their coffers and not the copyright holder's pocket. The number or times a disc is rented is therefore irrelevant with respect to any funds the copyright holder will garner from the sale of said discs. BB is the one that sees the profits from a higher turnaround since they can rent a DVD more times within any given period as a result.


And by you violating the copyright and making a copy then returning the original quickly rather than keeping the original DVD out of circulation for a little longer, you're reducing the number of copies the rental company needs to buy in order to have the movie on hand for rental.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

HDTiVo said:


> Apparently Chief Justice pdhenry has also ruled that since he doesn't believe you are doing what you say you are doing, what you say you are doing is therefore illegal.


Might as well call a spade a spade.


----------



## Hit The Ball (Jun 26, 2002)

HDTiVo said:


> In the Betamax decision the Court didn't say you can't use your Betamax because the copyright holder is going to lose some money. They said it is reasonable for you to use your Betamax and cost the copyright holder some potential revenue.


It was my understanding that the Betamax decision was to allow someone to record a TV show for later personal viewing. Please post a link to the section where it says it OK to copy a pre-recorded movie.

HTB


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> Yep, in court it would be very different if Blockbuster made the copies of course but Blockbuster making the 10 copies and renting out to 20 people at once is no different to the copyright holder who got paid for 10 DVDs than if they rent to 10 people who make a copy and give it right back and then 10 more people get the movie.
> 
> anyway you slice it captian_video the overall impact is a negative for the copyright holder


Sure the former is still different for many reasons.

Of course the overall impact is negative on the copyright holder. However, that obviously was not the controlling issue leading to the rights carved out in the Betamax case.

Okay, all you Summary Judgement Legal Scholars. Can you site me a precedent where an individual copied or recorded and returned original content (any form - broadcast, VHS, DVD ... ; rented, purchased ...) at home, watched it at home in a similar manner to what they might have watched the original source (ie. didn't invite 500 people over or watch it numerous times), and deleted said copy/recording thereafter? What was the outcome?

I've cited as my precedent Betamax, a decision from the US Supreme Court. In that case the content was broadcast via free OTA (government owned & licensed) airwaves. At that time that was pretty much the only soruce that could be at issue. I argue in today's world there are many other sources, but that the issue was not decided based on source, but on _use_, *fair use*, and what constituted such fair use. Thus the Courts should decide to extend the rights created in the Betamax case to other sources provided the _use _ is under similar ground rules.

Sounds like a decent case so far.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

captain_video said:


> That being said, once BB has the discs in hand, any money they make from rentals goes into their coffers and not the copyright holder's pocket.


If people are making copies and returning the disks, the store needs to keep fewer on-hand, thus reducing proceeds to the original author.

- edit - oops, smeek.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

MickeS said:


> Is the Unbox download quality the same as what's on the previews on the TiVo?


 I can't recall the quality of the TiVo/Amazon Unbox promos but we've rented a few Unbox videos now and have been pretty happy with them. They aren't HD quality and the audio isn't 5.1 Dolby but it is surround sound.

We watch them on our 42" HD LCD and the quality of the picture and surround sound is as good as the best SD shows. Our video is HDMI directly to the TV and our audio is delivered from TiVo via optical to our HT receiver which is set to ProLogic II when its not running Dolby 5.1, THX or DTS.

We just rented "Music and Lyrics" and the "Last King of Scotland" over the weekend for 99 cents each. :up: (As opposed to $3.99 each on Comcast VOD/PPV.)

To compare:

- Unbox copy of _Music and Lyrics _ = 1 hour 44 minutes/2.4GB of data
- Planet Earth _Caves_ HD = 1 hour/7.28GB of data

Our rule of thumb is that if it's a movie for my wife (aka: "Chick Flick") or one without a lot of special effects, etc., Amazon Unbox is perfectly fine. They start downloading about 5 minutes after we order them and they can sit there for 30 days before they expire. We like the 99 cent specials they offer on weekends too.

However if it's a high-tech feature film with a lot of special effects (aka: "Guy flick with lots of stuff blowing up and space ships wizzing by), we'll spring for the HD PPV or go ahead and rent the DVD from Blockbuster (particularly if there are bonus tracks on the DVD we'd like to view).

Hope that helps!

Oh...and there's absolutely nothing wrong with "Chick flicks" of course!


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

Hit The Ball said:


> It was my understanding that the Betamax decision was to allow someone to record a TV show for later personal viewing. Please post a link to the section where it says it OK to copy a pre-recorded movie.


Just as a note- in case fair use advocates have forgotten- the suit on 321 studios didn't ask the courts to re-examine what Betamax made legal. Instead, Macrovision sued based on patent infringement. You have to use their algorithm to read the DVDs, so therefore the software was illegal. It seems to me they would use an identical play with DVDFab and similar tools for copying (oh yeah, and with similar appeal to the DMCA). They haven't yet, and some tools talked about on Doom have been around longer than 321's thing.

Regardless if they try, I don't see any way to stomp out freeware, so there is a huge practical enforcement problem if Hollywood believes it can use repression to avoid a repeat of the MP3 debacle.

My belief is the only hope is to get ahead of the parade and mold consumer patterns before they get established. Low cost unbox/blockbuster sales is one way to do it. It really would be a lot more attractive than ripping and building a video server, but once that pattern is established, there will be an ecosystem built up around it, and nuclear force won't be able to dislodge it.

The main problem with my Ground Hog day analogy is that it took Bill Murray hundreds if not thousands of times repeating the same mistakes for for him to learn how to get it right.


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

richsadams said:


> They aren't HD quality and the audio isn't 5.1 Dolby but it is surround sound.


Unbox videos I tested were close to a VHS quality tape. Picture comparisons are here.

Just for fun- I rented from Netflix the same movie and it was way way better than unbox. If anyone is curious about the pictures, I'd be happy to post them.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Justin Thyme said:


> Unbox videos I tested were close to a VHS quality tape. Picture comparisons are here.
> 
> Just for fun- I rented from Netflix the same movie and it was way way better than unbox. If anyone is curious about the pictures, I'd be happy to post them.


I'd be interested to see.

I just tried to order a rental for the first time. GOD DAMN that Amazon site is a f***ing maze. I still don't know if I ordered it correctly. When I click the "Download" button in the Downloads library (or wherever the hell I finally managed to find that button) it says it's already downloaded, but there's nothing on my TiVo.
Oh well.


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

Okey Doke- I'll post them later this evening.

By the way, for rippers that have a CSS license to read DVDs do not violate the agreement with the DVD CCA's if they make an electronic copy of the DVD. This was the result of the Kaleidescape ruling last year. Judge didn't rule if copyright was infringed on- he just ruled against the argument in DVD CCA's suit that Kaleidescape violated the agreement. I suppose that can hole can be closed when folks have to renew their licenses, but I neglected to add a mention of that facet of the dvd copying legal picture.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Justin Thyme said:


> Unbox videos I tested were close to a VHS quality tape. Picture comparisons are here.
> 
> Just for fun- I rented from Netflix the same movie and it was way way better than unbox. If anyone is curious about the pictures, I'd be happy to post them.


 Hmmm...maybe our VCR isn't as good as yours...haven't fired it up in a while...but the Unbox videos we've watched are as good as any SD show saved at the "Best" level on our TiVo. Purists certainly should stick with DVD's.


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

Is that pink, blue, or purple SD? 

Ok. Maybe just brown.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Justin Thyme said:


> Is that pink, blue, or purple SD?
> 
> Ok. Maybe just brown.


Ha!


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

above is unbox








above is HD-DVD (Toshiba XA1)​
Just for reference, 








This is DVD upscaled by Toshiba XA1.​
These are details of the same frame of Christmas Vacation displayed here.

As I said in that thread: Amazon to their credit is up front about only sending you one half the data of a dvd. In the full frame referenced above, really no one except you in your family will notice if you have a 40 inch or lower screen. But for a 50 inch or bigger- folks will notice a lot- especially if they sit closer than normal. It is uncomfortable to watch- the kind of thing folks used to lunge for the rabbit ears to see if they could make it come in a little bit sharper.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Justin Thyme
> Unbox videos I tested were close to a VHS quality tape. Picture comparisons are here.
> 
> ...


Finally! A rational response to the OP's question that echoes what I've been trying to say all along before everyone started joining the FBI witchhunt. Nice to see that at least a few people are trying to keep this thread on topic.  DVDs are better than Unbox and you can get a rental plan such that your cost per disc is comparable to what Unbox charges, if not less  . Considering that Unbox only gives you half the data, $1.99 per DVD would still be a bargain by comparison.

If you've ever seen a VHS tape on a big screen TV you'll understand where I'm coming from. On a small TV, Unbox will probably be fine for some people since the amount of detail is lessened anyway. I gave up on SA Tivos a long time ago since they just didn't measure up when viewed on a big screen. Even DTivos are lacking in quality, mostly due to the amount of compression DTV is applying to their channels.

Unbox may be inexpensive and convenient and attractive to some. For those of us that prefer a bit better quality, stick with DVDs. Better yet, move up to HD-DVDs or Blu-Ray discs. With the format war being what it is, I'll certainly understand why many people won't take the plunge.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Justin Thyme said:
 

> Okey Doke- I'll post them later this evening.
> 
> By the way, for rippers that have a CSS license to read DVDs do not violate the agreement with the DVD CCA's if they make an electronic copy of the DVD. This was the result of the Kaleidescape ruling last year. Judge didn't rule if copyright was infringed on- he just ruled against the argument in DVD CCA's suit that Kaleidescape violated the agreement. I suppose that can hole can be closed when folks have to renew their licenses, but I neglected to add a mention of that facet of the dvd copying legal picture.


I thought your initial patent argument was a good one, subject to the fact that a patent licensee would be okay. Thanks for showing the above example.

Also, the DMCA would certainly come into play in any Court decision.

As to your other point about ground hogs, I suspect its not nearly as bad as you think. Its alot about "negotiating" for property rights while your business decline remains less than the rights you think you will get. The content makers play the game repeatedly. I also suspect they go some distance too far each time, but maybe that has to be because you don't know when to quit until you observe you are starting to lose more than you could gain.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

captain_video said:


> Finally! A rational response to the OP's question that echoes what I've been trying to say all along before everyone started joining the FBI witchhunt. Nice to see that at least a few people are trying to keep this thread on topic.  DVDs are better than Unbox and you can get a rental plan such that your cost per disc is comparable to what Unbox charges, if not less  . Considering that Unbox only gives you half the data, $1.99 per DVD would still be a bargain by comparison.


Its interesting to see this download market developing. It is miniscule compared to the entire market. The magnitude of the reaction people are having to lower prices is very interesting.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

I tried it last night for the first time, and it took about 4 hours to download a 2 hour movie. I don't know if that's normal or not, but I guess it was OK. I wish I would have been able to start watching it before the download was finished though, like with PC->TiVo recordings.

I didn't find any $0.99 rentals. Do you have to have some special code for those?


----------



## moxie1617 (Jan 5, 2004)

The specials have only been available on the weekends.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Justin Thyme said:


> As I said in that thread: Amazon to their credit is up front about only sending you one half the data of a dvd. In the full frame referenced above, really no one except you in your family will notice if you have a 40 inch or lower screen. But for a 50 inch or bigger- folks will notice a lot- especially if they sit closer than normal. It is uncomfortable to watch- the kind of thing folks used to lunge for the rabbit ears to see if they could make it come in a little bit sharper.


 Thanks for posting those photos. :up:

Point taken about 50+ inch screens, but I have to say that on our 3 month old 42 inch LCD the PQ of the Unbox movies we've rented are no where near that poor. I suppose if I put my nose on the screen it might not look so good, but at about 6 to 10 feet we'd rate the picture quality very good...certainly not HD, but again as good as any SD television show TiVo recorded in best quality.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

MickeS said:


> I tried it last night for the first time, and it took about 4 hours to download a 2 hour movie. I don't know if that's normal or not, but I guess it was OK. I wish I would have been able to start watching it before the download was finished though, like with PC->TiVo recordings.
> 
> I didn't find any $0.99 rentals. Do you have to have some special code for those?


 Our TiVo Ethernet is connected directly to our router (Comcast cable broadband). It appears to take less than 20 or 30 minutes to download a typical Unbox movie of 2GB to 3GB. Depending on your setup, 802.11g or 802.11n, etc., wi-fi would certainly take longer.

As Moxie pointed out...the 99 cent specials are usually featured on the weekends although I just looked and there were several 99 cent movies available right now. Now and then they'll have sales on purchases too. We bought a movie for $5.99 a while back. I'm not sure I'd do that again unless it was something we'd want to show to friends and/or family. We used to archive a lot of programs but soon realized they'd just sit on the shelf (or on TiVo) and collect dust so we don't do that much anymore.

Agreed, it was a bit of a pain to get an Amazon Unbox account set up...but now we can go to www.amazon.com/unbox, select a movie and use their "One click" button to order it making it quite simple.

Again, if it's an important, high-tech kind of cinematic experience I'd still opt for DVD. But for the run-of-the-mill chewing gum for the eyes movie...Unbox works for us.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

richsadams said:


> Our TiVo Ethernet is connected directly to our router (Comcast cable broadband). It appears to take less than 20 or 30 minutes to download a typical Unbox movie of 2GB to 3GB. Depending on your setup, 802.11g or 802.11n, etc., wi-fi would certainly take longer.


I use 802.11b, so I guess that accounts for some of the lower speed. But I'd think that it shouldn't matter that much - my Internet connection (Cox cable) is probably slower than the wi-fi anyway (I think it was around 9 mbps when I tested last). How fast is your Internet connection?

I tried swivel search (on my S2, for some reason it;s not yet on my Series 3), and it will be great when Unbox videos can be ordered from there. And when they'll be in 16:9.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

MickeS said:


> I use 802.11b,


I have a Model A Ford, but I don't use it for Interstate travel. 

Don't judge this without the "latest" technology on your side. There is a legitimate issue with the fact that its designed to require complete download and processing before playback can begin, which aggravates any download speed questions.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

MickeS said:


> I use 802.11b, so I guess that accounts for some of the lower speed. But I'd think that it shouldn't matter that much - my Internet connection (Cox cable) is probably slower than the wi-fi anyway (I think it was around 9 mbps when I tested last). How fast is your Internet connection?
> 
> I tried swivel search (on my S2, for some reason it;s not yet on my Series 3), and it will be great when Unbox videos can be ordered from there. And when they'll be in 16:9.


 Yep, 802.11b is going to be a bit slow. You should be able to upgrade to 802.11g very cheaply now and even 802.11n is pretty inexpensive compared to when it was introduced a while back.

I use Speakeasy to run tests periodically. The speed really depends on where the data is coming from, how many people are using our particular exchange and line, etc., etc. Here's the latest for us:

SFO
Download Speed: 13352 kbps (1669 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 1736 kbps (217 KB/sec transfer rate)

NY
Download Speed: 5716 kbps (714.5 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 1438 kbps (179.8 KB/sec transfer rate)

So as you can see it varies widely from points coast to coast. I'm not sure where the Unbox videos are coming from.

It will indeed be sweet whenever they get Unbox activated on TiVo...then I can _really _ be a couch potato! And you are right, I forgot the Unbox movies are not in 16:9 which is a bit of a nuisance...we use TiVos zoom feature to fill the screen w/o much loss of content but widescreen would certainly be better.


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

On resolution, there is a tipping point- like with the old dot matrix printers that had jaggies visible on the fonts. Most folks don't want a 10dpi printer. But after 300dpi, it's like- ok fine. This is pretty good print resolution today, and it will be sufficient 100 years from now regardless whether one billion dpi is possible then. It's something to bear in mind with this notion that resolutions will progress infinitely upward- today HD, tomorrow super HD at 4 Megapixels of resolution, then ultra HD with 10MPixles per frame (actually a cam that does that is only $17K today) etc. etc. I have a 1966 convertible muscle car with 389 Cu in engine fed by a 4 barrell Holley carb. Interstate travel is great in it. Difference is that ripped dvds don't wear out, and my great grandson could potentially enjoy this Criterion copy of Casablanca just as much as I do even though it is "only" dvd resolution.

Personally, I think an upscaled DVD looks fine from 6 feet away on the 58 inch panel we have upstairs.

So I would naturally go for (and am) building a library at DVD resolution. Given the hassles of ripping the hundreds of dvds, I am sincere that I'd gladly pay unbox this money if only they had the resolution. Given the current resolution, to use unbox for my library would be a stupid investment because really it is already only viewable on one of the TVs in the house due to the low resolution. Since Mrs. Thyme already thinks the movie room 58 inch panel is way too big, I don't imagine I will be buying any 200 inch panels even if they are only $1.98 in the future. So HD would be nice, but a dvd resolution library would be sufficient.

Ok- so what does this tipping point mean for online video distribution? In my case, Amazon either gets the money for the dvd, or they get it for the download. The have an interest in me going to the download purchase, since I would have a long term relationship because they would be hosting my library. Hollywood also has an interest because it is not healthy for their long term business if they inadvertently force consumers to choose a pattern where they start ripping dvds into an unprotected form that can and unfortunately will be swapped around the way kids swap mp3's.

So as I said before- this is a golden moment for them where they can guide consumer patterns. It's plain enough they are heading full speed into the quagmire that the music industry has found itself in regarding private libraries of easily transfered digital music.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

Based on the reports posted on the quality of the downloaded videos, one wonders why Unbox didn't use a better compression scheme that would yield small files and higher resolution, such as mpeg4. This would certainly be feasible for the PC crowd but not so much for the Tivo users. I can only surmise that they were more interested in reaching a broader user base than providing better quality. No doubt this decision was made by the bean counters and not the home theater enthusiasts. 

Ironically, I just noticed that Verizon is now offering a similar service to their FIOS and DSL subscribers called Movielink. It's not set up to work with Tivos but if you watch movies on your PC (I still can't see why anyone would want to do this unless you're in a dorm room and don't own a TV) or HTPC this might be of interest to you. Here's the link in case anyone's interested:

http://verizon.movielink.com/store/web/home/home.jsp?modelID=model4

I have no idea what sort of quality downloads they provide but I'd bet they're on a par with Unbox. Rentals start at $0.99 with most movies available for $1.99 and up. They have a different surprise $0.99 rental posted each day. It looks like the rental terms are similar to Unbox in that you can keep the movie for 30 days but you have to watch it within 24 hours after you initiate playback.

I'd be curious to know how Unbox users would feel about $0.99 VHS rentals if they were available? Would they think they're a good deal or would they turn their nose up at them like most of us after seeing them next to the DVD version of the same movie? It sounds like that's exactly what Unbox users are getting, which doesn't seem like much of a deal to me.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

captain_video said:


> I'd be curious to know how Unbox users would feel about $0.99 VHS rentals if they were available? Would they think they're a good deal or would they turn their nose up at them like most of us after seeing them next to the DVD version of the same movie? It sounds like that's exactly what Unbox users are getting, which doesn't seem like much of a deal to me.


the thing is for many early UNBOX users, it is not about the quality per se.

We have wireless speakers that both have an on/off switch. I catch my wife listening to music with just one speaker on all the time. to her Stereo just does not matter. She is the same with resolution on a TV screen, it just does not matter to her as long as she can make out what is happening. I see this same divided mindset in the video game market. The Wii is taking off and selling as soon as they hit shelves. It is not about better graphics or more powerful game play, but about a different kind of game play that is more fun to many. Then you have hard core gamers, who know a lot more about how everything works and see the Wii as a toy they would not want to have.

UNBOX and video is just like this. Of course people would not want VHS tapes, but not because of video quality but because they can not just download the movie and easily watch it on their TV. That is what UNBOX is selling at the end of the day, not high quality video but easy to watch video. Once they beat out PPV or video rental store pricing and get below 2$ rentals then people flock to it.

Hopefully they will improve resolution and more importantly the audio quality but that will not drive a large uptick in sales, but just add on the enthusiasts to whom video quality is important. IN this forum the enthusiasts are represented in larger number then regular folk so it is harder to see here but that is the market UNBOX works in


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

captain_video said:


> Based on the reports posted on the quality of the downloaded videos, one wonders why Unbox didn't use a better compression scheme that would yield small files and higher resolution, such as mpeg4.


They did use mpeg4. They had to transcode everything to mpeg2 to make it available to Series 2 TiVoes.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

captain_video said:


> I'd be curious to know how Unbox users would feel about $0.99 VHS rentals if they were available? Would they think they're a good deal or would they turn their nose up at them like most of us after seeing them next to the DVD version of the same movie? It sounds like that's exactly what Unbox users are getting, which doesn't seem like much of a deal to me.


The only reason that the Unbox videos are selling/renting is the convenience. If you have to leave the house to rent a VHS, you might as well get a DVD instead.

For me, the Unbox video was just good enough to keep using it. It was too soft and "out of focus" to be worth buying, but good enough for a rental every once in a while. In no way can it compete with DVD in any area except convenience.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

captain_video said:


> I'd be curious to know how Unbox users would feel about $0.99 VHS rentals if they were available? Would they think they're a good deal or would they turn their nose up at them like most of us after seeing them next to the DVD version of the same movie? It sounds like that's exactly what Unbox users are getting, which doesn't seem like much of a deal to me.


 To be fair and once more...the PQ of the movies we've rented from Amazon Unbox is far superior to VHS and on par with the best SD recordings on TiVo. They are not DVD quality and some purists may object to that...no one's breaking their arm to rent them.

Believe me, watching a poor quality movie drives me nuts. If you ask my wife she'll tell you I'm a borderline audio/video purest. If the movie in question demands the best audio and video reproduction our equipment can more than handle it and I'll rent the DVD. But for your basic non-high tech movie Unbox does a fine job and to keep slamming them as if they are just garbage and a waste of time is unfair...particularly from those that haven't seen one.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

I'm sure the whole appeal of Unbox boils down to convenience over all else. I can't see where it has anything else going for it. I suppose what I was getting at is whether the people that rent Unbox movies would choose a $0.99 VHS rental over a more expensive DVD if they had to go to the video store. If so, then Unbox would undoubtedly be their top choice.



> But for your basic non-high tech movie Unbox does a fine job and to keep slamming them as if they are just garbage and a waste of time is unfair...particularly from those that haven't seen one.


I've already conceded that viewing an Unbox movie on a small screen is probably adequate for most people. For those of us that have big screen TVs and home theater setups, we tend to be more critical of what we watch so Unbox would definitely not fill the bill. Nevertheless, Unbox will have a market niche, just like video ipods and the like. There are those that value convenience and cost over quality so there will always be a market for such products.

I don't have to see an Unbox movie to know it's not something I'd particularly enjoy. An mpeg2 file with that amount of compression can't be good on a big screen TV. Someone already indicated it's on a par with VHS quality, but obviously some of you feel it may be better than that. I certainly wouldn't waste my time renting one but, as they say, one man's garbage is another man's treasure. 

Here's the hierarchy I use as my standard for picture quality for consumer products, from lowest to highest:

8mm/VHS/Beta
Hi-8/S-VHS/ED-Beta (I never actually saw one of these since they were mostly used in commercial camcorders but this is where they should have fallen based on the technical specs, albeit perhaps with a slight edge over the other two formats)
SA Tivo/ReplayTV
DTivo/UTV/D-VHS & Dish DVR (SD recording)
DVD
*HDTivo/Dish HD DVR/HD D-VHS (again, I've never used one of these for HD recording but I'm guessing this is where they'd fit in since they're all just just bit recorders)
*HR20 DTV HD DVR (I'm assuming the mpeg4 broadcasts are slightly better than DTV's mpeg2 HD offerings)
*S3 Tivo (digital cable and FIOS sources have less compression than what DTV or Dish provide)
HD-DVD/Blu-Ray

* OTA recording should be identical for all of these devices since they're just dumping the original digital data to a hard drive.

IMHO, based on my current hardware and viewing preferences, anything below the quality of a DTivo/UTV/Dish DVR is simply not aceptable for viewing. Then again, any low resolution format is going to look like crap on a 60" screen, unless you like looking at a colored snowstorm. If you have a small screen (32" or less) then Unbox should be fine as your viewing source. Big screen afficionados will undoubtedly want to look elsewhere.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

captain_video said:


> I've already conceded that viewing an Unbox movie on a small screen is probably adequate for most people. For those of us that have big screen TVs and home theater setups, we tend to be more critical of what we watch so Unbox would definitely not fill the bill.
> 
> I don't have to see an Unbox movie to know it's not something I'd particularly enjoy. An mpeg2 file with that amount of compression can't be good on a big screen TV. Someone already indicated it's on a par with VHS quality, but obviously some of you feel it may be better than that. I certainly wouldn't waste my time renting one but, as they say, one man's garbage is another man's treasure.


 Author Bernard Bailey once said "When they discover the center of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it."

P.S. Our HT can beat up your HT.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

I watched Blood Diamonds on my S3 and used the aspect-zoom to fill the widescreen TV. 

While it was certainly not anywhere near DVD quality, I found myself enjoying the free movie (working off my $15 credit). I imagine I would have also enjoyed it at $0.99.


----------



## moxie1617 (Jan 5, 2004)

It was just slighty less good at $.99.


----------



## Solver (Feb 17, 2005)

I enjoy the 99 cent Amazon movie rentals. I would also enjoy $1.99 rentals as well. I would not enjoy a $2.99 rental since I would not rent the current product at that price.
Come to think of it, ever since the Pay per View people raised their (one time) movie view price from $1.99 to $2.99, I have never paid to rent a single movie from them. Go figure.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

captain_video said:


> Nevertheless, Unbox will have a market niche, just like video ipods and the like. There are those that value convenience and cost over quality so there will always be a market for such products.


the irony is that Home Theater is the market niche and UNBOX quality is just fine is the general market.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> the irony is that Home Theater is the market niche and UNBOX quality is just fine is the general market.


I'd agree that Unbox is for the general market but anyone with a big screen TV and a modest surround system technically qualifies as having a home theater. It's no longer a niche market like it once was. More and more people are buying big screen HDTVs every day and the prices keep plummeting. There are lots of "Home Theater in a Box" audio surround systems available for less than $500 to complete the home theater experience for not a lot of money.

Once you've taken the plunge into HD it's very difficult to go back to something like Unbox or VHS. Sorry if anyone thinks I'm being "elitest" in my statements but I think most people that have switched to HDTV would agree with it. Watching anything of low quality and resolution on a big screen HDTV is simply annoying at best. I find I can tolerate such signals only on a small screen TV. I didn't buy a 60" HDTV to feed it low-rez signals, but hey, that's just me.  If you've never bought into HDTV then you wouldn't understand and will no doubt be perfectly happy with Unbox or other low-rez sources for your viewing pleasure.

All I can say is, if you like Unbox then nobody's stopping you from ordering all the movies you want. It's all good, people.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

captain_video said:


> If you've never bought into HDTV then you wouldn't understand and will no doubt be perfectly happy with Unbox or other low-rez sources for your viewing pleasure.


this is the elitist part. I have not bought into HD yet as this christmas or super bowl season is my target to coinicde with all the big sales. Yet I understand perfectly that an UNBOX quality movie will display far more compression artifacts on a 60" TV. I am pretty sure a survey of households will find that those with a 60" TV is still not a large part of the market and not the intended market as UNBOX is introduced. I am comfortable in standing by that statement.

in the future people will find 2 dimensional displays to be unwatchable. oops perhpas I looked too far ahead


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> tI understand perfectly that an UNBOX quality movie will display far more compression artifacts on a 60" TV.


What surprised me was that on my 42" HD TV, the problem was not compression artifacts. In fact I don't think I noticed a single such occurrence.

What they've done to increase compression instead is to slightly blur the picture - everything looks like it's a little out of focus. I think this would not be noticeable on a regular CRT TV, but it is very noticeable on HD.

I think they've done a pretty good job with the parameters they've had to work with.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

MickeS said:


> What surprised me was that on my 42" HD TV, the problem was not compression artifacts. In fact I don't think I noticed a single such occurrence.
> 
> What they've done to increase compression instead is to slightly blur the picture - everything looks like it's a little out of focus. I think this would not be noticeable on a regular CRT TV, but it is very noticeable on HD.
> 
> I think they've done a pretty good job with the parameters they've had to work with.


ah, thanks for the clarification. I have watched them on a 12 inch LCD in my bedroom and a 32inch tube TV. Your are right - the blur is not noticeable. I have watched HD downconverted on the tube TV and even with the down conversion the crispness of that is unmistakeable.

alongside with my other comments I am sure UNBOX will up the quality as they can, it does sound like they already have some very knowledgeable people working on this issue. It is not like they are deliberately shooting for VHS quality for its own sake.


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

ZeoTiVo said:


> It is not like they are deliberately shooting for VHS quality for its own sake.


Oh, I think they are deliberately segmenting. They segment with release dates by media now. They segment by resolutions for digital release over time. Same thing. Get it?

If you buy the argument that resolutions go up forever this works. You segment, exploit that low res segment- see what happens with returns/ cracking/ impact on profits. Then you write it off and loosen up on the next step up- dvd resolution then HD, then super HD, then Ultra HD.

They think my Grandson will not be interested in the copy of the dvd that is sitting on my server and will be replicated in the family in perpetuity.

It's a wrong bet. They over-rate the appeal of higher resolutions. As you guys have been remarking- the differences even between unbox and dvd is not that big a deal on the size of screen that is comfortable (doesn't dominate) the living room. Mrs. Thyme actually insisted on smaller than 42 even though she could have had anything she wanted. And I built the cabinets so that nothing larger can replace it.

It may well be that my grandson's wife insists the same, and if that is so, then even the jump from dvd to hd segment won't be that compelling.

IMHO, they are going to have to do ground hog day a thousand times before they get it right.

Only they only have one try. They blow this now, and let things go to ripped copies to personal servers, and their libraries are worth zip.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Justin Thyme said:


> It may well be that my grandson's wife insists the same,


I hope your grandson shows some backbone and redecorates like a man.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

captain_video said:


> I'd agree that Unbox is for the general market but anyone with a big screen TV and a modest surround system technically qualifies as having a home theater. It's no longer a niche market like it once was. More and more people are buying big screen HDTVs every day and the prices keep plummeting. There are lots of "Home Theater in a Box" audio surround systems available for less than $500 to complete the home theater experience for not a lot of money.
> 
> Once you've taken the plunge into HD it's very difficult to go back to something like Unbox or VHS. Sorry if anyone thinks I'm being "elitest" in my statements but I think most people that have switched to HDTV would agree with it. Watching anything of low quality and resolution on a big screen HDTV is simply annoying at best. I find I can tolerate such signals only on a small screen TV. I didn't buy a 60" HDTV to feed it low-rez signals, but hey, that's just me.  If you've never bought into HDTV then you wouldn't understand and will no doubt be perfectly happy with Unbox or other low-rez sources for your viewing pleasure.
> 
> All I can say is, if you like Unbox then nobody's stopping you from ordering all the movies you want. It's all good, people.


 OMG  The horse you rode in on couldn't be more deceased! Leave the poor thing alone man!

Shall I recap to be sure we all understand your wisdom? We understand the fact that you've never seen an Amazon Unbox movie. We understand that even if you did you're positive that you wouldn't like it. We understand why you wouldn't like it for all of the reasons you've stated ad nauseam. We understand that you have a Hummer of a home theater that prevents you from enjoying anything less than cinematic perfection. (We also feel your pain.) We understand that anyone watching a movie on anything less than whatever is christened as the ultimate home theater couldn't experience anything more than mediocrity and most assuredly deep sorrow. Did I mention that we understand that you've never seen an Unbox movie?

Enough already! We get it...WE GET IT! And we all hope and pray that you're never, ever subjected to anything as common as an Unbox movie lest your universe and all that you know to be good, just and right come crashing down around you!

BTW, I too might have made the same uniformed assumptions until I actually watched an Unbox movie on my tiny 42" HD LCD TV. But based on the feedback here it appears that _most _ people don't agree with your position and we _both_ would have been wrong.

That said, can we pahleeze get back to the original topic and move on?  Thank you.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Justin Thyme said:


> Oh, I think they are deliberately segmenting. They segment with release dates by media now. They segment by resolutions for digital release over time. Same thing. Get it?
> 
> If you buy the argument that resolutions go up forever this works. You segment, exploit that low res segment- see what happens with returns/ cracking/ impact on profits. Then you write it off and loosen up on the next step up- dvd resolution then HD, then super HD, then Ultra HD.
> 
> ...


I agree with all of that.

I'd also like to point out that lower resolutions probably reduce piracy.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

My perspective:

I find the image quality of an SD-DVD on an HDTV display to be pretty nasty. It's one of the factors keeping me out of the HDTV market. Unbox on a 31 inch SDTV screen is less objectional than a commercial DVD on an HDTV screen.

And I eagerly await whatever 99 cent wonders Amazon will offer tomorrow.


----------



## Redux (Oct 19, 2004)

richsadams said:


> Enough already! We get it...WE GET IT!


He's an interesting character, a genuine Tivo old-timer, made his mark many years by packaging Tivos with software done by the developers at the "other" forum and selling them as "hacked" Tivos at a premium.

He's a genuinely helpful guy, has done some good newbie tutorials, and his tone here is not entirely representative. You've got to understand that (in relative terms) he's a giant walking among pigmy luddites here, and that occasionally shows through a little. He's OK.


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

That is unquestionably in their thinking- they allow unencrypted 320x240 files for portable video devices now, but not higher resolutions.

Once a river starts flowing, it carves its own channel. As the water is first finding its way to the sea, many simple things can be done to control where that channel gets etched. Afterwards, it is near impossible to redirect it.

The studios are not offering a choice that is in their long term interest. If they go with libraries at dvd quality on the retailer's servers, then it fixes this problem. 

My Grandson in 30 years won't be able to download a digital copy of the dvd if it is sitting on an unbox server only accessible from my account. Even my son won't get the copies, because the downloads are restricted to a single household. So the studios' interests are satisfied.

My interests are satisfied because it is more convenient for me to acquire an online library than one where I have to maintain a box, hook it up to my home network, rip the dvds. But studios are fooling themselves if they think it is too huge barrier for the bulk of consumers- It's no bigger a deal than with MP3s, the public is much more sophisticated than when CD ripping became the rage.

People will do it if there are no other more convenient choices. 

But only a fool would think that droves of folks are going to choose that convenience and the very short shelflife of unbox resolution over the long shelf life of a ripped dvd copy.

So you could say- sure sure- maybe it will turn out the way that some random anonymous fellow said on some internet forum. What is to stop the studios from allowing Amazon, Netflix, and Blockbuster to later sell dvd resolution files with lifetime redownload. Reason? Too late. Once a consumer behavior is set, it is very difficult to change. Folks will have tasted the extra fluidity of owning a copy without DRM. They can transfer it electronically, let them copy it off their computer as kids now do with MP3's, etc.

They will decline to let Unbox maintain the consumer's library of purchased video. So it's Checkmate if they wait- the door can't be shut after the cow leaves, can't stuff the genie back into the bottle... pick your platitude.

I just think the Studios think their are do-overs due to escalation of demand for resolution. If people go to ripping and retaining an unlocked copy in perpetuity, then the Studios figure they can do-over the unbox librarying way at HD resolution. But are there really "do-overs"? For that they will have to consider carefully the sufficiency of DVD resolution on screens that the Mrs. Thymes of the world will allow in their living rooms. 

I'm afraid if they mess up on dvd resolution, there's no do-overs.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Redux said:


> He's an interesting character, a genuine Tivo old-timer, made his mark many years by packaging Tivos with software done by the developers at the "other" forum and selling them as "hacked" Tivos at a premium.
> 
> He's a genuinely helpful guy, has done some good newbie tutorials, and his tone here is not entirely representative. You've got to understand that (in relative terms) he's a giant walking among pigmy luddites here, and that occasionally shows through a little. He's OK.


 I'd generally agree as I've read many of his posts over the years as well...mostly interesting. But the overkill and arrogance can get to be too much sometimes. Pummeling people over why they are wrong and then throwing out a couple of scraps like "Well...if that works for your little life...okay" at the end isn't helpful and only comes across as condescending.

It was kind of you to come to his defense, but I suspect he can stand up for himself. Point taken however. Okay...way OT. Meanwhile, back at the ranch...


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Redux said:


> He's an interesting character, a genuine Tivo old-timer, made his mark many years by packaging Tivos with software done by the developers at the "other" forum and selling them as "hacked" Tivos at a premium.


was he the one they got really Poed about making money off of their hacks?


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

pdhenry said:


> I find the image quality of an SD-DVD on an HDTV display to be pretty nasty.


I sincerely am curious-
What size HDTV, and how far do you sit from it.

Also- Are you the lone voice in the room, and do you buy content or mostly rent/ watch broadcast? On the 42 inch and the 38 inch I find that everyone sees what I am talking about when I point to it, but they look at me like I am from Mars if I care about stupid stuff like that. (Which they are used to, so they just roll their eyes- like I am going on another techno bender.)

On the 58 inch people ask me if anything is wrong with the dvd or the connections. I tell them about the HD DVDs they can get off of Netflix but they don't want to bother. They asked on first watching. They have long since forgotten about it.

It's certainly not scientific, but that suggests to me there is trouble in River City regarding a lot of assumptions about mass market reaction to HD. It suggests to me that what typical consumers care about is the big screen and rich colours, but the HD content is a take it or leave it shrug of the shoulders. If the movie isn't available in HD, they will still get the movie in SD because that is what they want to watch. The bigger question is what happens when the content is available in HD. Will they spend $10 premium for the HD-DVD version of the movie?

I'm not convinced there will be as much of that as the Studios are hoping. In any case, we'll know more after the upcoming Christmas season.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

I dunno - probably a 42 inch flat panel (plasma, based on what I know about the guy who owns it). Maybe I was closer than I should be but every time I've seen a standard def DVD on an HD screen the compression artifacts scream at me. At the friend's house it was probably 10-12 feet from the 42-inch screen, I guess.

Having said that I saw a blu-ray or HD-DVD program on display at Fry's a couple of months ago and said "ahh, now I understand..."


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> I'd generally agree as I've read many of his posts over the years as well...mostly interesting. But the overkill and arrogance can get to be too much sometimes. Pummeling people over why they are wrong and then throwing out a couple of scraps like "Well...if that works for your little life...okay" at the end isn't helpful and only comes across as condescending.
> 
> It was kind of you to come to his defense, but I suspect he can stand up for himself. Point taken however. Okay...way OT. Meanwhile, back at the ranch...


In retrospect I'd have to agree that my posts in this thread were entirely too redundant and certainly overkill. Sometimes I get on a soapbox and don't know when to quit. For that, I apologize since I never meant to come across as condescending but I can see how I came across that way.

As for selling pre-hacked Tivos on ebay, I can only plead it happened at a time when I was younger and ignorant of the copyright issues involved with the hack software. I was quickly set straight and have not repeated the transgression. I had only sold a few units up to that point so the damage was minimized. I have provided compensation to any hack developer that requested it and I have no doubt that I'm the only seller of pre-hacked Tivos that has ever done so. It's amazing that one mistake has a tendancy to keep coming up and biting me in the butt. If anything, I learned a serious lesson and have since become the hack developers' No. 1 crusader for intellectual property rights. I can be worse than a born-again Christian or reformed smoker when it comes to this topic (I am a reformed smoker, BTW).

My biggest problem is understanding why people can settle for mediocre quality when there is far better to be had for about the same price. Ironically, the following response from the OP supports what I've been spouting all along:



> I find the image quality of an SD-DVD on an HDTV display to be pretty nasty. It's one of the factors keeping me out of the HDTV market. Unbox on a 31 inch SDTV screen is less objectional than a commercial DVD on an HDTV screen.


The sad part is the logic that he's using to avoid getting into HDTV. Too bad because he'll never know what he's missing.  Once I took the plunge I couldn't understand why I had waited so long to do it. My advice is, if you can afford it, do it now!!! The only downside is that you may feel differently about your 99-cent Unbox downloads.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

captain_video said:


> In retrospect I'd have to agree that my posts in this thread were entirely too redundant and certainly overkill. Sometimes I get on a soapbox and don't know when to quit. For that, I apologize since I never meant to come across as condescending but I can see how I came across that way.


 Apology accepted and no harm done. :up: (BTW I've had soapboxes super glued to my feet on occasion as well.)

But then you just had to go and say...



captain_video said:


> The only downside is that you may feel differently about your 99-cent Unbox downloads.


 Aurgh!


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

captain_video said:


> In retrospect I'd have to agree that my posts in this thread were entirely too redundant and certainly overkill.


You sound like an interesting person. Let's see more of you around here.


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

Justin Thyme said:


> Oh, I think they are deliberately segmenting. They segment with release dates by media now. They segment by resolutions for digital release over time. Same thing. Get it?
> 
> If you buy the argument that resolutions go up forever this works. You segment, exploit that low res segment- see what happens with returns/ cracking/ impact on profits. Then you write it off and loosen up on the next step up- dvd resolution then HD, then super HD, then Ultra HD.
> 
> ...


Agree 101%. I have posted many times in AVS Forums that "normal" tv's (4 out of 5 wives prefer normal sized tvs) will be the death of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray due to the lack of WOW factor.

My wife also insisted on a 32" LCD for the family room, not because she had to, but she specifically didn't want the room "overpowered". And, she watches very little on the basement theater setup, prefering her 32" TV.

IMHO, we (males) are responsible for this. We constantly remind our wonderful spouses that 4" is GIANT. Therefore, a 32" LCD is MONSTROUS. Anything larger is just- "don't go there".


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> We constantly remind our wonderful spouses that 4" is GIANT.


You're going to put that thing where?


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

larrs said:


> IMHO, we (males) are responsible for this. We constantly remind our wonderful spouses that 4" is GIANT. Therefore, a 32" LCD is MONSTROUS. Anything larger is just- "don't go there".


my wife has put her foot down on anything larger than 40" coming into the house. It hurts when she does that 

PS dubious puns aside, it is the slim, flat shape of the LCD that sells my wife on that being our next TV. She is in the same mindset of wanting something that fits the room decor and not in making the TV the focus point of a TV viewing room like I would. HD TV will evolve into the mainstream but mainly because it will be what Best Buy has on the shelf for cool looking TVs.

I think TiVo inc.'s comment that best Buy did not have a combo they liked is That the S3 was priced too high for the average consumer (which is a no brainer for a DVR at even 600$) and they wanted something cheaper to create a package. I am still dubious about that even unless it is the proverbial, buy a TV $3,000 and up and we throw in a free DVR. Of course if the DVR is an S2 that is just a silly deal.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

captain_video said:


> You're going to put that thing where?


Some of us have spouses that don't need any reminding. 

I became more interested in the flat panels after I stopped going to the gym regularly.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Rental of "Dreamgirls" is available for $0.99 now. Also "The Return" with Sarah Michelle Gellar.


----------



## Joey Bagadonuts (Mar 13, 2006)

Has anyone had a problem with your email notification quoting the 99 cent download but when you click on the link, the cost is substantially more? I got an email letting me know Ron White's "They Call Me Tater Salad" comedy routine was available for 99 cents. Yet, when I click on the link, the price is $3.99.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Joey Bagadonuts said:


> Has anyone had a problem with your email notification quoting the 99 cent download but when you click on the link, the cost is substantially more? I got an email letting me know Ron White's "They Call Me Tater Salad" comedy routine was available for 99 cents. Yet, when I click on the link, the price is $3.99.


 That is concerning. I wonder if the 99 cent special expired. Or perhaps...like some retail stores...no one updated the price?

I just checked our Amazon account and the three 99 cent videos we ordered were charged to our CC correctly. I'd certainly bug them about it!


----------



## Joey Bagadonuts (Mar 13, 2006)

richsadams said:


> That is concerning. I wonder if the 99 cent special expired. Or perhaps...like some retail stores...no one updated the price?
> 
> I just checked our Amazon account and the three 99 cent videos we ordered were charged to our CC correctly. I'd certainly bug them about it!


Thank you. Fortunately, I saw the $3.99 before I actually ordered the download. I have since emailed the folks at Amazon and asked for an explanation. I don't think the download had time to expire being that I received the email at 7am Friday and attempted the download only a few hours later. I have since tried again several times and used different search methods in order to access that particular download and each time I am seeing a cost of $3.99. I'll post Amazon's response.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

MickeS said:


> Rental of "Dreamgirls" is available for $0.99 now.


Watched Dreamgirls this afternoon for 99 cents.

I'm really enjoying these 99 cent rentals.....and it's just so darn convenient! Still have Music & Lyrics to watch from last weekends 99 cent specials.


----------



## Joey Bagadonuts (Mar 13, 2006)

Well, I have to say, I am not at ALL pleased with the response I received from Amazon regarding the conflicting download prices for a supposed 99 cent special. Here is the response I received:

_Hello from Amazon.com.

The price and availability of the items offered on our web site are
subject to change. The price of an item in an email from us does not
guarantee that this price will remain the same, nor does it reserve
the special price for you.

The current price and availability of an item will always be the most
up to date on our website and not necessarily the same when you first
saw the item.

From the bottom of the "The Download" email you received:
"Please note that product prices and availability are subject to
change. Prices and availability were accurate at the time this
newsletter was sent; however, they may differ from those you see when
you visit Amazon.com."

I've included some more information about prices and availability
below, in case it's helpful._

This sure smells like just a scam to get email subscribers to visit their download "specials" site in hopes of conning us into paying more for a download than advertised via email. I would expect this type of shoddy service from some fly by nite service but not from Amazon. I have no desire to patronize a service that resorts to this type of trickery so, once my free $15 in downloads has been depleted, I'm done with Amazon and Unbox.


----------



## mick66 (Oct 15, 2004)

MickeS said:


> Rental of "Dreamgirls" is available for $0.99 now. Also "The Return" with Sarah Michelle Gellar.


I've been receiving the weekly email and renting a $.99 video most of the past few weekends and I didn't get an email regarding any $.99 specials this week. I did get an email about "the significant seven" though.

I found "The Return" as a rental, but it was $2.99 not $.99.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

mick66 said:


> I've been receiving the weekly email and renting a $.99 video most of the past few weekends and I didn't get an email regarding any $.99 specials this week. I did get an email about "the significant seven" though.
> 
> I found "The Return" as a rental, but it was $2.99 not $.99.


Weird. I looked just now, and it says $0.99 at least for me:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...f_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=294505601&pf_rd_i=16261631

It's also listed as such on the current Unbox "front page" for me, along with some other ones:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...=1182670007/ref=tr_307911/105-9214049-2250813


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Joey Bagadonuts said:


> Well, I have to say, I am not at ALL pleased with the response I received from Amazon regarding the conflicting download prices for a supposed 99 cent special. Here is the response I received:
> 
> _Hello from Amazon.com.
> 
> ...


 Hmmmm...don't blame you for being upset...it upsets me too. 

It makes me suspect that they are following the marketing ploys employed by some of the airlines, ticket agencies and others. The strategy is to first determine how many sales are required to reach a strategic goal...in this case perhaps an agreed movement of product...and once that point is realized move the pricing up to recapture the desired margin. That's how you can end up paying full price for an airline seat while the guy next to you pays $99 to fly coast-to-coast. The whole thing is automated so if you had by chance responded to the e-mail immediately the 99 cent price point may have been available. But a few hours or a day later...all gone...they met their objective.

I agree, I thought Amazon had higher morals than that. Well have to watch and see what they are up to.

Did you give them a piece of your mind yet?


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

mick66 said:


> I've been receiving the weekly email and renting a $.99 video most of the past few weekends and I didn't get an email regarding any $.99 specials this week. I did get an email about "the significant seven" though.
> 
> I found "The Return" as a rental, but it was $2.99 not $.99.


 Hmmm...I just signed in and it's listed for 99 cents for me as well. Perhaps this is very targeted marketing? I guess you can create a software program to do just about anything these days. 

If that's the case I'm not sure if I should be happy or sad that they think they can only get 99 cents out of me!


----------



## Redux (Oct 19, 2004)

Justin Thyme said:


> Unbox videos I tested were close to a VHS quality tape


I usually pretty much agree with your observations, so I'm puzzled by this statement.

All the Unbox videos I've seen are _considerably_ better than VHS, and I have an extremely high quality SVHS deck.

Do you mean "better than VHS, but close" or "almost as good as VHS"? If the former, OK it's a judgement call and I disagree. If the latter, I think that's just plain wrong.


----------



## mick66 (Oct 15, 2004)

MickeS said:


> Weird. I looked just now, and it says $0.99 at least for me:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...f_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=294505601&pf_rd_i=16261631
> 
> ...


Sorry, my mistake.


----------



## Joey Bagadonuts (Mar 13, 2006)

richsadams said:


> Hmmmm...don't blame you for being upset...it upsets me too.
> 
> Did you give them a piece of your mind yet?


Not immediately, no. I was so surprised by their arrogant-toned response that my first reaction was basically, "screw you; I'll use Netflix' _Watch Now_ for free" and I had no desire to dignify their email with a response. Did you notice there isn't even a hint of an apology in their response? Not "we're sorry for the misunderstanding" or anything of that nature. Instead, they use an aggressive, hard core approach and basically tell me, "Hey, we can put whatever we want in our advertising because we include that nice little caveat, _Please note that product prices and availability are subject to change_ in our rules".

Now that some time has passed since I received their response, even though my, "screw you" feelings haven't changed and I will use Netflix instead of Unbox, I've written Amazon and tactfully voiced my displeasure with this cheap marketing ploy.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

Just to make sure I wasn't tooting my horn with nothing to back it up, I decided to download "Monty Python's - The Meaning of Life" from Unbox (another $0.99 special) just to see what the fuss was all about. Prior to that I downloaded the Unbox preview of "The Breach" to my S3 Tivo. The preview looked very soft and grainy but I figured it was probably because it was just a preview and was distributed with low resolution just to keep the file size as small as possible. I assumed that the Unbox movies surely had to look better than this. 

Unfortunately, the movie looked no better than the preview. I haven't had a SA Tivo for quite some time so I had nothing to gage the picture with regards to SA Tivo recordings at best quality on my HDTV. The images were definitely better than VHS or S-VHS quality but not even on a par with standard definition TV programming via my FIOS network. I suffered through the opening short feature, only because I hadn't seen it before and it was quite entertaining but ultimately unwatchable, IMHO. At the very beginning there's a closeup of a document that an actor is holding in front of the camera that is apparently key to the storyline. The document, although it was in rather large type, was completely undecipherable and blurry. I have found that if the content is entertaining enough people will watch it even though the quality of the image is unbearable. I only sat through it because I knew it was a short feature and would mercifully be over soon.

I promptly deleted the movie without bothering to watch the main feature, fully realizing that there was $0.99 I'll never see again. My conclusion is that if you have a large screen TV then avoid Unbox at all costs. I'm sure it will be watchable on a smaller screen (e.g. 27" or less) but if you expect quality of any kind on a larger screen you'll be sorely disappointed. Even at $0.99 I find it to be no bargain whatsoever.

The one thing I found extremely bothersome is the fact that you MUST watch the entire movie within 24 hours after you have started it else it will be deleted automatically. My wife can rarely stay awake for the entire length of a feature film so we tend to watch movies in installments. At least with DVDs I can keep them long enough for both of us to see the entire film. Unbox just isn't practical in my case, regardless of the picture quality issue.

Keep in mind that this is only my personal opinion and may not coincide with your own. Try Unbox on your TV and see if you like it. I'd highly recommend starting off with a $0.99 movie first instead of sinking more money into something you'll regret later. Just don't say I didn't warn you.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

And yet others among us are quite satisifed. Such is life.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

pdhenry said:


> And yet others among us are quite satisifed. Such is life.


 Yes...they look fine on our 42" HD LCD too...nothing to shout about, but for the convenience of the occasional plain old low tech movie...seems fine to the missus and me.

BTW We have "The Meaning of Life" on DVD...the quality is pretty lousy too...old school technology. I'd imagine that the Unbox version isn't any better.

Although you can keep them for 30 days, I have to agree that the 24 hour limit once you start watching is certainly off-putting though. However I can't honestly remember the last time we didn't watch a movie we'd rented within 24 hours...or almost always in one sitting. So I guess it's just the notion that I can't do whatever I want with it...but then for 99 cents...well...I guess it's not a high priority worry.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Joey Bagadonuts said:


> Not immediately, no. I was so surprised by their arrogant-toned response that my first reaction was basically, "screw you; I'll use Netflix' _Watch Now_ for free" and I had no desire to dignify their email with a response. Did you notice there isn't even a hint of an apology in their response? Not "we're sorry for the misunderstanding" or anything of that nature. Instead, they use an aggressive, hard core approach and basically tell me, "Hey, we can put whatever we want in our advertising because we include that nice little caveat, _Please note that product prices and availability are subject to change_ in our rules".
> 
> Now that some time has passed since I received their response, even though my, "screw you" feelings haven't changed and I will use Netflix instead of Unbox, I've written Amazon and tactfully voiced my displeasure with this cheap marketing ploy.


 It'll be interesting to hear what they have to say in a reply..._if _ they reply that is.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> And yet others among us are quite satisifed. Such is life.


Like I said, it's something you need to try for yourself and see if it's worthwhile to you. Obviously, many folks here are pleased with the service and there's no denying the convenience of it. I just had to try it for myself to make sure I wasn't just blowing smoke and making a false assumption. I figured I at least owed you guys the benefit of the doubt after making such a fuss about it.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

The wife and I just finished watching an Unbox copy of The Last King of Scotland. (Great movie BTW :up: ). During a brief lull I asked her what she thought about the quality of the picture. She said "What do you mean?" I said I wanted to know if she thought it was okay. "Looks fine to me, why?" "Just wondering." I said. 

It did indeed look just fine. It won't replace a DVD copy and it probably would have been nice to have the DVD "extras", but all-in-all two hours of good entertainment for 99 cents. :up:


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Yeah, I don't think anyone ought to pay 15 dolllars to "own" an Unbox title (lack of DVD extras, lack of closed captioning) but for a one-time weekend viewing the price/performance math comes out pretty good. 

About 5 minutes into The Last King of Scotland I paused and mentioned to my wife that we wouldn't be able to view captions (sometimes the Scot accent can be a little indecipherable).


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> The wife and I just finished watching an Unbox copy of The Last King of Scotland. (Great movie BTW ). During a brief lull I asked her what she thought about the quality of the picture. She said "What do you mean?" I said I wanted to know if she thought it was okay. "Looks fine to me, why?" "Just wondering." I said.


My wife needs to wear her glasses to see anything clearly but she refuses to wear them when watching TV. Most women are more inclined to notice the set itself as a piece of furniture or decoration and not the image it's displaying so please pardon me if I don't take that as a strong endorsement for Unbox. My wife doesn't notice the difference between standard TV and Hi-Def so I take her opinion with a bag of salt in this area.

Ironically, if it wasn't for my wife I never would have realized I also needed glasses. She had her eyes examined and brought home her first pair of specs. She commented that they didn't seem to make much difference and handed them to me to try them. I was watching my 32" Toshiba CRT set at the time and was more than amazed when the picture suddenly became much sharper after putting on the glasses. I got my eyes tested and I've been wearing glasses ever since. This was over 10 years ago and I've had my prescription changed several times over that period. I'm not saying that you need to get your eyes checked but if Unbox looks that good to you then you might want to consider it.  You'll thank me later.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

captain_video said:


> My wife needs to wear her glasses to see anything clearly but she refuses to wear them when watching TV. Most women are more inclined to notice the set itself as a piece of furniture or decoration and not the image it's displaying so please pardon me if I don't take that as a strong endorsement for Unbox. My wife doesn't notice the difference between standard TV and Hi-Def so I take her opinion with a bag of salt in this area.
> 
> Ironically, if it wasn't for my wife I never would have realized I also needed glasses. She had her eyes examined and brought home her first pair of specs. She commented that they didn't seem to make much difference and handed them to me to try them. I was watching my 32" Toshiba CRT set at the time and was more than amazed when the picture suddenly became much sharper after putting on the glasses. I got my eyes tested and I've been wearing glasses ever since. This was over 10 years ago and I've had my prescription changed several times over that period. I'm not saying that you need to get your eyes checked but if Unbox looks that good to you then you might want to consider it.  You'll thank me later.


 You can't give up can you? I and a number of others here have never said Unbox videos looked _that _ good we said they look fine. Perhaps it is you that should have your eye prescription checked because it would appear that you only see what you want to see.

Just when we thought you couldn't establish yourself to be a bigger fool you prove us wrong...again. Your sexist comments are just that...sexist, small minded, antiquated and unwelcome. Its no longer the 19th Century. I'd suggest you read what you just wrote to _your _ wife and see what she thinks.

FYI my wife has never had to wear glasses and is still blessed with 20/20 vision. So I could care less if my wife's endorsement affects you one way or another but insulting her just confirms you to be the arrogant jerk we all thought you were.

So thanks but no thanks. Based on your arrogant, intolerant and misogynistic mindset I think Ill pass on your advice. Your happy faces at the end of your posts don't change your message or your tone, they just make you out to be an even bigger a**.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

I guess you haven't caught on yet that I really don't care if you like Unbox or not. If you like it then more power to you. Nobody is telling you not to watch it or how to spend your money. Just because you don't subscribe to my opinion doesn't mean you have to pay any attention to it either, because that's all it is, just an opinion. Take it for what it's worth. I'm entitled to mine just as much as you're entitled to yours so why don't we leave it at that.

I never meant to insult your wife and I suppose my comment did sound a bit sexist. However, based on personal experience with many of the women that I've met over the years I have also found it to be quite true so it wasn't just a random statement. The Wife Acceptance Factor (or WAF is it is known in forums) is a well documented phenomenon and deals with whether or not the spouse will permit the installation of any high tech A/V equipment in a room based on its appearance. Few of them actually take an interest in the quality of the image a device can display, at least not to the same degree that most men will. There are obviously exceptions to the rule but they tend to be few and far between. Usually, if the image is acceptable to them then they are fine with it. If your wife does not fall into the former category then you are indeed a lucky man.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

captain_video said:


> Like I said, it's something you need to try for yourself and see if it's worthwhile to you.


I thought you said to avoid it at all costs?


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

I rented a movie for .99 yesterday. It did not download, and I suspected it might be a disk space issue.

When I used the target TiVo later there was a message acknowledging the failure of the download due to disk space, and explaining clearly how to re-initiate the download. There was also a similar email in my inbox. I am impressed with this.

After going to Amazon/unbox and re-intitiating the download, it started in a reasonable amount of time (I had dealt with the disk space issue.) Also, I was offered the download to any of my devices.

There are two things I am interested in trying after this experience:

1. If I completely delete* the rental off the target TiVo with/without starting to watch it, would I be able to download it again to any of my TiVoes within the 24hr/30day period.

2. Having freed up disk space on the target TiVo, seeing if the download would have ever started on its own, without my re-initiating it.


*An Unbox purchase must be deleted from the Recently Deleted group to free up the license.


----------



## TiVoStephen (Jun 27, 2000)

HDTiVo, I can save you some testing time if you like.

1. No. Once the movie has completely downloaded, that consumes the rental license.
2. Yes -- if you had freed the disk space within a few hours of the last failure, it would have re-initiated on its own.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

TiVoStephen said:


> HDTiVo, I can save you some testing time if you like.
> 
> 1. No. Once the movie has completely downloaded, that consumes the rental license.


According to the Unbox FAQ on Amazon's site, you can download a movie to up to two 2 TiVos and have it at both at the same time.

Is that only for purchased videos then, and not rented ones? It makes no mention of that in the FAQ that I can see. I assumed that it was for unwatched rentals too.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

MickeS said:


> According to the Unbox FAQ on Amazon's site, you can download a movie to up to two 2 TiVos and have it at both at the same time.
> 
> Is that only for purchased videos then, and not rented ones? It makes no mention of that in the FAQ that I can see. I assumed that it was for unwatched rentals too.


Definitely only purchases.

Thanks Stephen.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> I thought you said to avoid it at all costs?


I'm pretty sure I meant that for big screen TV owners. If you're a home theater enthusiast then I'm pretty sure you'd share my feelings if you are more particular about the clarity, color, and resolution of the images you display on your TV. Smaller sets will allow Unbox downloads to be much more tolerable to watch.

If you have a SA Tivo then you should have a pretty fair notion of what your recordings look like at best quality. I can't confirm that you will get the same quality since I have nothing I can compare it with but that's what is apparently being claimed. If you download a lot of compressed videos off the internet then Unbox will be right up your alley.


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

captain_video said:


> I'm pretty sure I meant that for big screen TV owners. If you're a home theater enthusiast then I'm pretty sure you'd share my feelings if you are more particular about the clarity, color, and resolution of the images you display on your TV. Smaller sets will allow Unbox downloads to be much more tolerable to watch.
> 
> If you have a SA Tivo then you should have a pretty fair notion of what your recordings look like at best quality. I can't confirm that you will get the same quality since I have nothing I can compare it with but that's what is apparently being claimed. If you download a lot of compressed videos off the internet then Unbox will be right up your alley.


I can agree and disagree on this topic at the same time. I have 3 16X9 fixed pixel HDTVs and Unbox sux on all of them but the 30" model in our master BR (it is watchable but not great on that one). However, in my family room, due to constraints of a built-in cabinet that was made for a 4X3 TV, I have an HDTV CRT (4X3) Samsung set. Unbox looks quite pleasing on this set. In fact, on a Friday night we may download and watch an Unbox title on this set and find it a great experience.

So, I will not qualify the results as being poor on a BIG screen, but any fixed pixel display (Plasma/LCD/SXRD, etc.). However, on a CRT (HD or SD), the results are quite good. YMMV.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

What's the size of your CRT HDTV? Is it a direct view set or RPTV? Like you, I can't vouch for the quality on anything but a fixed pixel display when talking about a large screen. I have a 32" SDTV in my family room and I have no doubt Unbox would be watchable on that set or at least tolerable.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

captain_video said:


> What's the size of your CRT HDTV? Is it a direct view set or RPTV? Like you, I can't vouch for the quality on anything but a fixed pixel display when talking about a large screen. I have a 32" SDTV in my family room and I have no doubt Unbox would be watchable on that set or at least tolerable.


I have a 50" Fujitsu plasma display, and while there's certainly the usual issues of macroblocking during high-motion scenes and black level issues in very dark scenes, it's also something anyone who does now or previously did subscribe to DirecTV would be intimately familiar with. In general, Unbox downloads are quite watchable on it. Of course they could be better. So could most any SD channel.

I'm not a DVD/video renter. I buy my DVD's or watch movies on movie channels. So to rent the occasional Unbox video or to buy the occasional TV episode works quite well for me. I'm simply not going to commit monthly to services like Netflix and have no desire to deal with queues and waiting and shipping, et. al. And I have no desire to deal with local stores and all the headaches and inconveniences that go with them. So a service like Unbox is great. And I like it much better than cable PPV because I get to use TiVo trick play features while watching it instead of the crappy mostly-server-based Scientific Atlanta implementation.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

My monthly fees for Blockbuster are only about $18.89 with tax. Compared with the cost of renting DVDs or buying PPVs it's a pretty good deal. Of course, it's not much of a bargain if you only watch one or two movies a month. If you're a movie lover like me then it's an outstanding bargain. Even if you only get three movies a week it works out to about $1.50 per movie. 

Aside from movies there are lots of special interest DVDs and compilations of TV series that I may have missed along the way that I've always wanted to watch. It's a great way to see the missing episodes of your favorite TV show.

Setting up a queue isn't much of a chore. Just pick the movies you want from their vast library and then select the priority for the order in which you want them sent to you. I just scour the list for the current movies being shown in theaters and select the ones I'd like to see when they're released. They get put into the saved portion of the queue and then move up to the regular queue list when they're scheduled for release within the next few weeks.

If you prefer older movies then you can simply search the database and find what you want. I like to check out the critic's picks and classic foreign films but there's a genre for everyone.

There are all sorts of options to obtain videos for your viewing pleasure. All of them won't fit everyone's taste, lifestyle, or budget so just find one that works for you. I like Blockbuster because it gives me a wide selection, I always get the new releases right when they come out (I'm usually among the first to view many of the discs I get so they're in pristine condition) and I can also get titles on HD-DVD when they become available. I get them the next day after they're shipped and I can keep them indefinitely. I can either return them to my local BB store and get a free rental with the exchange or simply seal it back up in the envelope and place it in my mailbox. Lately I've just been sending them back and bypassing the free rentals until I can get caught up on my backlog of movies. I've got stuff I recorded several years ago that I have yet to watch.

Blu-Ray discs are also available through BB online but I don't have a BD player at the moment. I recently heard that the Blockbuster stores are going to start stocking BD discs but so far I haven't seen any.


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

captain_video said:


> What's the size of your CRT HDTV? Is it a direct view set or RPTV? Like you, I can't vouch for the quality on anything but a fixed pixel display when talking about a large screen. I have a 32" SDTV in my family room and I have no doubt Unbox would be watchable on that set or at least tolerable.


32" Direct View

I believe the reason has to do with the way they draw "lines" instead of pixels. When we moved last year I also replaced a 36" Sony Direct View CRT behemoth with a Panasonic Plasma. Although the Panny has some of the best SD quality I have ever seen in a fixed pixel panel (Panny and Pioneer blew every other set I looked at away), it was still no match at all for the first gen Sony CRT HD set on SD material.


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

captain_video said:


> My monthly fees for Blockbuster are only about $18.89 with tax. Compared with the cost of renting DVDs or buying PPVs it's a pretty good deal. Of course, it's not much of a bargain if you only watch one or two movies a month. If you're a movie lover like me then it's an outstanding bargain. Even if you only get three movies a week it works out to about $1.50 per movie.
> 
> Aside from movies there are lots of special interest DVDs and compilations of TV series that I may have missed along the way that I've always wanted to watch. It's a great way to see the missing episodes of your favorite TV show.
> 
> ...


In my area, we have a bunch of RedBox DVD rental kiosks in almost all of our grocery stores. $1 per movie per night and you can reserve the new releases via your computer. Unless you rent more than 18 movies a month from Blockbuster or Netflix (assuming the 3 out plan at $17.99), then this is a better deal. I almost exclusively rent the new releases though. Unlike the mail services, they are weak on older catalog titles. 
If they are near you, they are a great service.

www.redbox.com


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

You should definitely get a decent image with a 32" CRT, even with Unbox videos. You don't start to notice the degradation until you start spreading the image out over a larger area, and then it becomes quite apparent that you're dealing with a low resolution image. Conversely, if you try displaying an HDTV image on a small screen you get to a point where the added definition doesn't gain you anything. The detail is there but things start getting too small to see it as the size of the screen is reduced.

I've seen the Redbox kiosks in my area but hadn't paid them much mind. They appear to have a limited selection IIRC but if they carry the latest releases it sounds like a good deal. The only downside is getting charged on a daily basis if I understand that to be the case since it may take me several days to get through a DVD if my wife wants to see it too.

How exactly does that work with regards to reserving new releases? Do you give them a credit card number online and then use the card to access the DVD at the kiosk? Do you ever have any problems with the DVDs being available?

I just checked the link you supplied and it appears that they only carry new releases at the Redbox kiosks. I love the fact that they say there are no late fees but that tends to downplay the fact that you're paying $1 per day for each day you have it out. I wonder if there's a maximum fee for rentals. Blockbuster and other stores will simply charge you for the retail cost of the DVD if you keep it out beyond a certain period. I'd like to think that Redbox has a similar policy. I always return rental discs promptly but my kids have a bad habit of taking everything back late (as in months later  ).


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

captain_video said:


> You should definitely get a decent image with a 32" CRT, even with Unbox videos. You don't start to notice the degradation until you start spreading the image out over a larger area, and then it becomes quite apparent that you're dealing with a low resolution image. Conversely, if you try displaying an HDTV image on a small screen you get to a point where the added definition doesn't gain you anything. The detail is there but things start getting too small to see it as the size of the screen is reduced.
> 
> I've seen the Redbox kiosks in my area but hadn't paid them much mind. They appear to have a limited selection IIRC but if they carry the latest releases it sounds like a good deal. The only downside is getting charged on a daily basis if I understand that to be the case since it may take me several days to get through a DVD if my wife wants to see it too.
> 
> ...


Yes, it is $1 PER DAY, but I drive by the store every day. You build an account and password with a credit card number and then rent online (of course, you can just go to the kiosk and rent from there with your card). The movie is "reserved" for you in the kiosk until 6:00PM the following day. Unfortunately, it also needs to be returned by 6PM the following day. So, for example, I rented "Shooter" and "Behind the Mask" this morning. They are due back by tomorrow at 6PM (or another $1 is assessed). I have until 6PM tomorrow to pick it up as well, but I'll pick it up on my way home tonight. With school out, Tuesday is as good as any day for "movie night". My understanding is that after $20 in fees, the movie is yours- I think it is on the web site. We like it quite well. Almost as convenient as Unbox $.99 rentals (see, we are now back on the thread topic).


----------



## Redux (Oct 19, 2004)

larrs said:


> The movie is "reserved" for you in the kiosk until 6:00PM the following day. Unfortunately, it also needs to be returned by 6PM the following day. So, for example, I rented "Shooter" and "Behind the Mask" this morning. They are due back by tomorrow at 6PM (or another $1 is assessed). I have until 6PM tomorrow to pick it up as well


Maybe Redbox varies with time zone. For me it's 9 p.m. and the max is $25, at which point you own the DVD.

Typically I reserve mine late the night before (after midnight), pick them up at lunch time, I then have that evening and the next evening until 9 p.m. for the dollar.

The combination of Redbox for new releases and Netflix for the extensive library of older material pretty much gives us everything we want.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

I usually rent from a small local video store, costs $2/movie and is due by 10pm the day after check-out ($1 per day extra after that). Works great, and not too expensive. Although they have a pretty small selection, but they have most of the new releases I've looked for.
Paying $4 for an Unbox rental compared to that seems pretty dumb. But I will probably get some more of the $0.99 Unbox rentals.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

I just read another thread on the topic of Unbox audio and discovered something interesting that I hadn't taken into consideration. Apparently the Unbox audio is only PCM stereo and not Dolby Digital. Any of you with surround systems are getting shortchanged if this is the case. I have to be honest and say that I didn't check to see what kind of soundtrack the Monty Python movie had that I downloaded. I assumed it wasn't DD due to the age of the movie (it sure didn't sound like it) but it appears that this may be the rule rather than the exception.

All you Unbox downloaders, how about chiming in and let us know what you're getting in the way of audio soundtracks? I suspect they will all be PCM stereo since none of the SA models support DD except for the S3. Of course, if you own a pre-S3 SA model you're already used to minimal surround effects except maybe for Dolby Pro-Logic. Me, I gotta have the slam-bang surround in all it's glory. How else are you going to know when the bad guys are sneaking up behind you?  

BTW - DVDs support both DD and DTS audio so you're actually getting a whole lot more than just better resolution.


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

captain_video said:


> I just read another thread on the topic of Unbox audio and discovered something interesting that I hadn't taken into consideration. Apparently the Unbox audio is only PCM stereo and not Dolby Digital. Any of you with surround systems are getting shortchanged if this is the case. I have to be honest and say that I didn't check to see what kind of soundtrack the Monty Python movie had that I downloaded. I assumed it wasn't DD due to the age of the movie (it sure didn't sound like it) but it appears that this may be the rule rather than the exception.
> 
> All you Unbox downloaders, how about chiming in and let us know what you're getting in the way of audio soundtracks? I suspect they will all be PCM stereo since none of the SA models support DD except for the S3. Of course, if you own a pre-S3 SA model you're already used to minimal surround effects except maybe for Dolby Pro-Logic. Me, I gotta have the slam-bang surround in all it's glory. How else are you going to know when the bad guys are sneaking up behind you?
> 
> BTW - DVDs support both DD and DTS audio so you're actually getting a whole lot more than just better resolution.


When I got the free $15 coupon early on, I rented two titles in my Media Room, where I have a full-blown 7.1 system. The audio is PCM stereo (it was on both of those and they were relatively new releases). However, when I turned on Dolby Pro Logic, I got a decent surround field from the rear. I believe all of the stereo tracks are most likely mixed for good 'ole Pro Logic (ala VHS). Not as good as DD 5.1, but sounds good on any DD setup, which by rule also has DPL processing.
Lately, as I said above, we have only been watching Unbox in our family room which only has one of those 2.1 Matrix systems, so I cannot verify what is going on right now.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Hey - my stereo setup is only (4.0? 3.0?) Dolby surround, so it looks like I win again! 

This week's selections include _Flags of Our Fathers_ and _Letters From Iwo Jima _ for 99 cents each. I know captain_video won't opt in, but I'm renting both. Maybe I'll watch them on Wednesday. :up:


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

pdhenry said:


> Hey - my stereo setup is only (4.0? 3.0?) Dolby surround, so it looks like I win again!
> 
> This week's selections include _Flags of Our Fathers_ and _Letters From Iwo Jima _ for 99 cents each. I know captain_video won't opt in, but I'm renting both. Maybe I'll watch them on Wednesday. :up:


Both great movies, I hear. I know FOOF is but haven't seen Iwo Jima. I can tell you this: FOOF begs to be seen on as big a screen as possible and in full surround sound.

I can count only a couple dozen movies that have to be experienced that way and FOOF is one of them.


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> Hey - my stereo setup is only (4.0? 3.0?) Dolby surround, so it looks like I win again!
> 
> This week's selections include Flags of Our Fathers and Letters From Iwo Jima for 99 cents each. I know captain_video won't opt in, but I'm renting both. Maybe I'll watch them on Wednesday.


I'll bet if you still had your 8-track then you'd be in hog heaven.  I'm not exactly sure how owning a mediocre TV and sound system makes you a winner but if it makes you happy.... 

I already rented Flags on DVD but I'm holding out for the Hi-Def versions of both movies. Blockbuster shows them in their HD-DVD listings but they don't have them in stock yet.



> Both great movies, I hear. I know FOOF is but haven't seen Iwo Jima. I can tell you this: FOOF begs to be seen on as big a screen as possible and in full surround sound.
> 
> I can count only a couple dozen movies that have to be experienced that way and FOOF is one of them.


I have not yet seen Flags for the reasons cited above but any movie that is done with a quality surround soundtrack is worth the price of admission. Add Hi-Def to the mix and you just went from watching plain ole' TV to a full-blown home theater experience. It's the difference between a movie being enjoyable and downright incredible! Any blockbuster action movie is a must see in Hi-Def and Dolby Digital surround. Watching an Unbox version is kind of like taking your sister to the PROM.  DVD isn't quite as good but it's the next best thing.


----------



## Joey Bagadonuts (Mar 13, 2006)

richsadams said:


> It'll be interesting to hear what they have to say in a reply..._if _ they reply that is.


Sad to say, no reply as of yet (other than the automated ones acknowledging you have sent an email). I have sent two separate emails voicing my displeasure with their service and their response to my first email. Nice customer service from the folks at Amazon Unbox. First they falsely advertise the price of a download and then they pick and choose which emails they'll respond to when someone voices a complaint about their service.


----------



## Redux (Oct 19, 2004)

captain_video said:


> any movie that is done with a quality surround soundtrack is worth the price of admission.


An excellent capsulization of the form vs. content perspectives. Well done.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

captain_video said:


> I'll bet if you still had your 8-track then you'd be in hog heaven.  I'm not exactly sure how owning a mediocre TV and sound system makes you a winner but if it makes you happy....
> 
> I already rented Flags on DVD but I'm holding out for the Hi-Def versions of both movies. Blockbuster shows them in their HD-DVD listings but they don't have them in stock yet.
> 
> I have not yet seen Flags for the reasons cited above but any movie that is done with a quality surround soundtrack is worth the price of admission. Add Hi-Def to the mix and you just went from watching plain ole' TV to a full-blown home theater experience. It's the difference between a movie being enjoyable and downright incredible! Any blockbuster action movie is a must see in Hi-Def and Dolby Digital surround. Watching an Unbox version is kind of like taking your sister to the PROM.  DVD isn't quite as good but it's the next best thing.


 OMG! Just when you think the horses rear end cant get any bigger. You continue to be the most self-centered, insecure, arrogant jerk on this entire forum! For God's sakes spare us from your "my #%@$&* is bigger than your #%@$&*" sophomoric drivel. Your rude, insensitive and irrelevant view of the world is enough to make us sick. If it wasnt so pitiful it would be funny, but its not. No one cares.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Joey Bagadonuts said:


> Sad to say, no reply as of yet (other than the automated ones acknowledging you have sent an email). I have sent two separate emails voicing my displeasure with their service and their response to my first email. Nice customer service from the folks at Amazon Unbox. First they falsely advertise the price of a download and then they pick and choose which emails they'll respond to when someone voices a complaint about their service.


 Sad but not surprising.  Thanks for keeping us posted though. :up:


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

> OMG! Just when you think the horses rear end cant get any bigger. You continue to be the most self-centered, insecure, arrogant jerk on this entire forum! For God's sakes spare us from your "my #%@$&* is bigger than your #%@$&*" sophomoric drivel. Your rude, insensitive and irrelevant view of the world is enough to make us sick. If it wasnt so pitiful it would be funny, but its not. No one cares.


Well, you know what they say about leading a horse to water. It's up to you whether or not you decide to take a drink. 

BTW, Rich, I couldn't help but notice the caption under your user name. Does it really pi$$ you off that much that you can't direct my opinions?


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Joey Bagadonuts said:


> Sad to say, no reply as of yet (other than the automated ones acknowledging you have sent an email). I have sent two separate emails voicing my displeasure with their service and their response to my first email. Nice customer service from the folks at Amazon Unbox. First they falsely advertise the price of a download and then they pick and choose which emails they'll respond to when someone voices a complaint about their service.


I'm surprised. I have sent two emails to them; one just a complaint to voice my displeasure about not having 16:9 formatted movies, and the other one was when I accidentally ordered two rentals of the same movie, and asked for a refund on one. I got a reply within 2 days for both of those, and that was a real reply, not just a standard "we received your email" thing.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

richsadams said:


> OMG! Just when you think the horses rear end cant get any bigger. You continue to be the most self-centered, insecure, arrogant jerk on this entire forum! For God's sakes spare us from your "my #%@$&* is bigger than your #%@$&*" sophomoric drivel. Your rude, insensitive and irrelevant view of the world is enough to make us sick. If it wasnt so pitiful it would be funny, but its not. No one cares.


Don't hold back, tell us what you REALLY think.


----------



## Redux (Oct 19, 2004)

richsadams said:


> You [the Captain of Video] continue to be the most self-centered, insecure, arrogant jerk on this entire forum!


I think that's a bit presumptuous of you to bestow the title so casually. There are a number of us who have put far more effort into it for a much longer period of time who deserve consideration.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

captain_video said:


> Well, you know what they say about leading a horse to water. It's up to you whether or not you decide to take a drink.
> 
> BTW, Rich, I couldn't help but notice the caption under your user name. Does it really pi$$ you off that much that you can't direct my opinions?


Once again youve completely missed the point; seeing only what you wish to see. Your opinions about software, hardware, movies, etc., etc., are just fine...in fact they're always welcome and (even if off the mark IMO now and then) are usually interesting if not entertaining.

Putting people down by passing judgment about what they have or dont have and how they opt to live their lives is _not _ expressing an opinion. Attempting to make others feel inferior in order to make yourself feel more important comes from low self-esteem; it's an unhealthy public display of insecurity. Constantly bolstering your ego by bragging about your possessions doesnt make you more of a man it just portrays you as an ugly, sad person.

Unfortunately nothing you have to say ends up being of consequence because you havent the ability to express your thoughts without somehow finding a way of injecting nya, nya, nya. That kind of childish arrogance nullifies everything else you have to share.

So the short answer to your question is, no. But thanks for taking the time to notice my new tongue-in-cheek caption which I borrowed from Paul Newman...giving credit where credit is due.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Redux said:


> I think that's a bit presumptuous of you to bestow the title so casually. There are a number of us who have put far more effort into it for a much longer period of time who deserve consideration.


Ha! Sorry, my bad.


----------



## ajr32 (Jan 23, 2007)

Thanks for whoever first mentioned this. Working nights, I watch a bunch of movies. I downloaded Epic Movie from Movielink for $4, then find it on Unbox for 99 cents. I think the Unbox price is closer to what I wanted to pay. But this is great to know and have.


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

It's nice to hear so many people are fond of Unbox.

Practically speaking though, anyone can get a Netflix or Blockbuster account and be paying right around .99 per video. And the selection with Netflix is virtually unlimitted (you don't find the unusual titles on Blockbuster- but if your tastes are highly mainstream, you won't notice the difference).

The advantage to Blockbuster is that when you turn in a video at the store you get an instant selection that conforms to your tastes at that instant. Their mail in turn around is a lot slower than Netflix, but you can easily do 2 videos every 4 calendar days for $9.95/ mo (1dvd at a time plan).

Unlike unbox, you get full DVD resolution, and if you don't watch it in 24 hours, you can elect to keep it as long as you like.

The studios are going to loosen up their wholesale pricing of online rentals if they are going to get a substantial market of folks into this viewing style.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Justin Thyme said:


> Practically speaking though, anyone can get a Netflix or Blockbuster account and be paying right around .99 per video. And the selection with Netflix is virtually unlimitted (you don't find the unusual titles on Blockbuster- but if your tastes are highly mainstream, you won't notice the difference).


You're smeeking...

You have to go through quite a few movies per month to get it under a buck per DVD. I don't watch that many movies per month and I don't believe in making personal copies of rented material.


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

According to Nielsen's 2005 data, American households watch television 8 hours 11 minutes per day. Assuming dvds have quality video, that means a household could blow through 10 disks in less than 2 days. 

So 10 dvds per month is not a lot of movies for a typical family. 

Guilty as charged on smeeking though it was intentional. I was reiterating an earlier point in order to encourage the idea of 50 cent Unbox rentals at DVD quality from a full selection of movies. It is also in Hollywood's interest because a server based model has demonstrated a capability of subverting piracy- unlike the distribution of physical media.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

I hope this thread stays alive, because for some reason the Amazon emails that I signed up for aren't coming through to my hotmail account... so I'm reminded of the specials when I see this thread. 

I just rented and watched "Night at the museem". It was a LOT better than I had expected! Really entertaining.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

Justin Thyme said:


> According to Nielsen's 2005 data, American households watch television 8 hours 11 minutes per day. Assuming dvds have quality video, that means a household could blow through 10 disks in less than 2 days.
> 
> So 10 dvds per month is not a lot of movies for a typical family.


A family might watch that much. I don't. One movie a week is plenty for me, and the last time I checked Netflix didn't have a $3.96 plan.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

MickeS said:


> I hope this thread stays alive, because for some reason the Amazon emails that I signed up for aren't coming through to my hotmail account... so I'm reminded of the specials when I see this thread.
> 
> I just rented and watched "Night at the museem". It was a LOT better than I had expected! Really entertaining.


 +1 :up:


----------



## SugarBowl (Jan 5, 2007)

MickeS said:


> I hope this thread stays alive, because for some reason the Amazon emails that I signed up for aren't coming through to my hotmail account... so I'm reminded of the specials when I see this thread.
> 
> I just rented and watched "Night at the museem". It was a LOT better than I had expected! Really entertaining.


I don't get the emails either. I do get an occasional "Unbox Preview" downloaded to the TiVo.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

SugarBowl said:


> I don't get the emails either. I do get an occasional "Unbox Preview" downloaded to the TiVo.


When I looked in my Amazon notification settings ("Amazon Delivers"), it says about my email "Verified (Unable to deliver)"

I have no idea why it's a problem, as I get the receipts and some other ads from them to that address just fine.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

This week's 99-centers:

_The Fountain_
_Children of Men_
_Stomp the Yard_
_Taxi Driver_
_Rocky Balboa_
_Freedom Writers_
The original _Die Hard_ is available as a $2.99 rental (I think this is its regular price).

I watched _Flags of Our Fathers_ on Wednesday - it has some kind of transcoding flaw that made any motion just jerky enough to be subtly annoying.

_Letters From Iwo Jima_ is still waiting in my NPL. Probably won't rent anything new this week.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

I think I will grab The Fountain for $.99. Though with Discs 2-4 of Part 1 of Season 6 of The Sopranos arriving from Netflix yesterday, I may have to wait a while to watch.


----------



## SugarBowl (Jan 5, 2007)

pdhenry said:


> This week's 99-centers:
> 
> _The Fountain_
> _Children of Men_
> ...


I downloaded flags of our fathers, but haven't watched it yet.

The Fountain sounds like an interesting movie.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

pdhenry said:


> This week's 99-centers:
> 
> _The Fountain_
> _Children of Men_
> ...


Freedom Writers is not formatted for TiVo.


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

Now playing on the ThymeLy VOD PyTivo server in the action category:

Price: free. You have to FF through the commercials. OK- those with -dvd are not free. They have stunning resolution an no commercials but are ripped from purchased DVDs. Those were $8 or so and have maybe been watched an average of 3 times since purchase, so the prorated charge would be $2 each for those.

Offer not available outside of the JT household. If you want your own PyTivo server, read the thread in the TTG forum.

12 Monkeys (Recorded Oct 4, 2005, USA).divx
48 HRS. 04-10-07 ''48 HRS.'' (1).mp4
Alamo 06-10-07 ''The Alamo'' (1).mp4
Apocalypse Now Redux 05-27-07 ''Apocalypse Now Redux' (1).mp4
Around the World Under the Sea (cropped.divx
Assignment 05-13-07 ''The Assignment'' (1).mp4
Backdraft (Recorded Sep 17, 2005, USA).div
Batman (Recorded Aug 18, 2005, TNT).div
Bells of St. Mary's (Recorded Dec 19, 2005, TCM).divx
Ben Hur part2-dvd2000.mp4
Ben Hur- part 1-dvd.mp4
Big Country 06-08-07 ''The Big Country'' (1).mp4
Big Fish 06-17-07 ''Big Fish'' (1).mp4
Big Jake.mp4
Black Knight 07-01-07 ''Black Knight'' (1).mp4
Blue Thunder 06-28-07 ''Blue Thunder'' (1).mp4
Braveheart 05-31-07 ''Braveheart'' (1).mp4
Bugsy.wmv
Caine Mutiny 06-06-07 ''The Caine Mutiny'' (1).mp4
Call of the Wild (Recorded Dec 11, 2005, AMC).divx
Captain Blood (Recorded Aug 23, 2005, TCM).div
Casablanca ok.div
Cast Away 05-27-07 ''Cast Away'' (1).mp4
Charlie's Angels 06-28-07 ''Charlie's Angels'' (1).mp4
Clear and Present Danger 06-03-07 ''Clear and Present (1).mp4
Command Decision 05-28-07 ''Command Decision'' (1).mp4
Commandments cropped.divx
Commando 06-07-07 ''Commando'' (1).mp4
Conan the Barbarian .mp4
Courage Under Fire cropped.divx
Crow- The Crow (Recorded Sep 15, 2005, TNT).div
Dances With Wolves (Recorded Aug 31, 2005, HISTORY).div
Death Hunt 06-29-07 ''Death Hunt'' (1).mp4
Deception (cropped)).divx
Desperate Hours 06-27-07 ''The Desperate Hours'' (1).mp4
Devil's Advocate 06-13-07 ''The Devil's Advocate' (1).mp4
Dial M for Murder OK cropped.divx
Die Hard 2 (Recorded Oct 3, 2005, FX).divx
Die Hard With a Vengeance (Recorded Sep 7, 2005, FX).div
Dirty Harry (Recorded Nov 15, 2005, USA).divx
Dirty Work 04-11-07 ''Dirty Work'' (1).mp4
Don't Look Now- dvd.mp4
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (Recorded Aug 27, 2005, TCM).div
Dragonheart (Recorded Sep 3, 2005, SCIFI).div
Edge 06-02-07 ''The Edge'' (1).mp4
Enemy Below 05-27-07 ''The Enemy Below'' (1).mp4
Eraser (Recorded Aug 7, 2005, TNT).div
Escape From Alcatraz 06-14-07 ''Escape From Alcatraz' (1).mp4
Exterminating Angel 06-24-07 ''The Exterminating (1).mp4
Far Country 05-20-07 ''The Far Country'' (1).mp4
Firecreek 05-19-07 ''Firecreek'' (1).mp4
First Knight (Recorded Dec 24, 2005, TNT).divx
First Knight 05-19-07 ''First Knight'' (1).mp4
Fist of Fury 05-12-07 ''Fist of Fury'' (1).mp4
foul play (recorded oct 29, 2005, tcm).wmv
Fugitive 06-02-07 ''The Fugitive'' (1).mp4
Gladiator (Recorded Dec 25, 2005, TNT).divx
Gladiator 06-01-07 ''Gladiator'' (1).mp4
Godfather, Part II 06-08-07 ''The Godfather, Part (1).mp4
GoldenEye 05-20-07 ''GoldenEye'' (1).mp4
Gone in Sixty Seconds 06-28-07 ''Gone in Sixty Second (1).mp4
GoodFellas 05-23-07 ''GoodFellas'' (1).mp4
Great Train Robbery 06-09-07 ''The Great Train Ro (1).mp4
Grendel 06-28-07 ''Grendel'' (1).mp4
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban 04-15-07 ''H (1).mp4
Henry V (Recorded Dec 14, 2005, TCM).divx
Hero 04-23-07 ''Hero'' (1).mp4
Hidalgo 06-10-07 ''Hidalgo'' (1).mp4
High Plains Drifter 05-29-07 ''High Plains Drifter'' (1).mp4
Hoffa (ok).divx
Hondo 06-25-07 ''Hondo'' (1).mp4
Horatio Hornblower The Duchess and the Devil slight ok (Recorded Jul 25, 2005, A&E).div
Horatio Hornblower The Wrong War (Recorded Jul 27, 2005, A&E).div
How the West Was Won (Recorded Aug 6, 2005, TCM).div
I Spy- Eddie Murphy.mp4
In a Lonely Place 06-25-07 ''In a Lonely Place'' (1).mp4
Island in the Sky 06-23-07 ''Island in the Sky'' (1).mp4
Jackal 06-04-07 ''The Jackal'' (1).mp4
Jaws 06-21-07 ''Jaws'' (1).mp4
Joan of Arc-dvd.mp4
Joe Kidd .mp4
Jules Verne's Mysterious Island 05-27-07 ''Jules Vern (1).mp4
Jumanji- ok.div
K-19 The Widowmaker (keep sync).divx
Kid Galahad (Recorded Dec 31, 2005, TCM).divx
King Arthur 06-16-07 ''King Arthur'' (1).mp4
King Kong 06-09-07 ''King Kong'' (1).mp4
Lord Jim 06-30-07 ''Lord Jim'' (1).mp4
Lord of the Rings The Fellowship of the Ring 04-2 (1).mp4
Lord of the Rings The Return of the King .mp4
Lord of the Rings The Two Towers.mp4
Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome 06-09-07 ''Mad Max Beyond (1).mp4
Mask of Zorro 06-17-07 ''The Mask of Zorro'' (1).mp4
Maverick 06-07-07 ''Maverick'' (1).mp4
McQ 05-26-07 ''McQ'' (1).mp4
Mission Impossible 2 06-03-07 ''Mission Impossible 2' (1).mp4
Murder 101 06-11-07 ''Murder 101'' (1).mp4
North to Alaska 05-26-07 ''North to Alaska'' (1).mp4
Ocean's Eleven 06-12-07 ''Ocean's Eleven'' (1).mp4
Once Upon a Time in China III 04-21-07 ''Once Upon a (1).mp4
Outbreak 06-08-07 ''Outbreak'' (1).mp4
Outlaw Josey Wales.mp4
Papillon 06-03-07 ''Papillon'' (1).mp4
Patriot 06-01-07 ''The Patriot'' (1).mp4
Patriot Games 05-30-07 ''Patriot Games'' (1).mp4
Peacemaker 06-23-07 ''The Peacemaker'' (1).mp4
Pirates of the Caribbean The Curse of the Black Pearl (1).mp4
Predator 2- ok (Recorded Jul 29, 2005, FX).div
Psycho ok (Recorded Oct 31, 2005, TCM).wmv
Rear Window (Recorded Oct 30, 2005, TCM).wmv
Red Dragon 05-26-07 ''Red Dragon'' (1).mp4
Reflections in a Golden Eye 06-13-07 ''Reflections in (1).mp4
Road Warrior (Recorded Jan 6, 2006, IFC).divx
Robin and Marian (keep sync).divx
Rocky 06-10-07 ''Rocky'' (1).mp4
Rocky II 06-10-07 ''Rocky II'' (1).mp4
Rocky III 06-16-07 ''Rocky III'' (1).mp4
Romancing the Stone quickfix.divx
Score 06-07-07 ''The Score'' (1).mp4
Shadow of a Doubt (Recorded Nov 17, 2005, TCM).divx
Shaft (Recorded Aug 3, 2005, TNT) (2).div
Silence of the Lambs 05-26-07 ''The Silence of th (1).mp4
Sleepy Hollow 05-18-07 ''Sleepy Hollow'' (1).mp4
Spellbound-dvd.mp4
Spider-Man 2 06-28-07 ''Spider-Man 2'' (1).mp4
Stakeout 06-12-07 ''Stakeout'' (1).mp4
Superman The Movie 06-16-07 ''Superman The Movie'' (1).mp4
The Abyss ok.div
The Adventures of Robin Hood ok.div
The Big Sleep (Recorded Aug 1, 2005, TCM).div
The Birds (Recorded Oct 30, 2005, TCM).wmv
The Blue Max (Recorded Aug 16, 2005, AMC).div
The Bridge at Arnhem.div
The Charge of the Light Brigade ok.div
The Hunt for Red October (cropped).divx
The Jackal cropped.divx
The Karate Kid 06-08-07 ''The Karate Kid'' (1).mp4
The Magnificent Seven ok.div
The Matrix (cropped).divx
The Matrix Reloaded (cropped).divx
The Mummy Returns (Recorded Mar 12, 2006, USA) (1).mp4
The Proposition (cropped).divx
The Road to El Dorado 06-14-07 ''The Road to El Dorad (1).mp4
The Two Jakes (cropped).divx
The Untouchables (Recorded Oct 22, 2005, AMC).wmv
Troy 05-27-07 ''Troy'' (1).mp4
Unfaithful 06-06-07 ''Unfaithful'' (1).mp4
Unforgiven 06-24-07 ''Unforgiven'' (1).mp4
Untouchables 06-08-07 ''The Untouchables'' (1).mp4
Vertigo- dvd.mp4
Wake of the Red Witch 05-26-07 ''Wake of the Red Witc (1).mp4
Wolf (Recorded Nov 20, 2005, TNT).divx​


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Justin Thyme said:


> Now playing on the ThymeLy VOD PyTivo server in the action category:
> 
> Price: free. You have to FF through the commercials. OK- those with -dvd are not free. They have stunning resolution an no commercials but are ripped from purchased DVDs. Those were $8 or so and have maybe been watched an average of 3 times since purchase, so the prorated charge would be $2 each for those.


All reruns.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

dswallow said:


> All reruns.


watched them all but one. wish that one had been Rocky III but what are you going to do 

anyhow- great tatse in movies and I actually have some on my TiVo DVRs right now since I record them for the summer. might watch them, might let them roll off. I am just not much of an archiver and instead have a few items like LOTR on DVD. What helps me is that I have a Toshiba RSTX20 so I can watch DVDs with that great TiVo trick play :up: which is another reason I like UNBOX and 99 cent rentals. Still have not given up netflix though


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

My point is that Unbox & the studios needs to pre-empt such home VOD.

The way to do it is get the content owners to see the threat that such home librarying poses to their revenue streams. If they understand where hard drive prices and capacity is going they will understand that everyone and their cousin will be able to do what I am doing in a few years for about $19.95. Or they could buy one prebuilt from Weaknees for $199.50 (just kidding WK). 

They need to slash prices and establish a consumer pattern of rent to own videos- only your "owned" video sits on the retailer's server. Heck- I'd love it if I didn't have to rip these DVDs or fiddle with this server. But it's not something only a hobbyist can do, and folks will do it if this is the only option open to them. What kind of prices? Oh- for 3 months do $3.95 to buy, 30 may be sitting on household tivos at a time. And none of this limitted selection low resolution crap. Full DVD or better resolution, with all of the popular movies available. No blackouts. If you want to pre-empt, get serious. Raise prices later when the pattern is established. Drop the prices back down if home VOD begins to get any foothold.

Studios- don't fall asleep at the wheel the way the music industry did. There is trouble here with a capital T.

Is it easy enough for the Naive to do it? No, not now, but products will find a way to meet demand. It would not be hard to build a server that would handle the transfer, transcoding, and PyTivo functionality all in one turn key package. All the user would have to do is set a preference to archive all movies (anything with greater than 1 hour duration), or archive anything KUID, or anything from TCM, ACM channels etc. And it would just happily collect them and have them ready for the viewer.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

pdhenry said:


> A family might watch that much. I don't. One movie a week is plenty for me, and the last time I checked Netflix didn't have a $3.96 plan.


They do have a $5/month plan for 5 DVDs.. at least that's what the various online ads I see say. I haven't bothered logging out from my netflix acct to see what the other plans are. (I don't think there's a referral plan.. but if there is, and you end up signing up, refer me!)

I'm grandfathered at 4 at a time for what new people get 3 at a time pay (I've been a netflix user for MANY years).. I keep thinking I should downgrade.. but haven't.
(Though I think I average a decent amount over a long time -- I actually just returned my first movie in a couple of months. I really need to downgrade!)


----------



## captain_video (Mar 1, 2002)

There was an interesting article in the latest issue of The Perfect Vision that relates directly to this thread. It addressed the issue of disc media being supplanted by downloadable media from various sources (it didn't address Unbox specifically but rather other sources similar in nature, such as Cinemanow). The basic premise is that it's just not ready for prime time and sources like DVD aren't going away anytime soon. The two biggest stumbling blocks that will prevent this from being a primary viewing source for most home theater enthusiasts is the lack of sufficient bandwidth to allow timely downloads and the serious compression used in order to keep the downloads small due to the bandwidth limitation.

Here's a brief quote from the article (reprinted without permission):



> ...it was clear that the HD stuff didn't look nearly as good as HD DVD or Blu-Ray, and the standard def material was downright ugly.


Keep in mind that these are folks like me that are highly critical of what they watch and the hardware they watch it on, but it definitely echoes my sentiments regarding Unbox downloads on a big screen HDTV. It _was_ downright ugly.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

How does your Unbox on TiVo content compare to your Cable Co's VOD?


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

I'm surprized no one nailed me on my modest pitch to the studios regarding pre-emption of video piracy by proactively promoting functionally identical yet revenue generating modes of digital "ownership". 

The counter to this is- well- why should the studios restrict themselves to the small market of folks that can download unbox to their living rooms. It would be possible for Cable and fiber companies to do the unbox option of buying a show and retaining the purchaced video on a server for later download. It would be a "buy" option for PPV and would use SDV for cable, and IPTV for FIOS. 

Again, the cool thing from the Cable/ FIOS perspective is that it locks in the customers because if they leave, they lose access to their video library. 

Consumers will see an inherant advantage to buying from an agnostic vendor like amazon, but if the studios wanted to really get proactive about heading off the phenomenon of video bits sitting unprotected on massive consumer hard drives, then they would be smart not to hold back and drive this agressively with the major distributors.

It wouldn't be a pretty picture from my point of view and I'm not advocating it or even predicting it. I think we can count on the studios to follow their standard pattern of being interested in short term profits and the price of becoming more vulnerable to speculative long term dangers.

There will be a lot more "free" video floating around like MP3's in the next 5 years so I guess consumers will be happy short term. I just hope the studios have enough money after this is all over to still put out some of those cool special effects movies.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

This week's selections:

The Pursuit of Happyness
Music and Lyrics
The Good Shepard
The Sweetest Thing
The 24th Day
Happy Feet
All available for TiVo.

At least one of these has appeared on the 99 cent list before - I rented M&L in June.

EDIT: These also show up on the TiVo at: 
Find Programs / Download TV & Movies / Amazon Unbox / Special Deals


----------



## Goontoe (Jan 7, 2002)

I ordered The Pursuit of Happyness this morning. Can't beat 99 cents! My only wish is that these movies would include closed captioning.


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

I snagged Pursuit as well. I was up late, after midnight. In bed watching some TiVoCast stuff. Then I think, hey, it's Friday. Wonder what Amazon's going to have for 99 cents this weekend.

And this time I didn't have to go to the computer. Just in bed, click over into unbox, specials, and there it is! Select movie, enter pin, click, click. Turn out the light, go to sleep, wake up, it's there.

This stuff is great!


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

Justin Thyme said:


> Now playing on the ThymeLy VOD PyTivo server in the action category:
> 
> Price: free. You have to FF through the commercials. OK- those with -dvd are not free. They have stunning resolution an no commercials but are ripped from purchased DVDs. Those were $8 or so and have maybe been watched an average of 3 times since purchase, so the prorated charge would be $2 each for those.
> 
> ...


Justin, I'm confirming. You can only do this with Series2 right now, right? Can't with Series3. I have a home "media" server I've built as well, but I don't have it tied into my TiVo's yet because they are both Series3. I want to do something like this.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

mahermusic said:


> ??? I disagree. Downright ugly? That's just not true. I have a 50" plasma with a Series 3. The Unbox downloads are not "downright ugly". They come through fantastic.


 +1 :up: Our experiences with Unbox in our HT have been fine as well.


----------



## SugarBowl (Jan 5, 2007)

Did anyone else have a problem with Flags Of Our Fathers? I get severe glitches about every 5-10 seconds. Emailed amazon, and:



"The behavior you described is not consistent with Unbox videos but
rather, suggests a problem with the DVR itself. For choppy video and
audio, TiVo recommends rebooting the TiVo to resolve the issue.

I am very sorry for any misunderstanding; however, as indicated on the
product detail page, at the time of purchase, and in the Amazon Unbox
Terms of Use, Amazon Unbox videos are not refundable."



This has ruined my good experiences with unbox.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

SugarBowl said:


> Did anyone else have a problem with Flags Of Our Fathers? I get severe glitches about every 5-10 seconds. Emailed amazon, and:
> 
> "The behavior you described is not consistent with Unbox videos but
> rather, suggests a problem with the DVR itself. For choppy video and
> ...


We haven't rented that particular movie and haven't had any troubles with the dozen or so others we've rented, but that's terrible! Both your experience as well as Amazon's response. It's not like you're asking for a full refund and a different video. Any retailer worth it's salt is willing to at least replace faulty products these days. They no doubt have to pay a licensing fee each time someone rents a video...but that's the risk you take to be in business...keeping the customer happy.

Have you had any other troubles like that to date? Can you download it again...did you ask or is the implication that it's just too bad? If that's the case I'd certainly join you in writing a complaint to Amazon. There's no telling when any of us might be in the same boat.


----------



## Justin Thyme (Mar 29, 2005)

20TIL6 said:


> Justin, I'm confirming. You can only do this with Series2 right now, right? Can't with Series3. I have a home "media" server I've built as well, but I don't have it tied into my TiVo's yet because they are both Series3. I want to do something like this.


Sorry. I didn't see your query until today.

Right- any Series 2. Not Series 1 or DirecTivos (well, maybe if they are hacked). I have both a DT and a Series 3- the library is currently unaccessible from the S3. Actually I already have done TivoBack transfers to the S3, and they look very impressive with the S3's upscaling. Also the transfers are 4X faster. But that was due to a glitch that set the permissions on my S3 incorrectly when I got it installed, and it wasn't too long before the glitch was corrected and I couldn't do it anymore. Anyway, I am positive Tivo will enable TivoBack on the S3. That's why I have moved all of my Hidef home movies to my PyTivo server. I am slogging through my DVD collection, and have maybe half done by now (I am ripping them with DVDFab Platinum- which is pretty dang impressive compared to the rippers from even 2 years ago).

I may have wasted quite a bit of time if Tivo also comes out with Mpeg4 TivoBack- in which case, I probably will not have guessed which MPEG4 profile to compress to. But I won't complain because if they do that, the S3 will effectively have triple the capacity, and I can keep many more movies local on the S3(s). At that time I probably will buy another S3 and move the DT over to Satellite recording (ethnic channels) duty.

BTW- nice Haiku.


----------



## SugarBowl (Jan 5, 2007)

richsadams said:


> We haven't rented that particular movie and haven't had any troubles with the dozen or so others we've rented, but that's terrible! Both your experience as well as Amazon's response. It's not like you're asking for a full refund and a different video. Any retailer worth it's salt is willing to at least replace faulty products these days. They no doubt have to pay a licensing fee each time someone rents a video...but that's the risk you take to be in business...keeping the customer happy.
> 
> Have you had any other troubles like that to date? Can you download it again...did you ask or is the implication that it's just too bad? If that's the case I'd certainly join you in writing a complaint to Amazon. There's no telling when any of us might be in the same boat.


I contacted amazon to see what their refund policy was for unbox. We've watched probably 10 videos and never had a problem.

I haven't tried to download this particular movie again. I'm not going to pay for it again, and they are not giving me a free credit to download it again.

I am not planning on buying anything else from unbox with this kind of customer service.

pdHenry mentioned an error in his copy of Flags Of Our Fathers (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=5301831&highlight=transcoding#post5301831) . Although it was more then annoying on my machine.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

SugarBowl said:


> I contacted amazon to see what their refund policy was for unbox. We've watched probably 10 videos and never had a problem.
> 
> I haven't tried to download this particular movie again. I'm not going to pay for it again, and they are not giving me a free credit to download it again.
> 
> I am not planning on buying anything else from unbox with this kind of customer service.


I would pursue it further; either through a written complaint or via disputing the charge with the credit card company. Just because Amazon's policy says no refunds doesn't absolve them of a duty to deliver you a working product in exchange for your payment, which they didn't.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

SugarBowl said:


> Did anyone else have a problem with Flags Of Our Fathers? I get severe glitches about every 5-10 seconds. Emailed amazon, and:.


Rented it for 99 cents and it played great on my S2


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

SugarBowl said:


> I contacted amazon to see what their refund policy was for unbox. We've watched probably 10 videos and never had a problem.
> 
> I haven't tried to download this particular movie again. I'm not going to pay for it again, and they are not giving me a free credit to download it again.
> 
> ...


 I agree with _dswallow_; press Amazon for a better response...that is if you were happy with the service until now. Noting that others have had problems with this particular video may alert them to the fact that there is an issue with the content, not your machine.

This is new territory for Amazon and I can cut them a little slack for the learning curve. But if "we" pressure them to perform now it should become part of their business practice to respond appropriately. If they get away with sending form e-mails and turning their backs on their customers that's what they'll do going forward. _pdHenry _ should also pressure them for a new download or refund.

Thanks again for posting and let us know how you get on.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

I'm having internet connectivity problems this week and had to cancel CrankyGeeks from DL'ing last night rather than tie up my downstream bandwidth for the entire evening. Looks like I'll forego the cheap downloads this weekend and catch on in the Penn & Teller _*BS*_ DVDs a friend lent me.

Anyway, this week's cheapies are:
The Astronaut Farmer
Dreamgirls
Stranger Than fiction
The Holiday
Man of the Year
Wild Things
 All are available on the TiVo.


----------



## Unix_Beard (Dec 22, 2003)

Has anyone bought a TV series complete season? Does it download all the episodes at once?


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Unix_Beard said:


> Has anyone bought a TV series complete season? Does it download all the episodes at once?


 Can't speak to the series question...and it's a good one. I'd hate for them all to download at once and have to watch them within 30 days! 

As noted earlier all of our experiences with Unbox have been good ones...except...the pilot of the TV show Jericho. It was a freebie download and I have to say the quality was particularly poor; very disappointing. We're waiting for the DVD version of season one to show up in a couple of months.

I'd also be interested in an answer to the series question and even more importantly if others have downloaded any TV shows and what the PQ was. So far movies have been fine, but we're really hesitant to try another TV show.


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

The only TV show I downloaded was Jericho too. The free pilot episode. And yeah, the PQ was bad.


----------



## meglet (Sep 13, 2004)

richsadams said:


> Can't speak to the series question...and it's a good one. I'd hate for them all to download at once and have to watch them within 30 days!


Only the rentals have a 30 day time limit. Purchased content (movies and TV shows) have unlimited time, you are just limited to how many devices they can be on at once. I just watched a TV show the other night that I purchased and downloaded back in May.


----------



## meglet (Sep 13, 2004)

SugarBowl said:


> Did anyone else have a problem with Flags Of Our Fathers? I get severe glitches about every 5-10 seconds. Emailed amazon, and:
> 
> "The behavior you described is not consistent with Unbox videos but
> rather, suggests a problem with the DVR itself. For choppy video and
> ...


Was this video a purchase or a rental? If it was a purchase, you can delete it from the PC and re-download it from your digital media library in your Amazon account. If it was a rental, keep pressuring them. I have had some strange licensing issues, and their customer service has always been great. Their response to you is not typical of what I've seen, if I were you I would continue to ask to be allowed to re-download it.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

meglet said:


> Only the rentals have a 30 day time limit. Purchased content (movies and TV shows) have unlimited time, you are just limited to how many devices they can be on at once. I just watched a TV show the other night that I purchased and downloaded back in May.


 Makes sense...I didn't even think about the fact that you're buying a TV episode for $1.99. Still...all-in-all it will be less expensive to rent the DVD(s) eventually, plus I know the PQ will be better.

We'll still be renting Unbox movies now and then though. :up:


----------



## Unix_Beard (Dec 22, 2003)

meglet said:


> Only the rentals have a 30 day time limit. Purchased content (movies and TV shows) have unlimited time, you are just limited to how many devices they can be on at once. I just watched a TV show the other night that I purchased and downloaded back in May.


Also, do ALL TV shows forbid Multi-Room Viewing?

I downloaded the free Jericho episode and its on a TV I don't watch often.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

In my experience, ALL downloaded TiVo content forbids MRV and/or TTG.


----------



## JustAllie (Jan 5, 2002)

I rented "Stranger Than Fiction" last night because it was one of the weekly 99 cent specials (thanks for the heads up, pdhenry!). 

:sniff: What a great movie. I doubt I would have rented it at $3.99 because I am not really a Will Ferrell fan. But this was very different from his comedy roles, and the movie was beautifully written. :up:


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

Hm, none of this weeks rentals appeal to me. But I have a plan... I'll rent Dreamgirls for the bedroom TiVo so Melissa can watch it while I catch up on Traveler in the living room.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

20TIL6 said:


> The only TV show I downloaded was Jericho too. The free pilot episode. And yeah, the PQ was bad.


Was it Letterbox? Too bad, you could have recorded it free in HD a couple weeks ago.


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

HDTiVo said:


> Was it Letterbox? Too bad, you could have recorded it free in HD a couple weeks ago.


 I can't remember if it was letterbox or not. I just remember that the picture had 'streaking' across the images. Really odd effect. But it was free, so whatever.

It's the only content I have downloaded so far from Unbox that had bad PQ. Everything else has been fine, and I've probably downloaded a dozen or so items.

I just saw that the Jericho pilot was free, and I hadn't seen the series. I wanted to see what all the hoopla was about. It was OK.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

20TIL6 said:


> I just remember that the picture had 'streaking' across the images. Really odd effect. But it was free, so whatever. It's the only content I have downloaded so far from Unbox that had bad PQ. Everything else has been fine, and I've probably downloaded a dozen or so items.


I have no hard evidence to support this, but I suspect newer titles to the TiVo Unbox library are probably encoded better (and wonder if some older titles have been reencoded) which would result in fewer fast motion artifacts or stuttering.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

davezatz said:


> I have no hard evidence to support this, but I suspect newer titles to the TiVo Unbox library are probably encoded better (and wonder if some older titles have been reencoded) which would result in fewer fast motion artifacts or stuttering.


That had been my opinion but the last few I watched (The Pursuit of Happyness, most recently) have had at least minor motion jitters. Enough to be noticeable, and not present on programs recorded from cable.


----------



## supasta (May 6, 2006)

I sure do love these weekend .99 cent specials. 3 new movies this week for me!


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

davezatz said:


> I have no hard evidence to support this, but I suspect newer titles to the TiVo Unbox library are probably encoded better (and wonder if some older titles have been reencoded) which would result in fewer fast motion artifacts or stuttering.


What about the opposite? Amazon has automated the process now that they have experience and some of the automated transcodes are funky?


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

HDTiVo said:


> What about the opposite? Amazon has automated the process now that they have experience and some of the automated transcodes are funky?


I suppose anything is possible. My rentals seem to have been better looking lately compared to launch. However, it could just be the movies I've rented. Who knows! What they really need to do is start supporting protected WMV on the Series3 and then not have to transcode. (Assuming the source material is decent. I've only watched it via TiVo.) And while we're talking S3, let's go HD.  By the way, I just got a note that Comcast just dropped their OnDemand rentals from $4.99 to $3.99 (though my box doesn't reflect it yet). Interesting.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

davezatz said:


> I suppose anything is possible. My rentals seem to have been better looking lately compared to launch. However, it could just be the movies I've rented. Who knows! What they really need to do is start supporting protected WMV on the Series3 and then not have to transcode. (Assuming the source material is decent. I've only watched it via TiVo.) And while we're talking S3, let's go HD.  By the way, I just got a note that Comcast just dropped their OnDemand rentals from $4.99 to $3.99 (though my box doesn't reflect it yet). Interesting.


Competition!!!  Amen DRM-WMV!!!! <-- A good path to HD!!!!


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

We watched Stranger Than Fiction and Letters from Iwo Jima this weekend. LFIJ was quite good, but STF had noticeable jerkiness.

Maybe the cahracteristics of the picture come into play. LFIJ was very subdued and low-contrast, while STF had the worst motion affects with dark figures against a white background (for example).


----------



## javabird (Oct 13, 2006)

Unix_Beard said:


> Has anyone bought a TV series complete season? Does it download all the episodes at once?


Here's a hint I received when I had to call tech suppport (I didn't have enough room on my Tivo for purchased videos all at once):

When you buy the episodes, you can select where to download them. So, instead of the name of your Tivo, you can select "Add this PC" (don't give the PC a name, so it will store it in your Media Library instead of downloading it). Then, when you are ready to watch it, you go to your Media Library and select your Tivo's name and "Download." Voila! Worked for me. :up:


----------



## bmgoodman (Dec 20, 2000)

based on the picture quality of "The Pursuit of Happyness", I wouldn't pay much more than 99 cents. The dialog scenes looked very good, but every time Will Smith ran down the street, it looked like double or triple vision. And this is on a 34" SDTV. I'm sure I will try a few more at 99 cents, but if I had paid $3.99 for Pursuit, it would have been my last download.

"So let me get this straight, I pay $3.99, same as Blockbuster. The PQ looks worse than something recorded off basic cable, and once I start watching it, I have only 24 hours to finish. Wow, where do I sign up?"


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

bmgoodman said:


> based on the picture quality of "The Pursuit of Happyness", I wouldn't pay much more than 99 cents. The dialog scenes looked very good, but every time Will Smith ran down the street, it looked like double or triple vision. And this is on a 34" SDTV. I'm sure I will try a few more at 99 cents, but if I had paid $3.99 for Pursuit, it would have been my last download.
> 
> "So let me get this straight, I pay $3.99, same as Blockbuster. The PQ looks worse than something recorded off basic cable, and once I start watching it, I have only 24 hours to finish. Wow, where do I sign up?"


What would you pay if the video were anamorphic and the bit rate were higher, like 3500 vs 2800?


----------



## SugarBowl (Jan 5, 2007)

meglet said:


> Was this video a purchase or a rental? If it was a purchase, you can delete it from the PC and re-download it from your digital media library in your Amazon account. If it was a rental, keep pressuring them. I have had some strange licensing issues, and their customer service has always been great. Their response to you is not typical of what I've seen, if I were you I would continue to ask to be allowed to re-download it.


It was a rental. I emailed my credit card company and they had sense enough to say "we're not worried about 99 cents, we'll credit your account".


----------



## JustAllie (Jan 5, 2002)

I watched "The Holiday" last night and while I really enjoyed the movie and the price, the picture quality was not as good as the other Amazon Unbox videos I've watched. Specifically, there were issues with rapid movement -- it was like the picture wasn't panning smoothly, but instead was jumping. I'm not sure what you call that problem -- it wasn't pixelization, but something else. Weird.


----------



## moxie1617 (Jan 5, 2004)

I call it judder. Saw it on the Illusionist and Jet Li's Fearless.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

I think that's what we've been calling "motion artifacts"

Back when I used to watch Rocketboom they had similar motion effects a lot of the time. I recall that if I skipped back it would resync better somehow and the video quality would improve. So far this hasn't worked for Unbox content.


----------



## Unix_Beard (Dec 22, 2003)

supasta said:


> I sure do love these weekend .99 cent specials. 3 new movies this week for me!


Makes you wonder what the bean counters are thinking.

Pulling the trigger on a .99 download is so much easier than $3.99. Given the lame 24 hour policy, I'm reluctant to drop 4 bucks to have the Tivo delete it if I didn't finish watching it. Then you have the whole subpar PQ....

I'm no cheapskate when it comes to this kind of thing but I'd rent much more at 99 cents than the current rate.


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

This week's cheap rentals are
Astronaut Farmer
Blade Runner
The Bourne Supremacy
Catch and Release
Daddy's Little Girls
Let's Go to Prison
The NeverEnding Story


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

As noted in another thread, there are two movies that can be purchased for free.
El Callejon de los Milagros 
Inspiracion
 These are two Mexican movies, in Spanish with English subttles.

El Callejon de los Milagros is "the most awarded film in Mexican History" with 49 international awards.

Inspiracion is "The story about a teen that falls in love and discovers his life is about to change. a film about wanting something and fighting to make it happen."

Makesure you buy the movies, as renting them is still $2.99.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

alansh said:


> This week's cheap rentals are
> The Bourne Supremacy





I'd be interested to hear if the fast action survives the transcoding unscathed.

Will have to check out those free movies - thanks pdhenry.


----------



## moxie1617 (Jan 5, 2004)

davezatz said:


> I'd be interested to hear if the fast action survives the transcoding unscathed.
> 
> Will have to check out those free movies - thanks pdhenry.


What's confusing to me is the fast action in Jet Li's Fearless was okay, the slow panning is what was bad. Most of the motion artifacts I've seen have been with panning, not with action scenes. Go figure.


----------



## JustAllie (Jan 5, 2002)

moxie1617 said:


> What's confusing to me is the fast action in Jet Li's Fearless was okay, the slow panning is what was bad. Most of the motion artifacts I've seen have been with panning, not with action scenes. Go figure.


+1, that's when the problem occurred when I was watching "The Holiday."


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

moxie1617 said:


> What's confusing to me is the fast action in Jet Li's Fearless was okay, the slow panning is what was bad. Most of the motion artifacts I've seen have been with panning, not with action scenes. Go figure.


MPEG compression works well when isolated portions of what appears onscreen are moving. When the entire image is moved or replaced, it requires much more bandwidth to accommodate storing all the necessary info. The encoding process places limits on how much bandwidth will be used -- a maximum bitrate. And if the bitrate needed is higher than that maximum, areas of the screen end up being skipped over because they can't be fully encoded within the bandwidth limitations. So it may take several frames to catch up with all the changes that occurred onscreen, and you'll see various artifacts during that time. Fast action in small areas of the screen is easily compressed since much of the screen remains unchanged frame to frame. But if you were to zoom in on the action and pan with it, you'd face encoding limitations again, and display artifacts.


----------



## moxie1617 (Jan 5, 2004)

Thanks, that makes sense. No longer confused.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

This weekend:

99 cent rental:

The Bourne Supremacy
The Bourne Identity
Breach
Ghost Rider
Dead Silence
Norbit
 Free to own:

Un Rey en la Habana
Hormigas en la Boca


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Thanks again for the reminder!

I rented "Dead Silence" on DVD last week... highly recommended for horror fans, REALLY scary IMO. 

I'm getting "Ghost Rider" now.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

pdhenry said:


> As noted in another thread, there are two movies that can be purchased for free.
> El Callejon de los Milagros
> Inspiracion
> These are two Mexican movies, in Spanish with English subttles.
> ...


the first was too much at free I am afraid  every cliche about a foreign film and why it is boring was there. :down: :down: 
Inspiracion was a fun love story with a very mature theme on how true love was to be. That one would be worth a 99cent rental. :up:

this has been an unauthorized review, should you disagree then you have no one to blame but yourself


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

pdhenry said:


> This weekend:
> 
> 99 cent rental:
> 
> ...


It's great that they would put the Bourne movies on special just as the latest installment hits the theaters. For $2, I'll be able to catch the earlier ones before going to see the Ultimatum.


----------



## alansh (Jan 3, 2003)

This weekend:
Babel
Breach
Ghost Rider
Pride
Shooter
TMNT
Remember the initial credit for signing up your TiVo expires 9/1.


----------



## Havana Brown (Feb 3, 2005)

I'm dowloading movies I wasn't interested in before just cause they're cheap.


----------



## smark (Nov 20, 2002)

Lots of good stuff this weekend.

300
TMNT
Shooter
ATHF


----------



## Havana Brown (Feb 3, 2005)

smark said:


> Lots of good stuff this weekend.
> 
> 300


Done! :up:


----------



## mrmike (May 2, 2001)

Mujeres Infieles (2004) is also 0.99 if you're into that sort of thing.

Anyone know why sort by price doesn't put the 0.99 ones in the right place?
That's annoying.

ATHF link for the lazy


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

mrmike said:


> Anyone know why sort by price doesn't put the 0.99 ones in the right place?
> That's annoying.


I'm trying to find that out myself. My guess is that there's really just a sale price field in their database with start/end times and the sorting doesn't take that into account, and/or the data is stored on multiple servers and isn't being updated properly on some.

Last week was weird... sometimes I'd only get all 6 $0.99 rentals showing in sort by price if I didn't exclude purchase-only downloads. If I tried to show rentals only, I only would get 2 of the specially priced videos shown.

Last night, shortly after midnight ET, prices on a few videos were shown as $0.99 on the main page but none were showing up correctly in sort by price.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

mrmike said:


> Anyone know why sort by price doesn't put the 0.99 ones in the right place?
> That's annoying.


Because the entire Unbox site sucks? 

I don't know who did that part of the Amazon site, but it's really bad.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

A little warning, i bought the whole season of "Dexter" which I found under the Unbox/Tivo/TV section, and it won't download to my Tivo, and Amazon says it can't download to Tivo at this time, and they'll get back to me in 5-7 days.

I wanted to use up the rest of my credit, and I basically got the whole thing free, but now I might have to watch them all on my PC.

-smak-


----------



## Havana Brown (Feb 3, 2005)

mrmike said:


> Mujeres Infieles (2004) is also 0.99 if you're into that sort of thing.
> 
> Anyone know why sort by price doesn't put the 0.99 ones in the right place?
> That's annoying.
> ...


So I'm NOT crazy. I thought I just didn't know how to navigate the thing.


----------



## Havana Brown (Feb 3, 2005)

Are this weekend's .99 rentals repeats of some before?


----------



## moxie1617 (Jan 5, 2004)

Zodiac and Hot Fuzz are new.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

I definitely haven't been going to the well as often as when all of the offerings were first-timers.


----------



## spikedavis (Nov 23, 2003)

You can't beat Zodiac and Hot Fuzz for 99 cents each. That's an incredible deal.

Too bad they aren't High Def versions....


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Hot Fuzz is awesome.


----------



## dylanemcgregor (Jan 31, 2003)

pdhenry said:


> I definitely haven't been going to the well as often as when all of the offerings were first-timers.


Not just that, but there seems to be less new releases (at least ones that I'm interested in) coming to Unbox at all. I'll pay 0.99 for something that I've got a bit of interest in that I haven't seen, and I'll do $3.99 on some rentals if I'm really interested (it would help if they got rid of the 30 day and 24 hour watching period), but they need to have new, interesting content each week.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

This weeks $.99 rentals are as follows:


The Contract 
Shooter 
I Think I Love My Wife 
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer 
Blade Runner 
Hot Fuzz 

I am not sure which version of Blade Runner it will be, but for .99 and though it would be cropped, I'll grab it for my TiVo for some night that my wife goes to bed early.......


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Also noted that they've added another NBC pilot created by the makers of "West Wing" called "Journeyman" for *free*. :up:


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

jlb said:


> This weeks $.99 rentals are as follows:
> 
> The Contract
> Shooter
> ...


I still don't understand why I can't get the specials email notifications... weird...

Why would BR be cropped? The ones I've rented have been letterboxed, not "pan and scan".

"Hot Fuzz" is hilarious.

Since I've seen "Shooter" (very good quality on the Unbox download!), BR and "Hot Fuzz" already, no rentals for me this time... the others don't appeal to me.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Some earlier posts on this thread noted problems downloading Unbox material...either failed or slow results. (There's a current thread in the TiVo Help Center started by someone that's having issues.) I just finished an S3/S2, wired/wireless experiment and posted the results.

I thought it might be helpful to anyone visiting this thread that's experiencing problems. Hopefully they'll post some feedback there and any opinions from the experts on this thread would obviously be welcome as well.


----------



## Havana Brown (Feb 3, 2005)

I downloaded 4 free NBC shows and it's taken two days to download three of them!


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

Shooter must have been 99 cents last week too. I think we watched it on Sunday. It was OK, mostly forgettable but distracting. I watched the Bionic Woman freebie last night - ugh.


----------



## d_anders (Oct 12, 2000)

Havana Brown said:


> I downloaded 4 free NBC shows and it's taken two days to download three of them!


Wow, I've downloaded 4 of the pilots as well, it took about 8-10 hours for all of them. I did download them before TiVo started featuring them on the TiVo units themselves, so perhaps Amazon now is getting hit now with heavier traffic and have to upgrade...

I have yet to have a download speed issue myself, but it could also be helped by my download speeds. Do you have a fast internet connection? Cable or DSL? What's your speed.

I've got a premium comcast internet connection that provided 5-10Mbps of true sustained download speed, with about 784-1Mbps upload.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

Havana Brown said:


> I downloaded 4 free NBC shows and it's taken two days to download three of them!


Ouch!  I just downloaded the free NBC pilot of "Journeyman" this a.m. to two TiVo's, one on Ethernet and one on wireless and both took about 20 minutes each. The program is a little more than 1/2 hour long, a 1GB file.

Just tested our Comcast broadband connection to Seattle (home of Amazon...assuming their servers are there too) using Speakeasy  and the download speed was 8982kbps (of course your results may vary  ).


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Mine took about 20 minutes each to download as well. Over wireless 11b.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

davezatz said:


> Shooter must have been 99 cents last week too. I think we watched it on Sunday. It was OK, mostly forgettable but distracting. I watched the Bionic Woman freebie last night - ugh.


heh, I liked both of those for the action drama they are. Some people's tastes 

PS - all 4 pilots loaded down in 10 minutes a piece or so


----------



## mtchamp (May 15, 2001)

I'll say it again. As exciting as rentals are at only 99 cents, give me a 3 day watch rental Hollywood and I'll rent your movies. I hit a brick wall with the 24 hour watch limit. All my other TiVo content is easier to consume. Why should I pay for something less convenient. When I have 2 free hours, I go to the theater. Hollywood wins anyway, I guess. Dumb rule, no more rentals from me, never.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

richsadams said:


> Ouch!  I just downloaded the free NBC pilot of "Journeyman" this a.m. to two TiVo's, one on Ethernet and one on wireless and both took about 20 minutes each. The program is a little more than 1/2 hour long, a 1GB file.


Is it a full episode? If so, it should be closer to ~43 minutes long, at least. (I consider that significantly more than "a little more than 1/2 hour").

I'm honestly asking, not nitpicking.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Yes it's a full episode. And 43 minutes is the length on them.

Whether it's a little or a lot more than half an hour is up to you.


----------



## Havana Brown (Feb 3, 2005)

Hot Fuzz wasn't bad for being .99

This time it didn't take so long to download. I think the free NBC ones where when everyone else was doing it too.


----------



## lawilson2 (Oct 6, 2005)

Dude.... Superman vs. Doomsday for .99 cent. Oh wow!


----------



## JPA2825 (May 15, 2000)

mtchamp said:


> I'll say it again. As exciting as rentals are at only 99 cents, give me a 3 day watch rental Hollywood and I'll rent your movies. I hit a brick wall with the 24 hour watch limit. All my other TiVo content is easier to consume. Why should I pay for something less convenient. When I have 2 free hours, I go to the theater. Hollywood wins anyway, I guess. Dumb rule, no more rentals from me, never.


I wish you could run the TiVo through a DVD recorder (like the LiteOn model, for example) while you're playing it in case you get called away or fall asleep and your 24 hour window slams shut.


----------



## lawilson2 (Oct 6, 2005)

I'm not getting how people can't watch a movie in 24 hours. I mean, you have 30 days to make time to sit down and watch it. I dunno, when I sit down to watch something, I watch it until it's done. The 360 has the same deal, only their windows is 14 days for movies I believe. 

I guess I would be more upset if you had 24 hours to watch it period, regardless of whether you started it or not. I think it just calls for a bit of planning of your time in those 30 long days to put 2 hours aside for a movie...


----------



## anom (Apr 18, 2005)

lawilson2 said:


> I'm not getting how people can't watch a movie in 24 hours. I mean, you have 30 days to make time to sit down and watch it. I dunno, when I sit down to watch something, I watch it until it's done. The 360 has the same deal, only their windows is 14 days for movies I believe.
> 
> I guess I would be more upset if you had 24 hours to watch it period, regardless of whether you started it or not. I think it just calls for a bit of planning of your time in those 30 long days to put 2 hours aside for a movie...


I take it you don't have any small children in the house.


----------



## lawilson2 (Oct 6, 2005)

anom said:


> I take it you don't have any small children in the house.


No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.


----------



## rambler (Dec 3, 2005)

JPA2825 said:


> I wish you could run the TiVo through a DVD recorder (like the LiteOn model, for example) while you're playing it in case you get called away or fall asleep and your 24 hour window slams shut.


If you have 2 tivo's in close proximity to each other you can do this.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

As an FYI, *dylanemcgregor*, was having terrible network problems with Unbox, but with the help of TiVo CSR's he was able to get everything working. Hopefully this will help some folks here.

Click here to view his post and other related info.


----------



## nexus99 (Oct 17, 2002)

I saw this and got all excited. Then I reconsidered. I am doing the HD TV thing and use netflix to rent high definition DVDs. (This means I have around 800 bucks tied up in 2 HD DVD players... yeah. I love the toys.) If UnBox offered HD content for 99cent per I think they would have a monster hit on their hands. Although the download times might be horrible. In the standard definition world Unbox is definately on the right track though! If you watch 5 or 6 movies a month... thats only 6 bucks. And you just click to get them. that is COOL  I can't wait till there is something like this for HD! Netflix and Blockbustrer will be hurting then! Sorry to ramble


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

nexus99 said:


> I saw this and got all excited. Then I reconsidered. I am doing the HD TV thing and use netflix to rent high definition DVDs. (This means I have around 800 bucks tied up in 2 HD DVD players... yeah. I love the toys.) If UnBox offered HD content for 99cent per I think they would have a monster hit on their hands. Although the download times might be horrible. In the standard definition world Unbox is definately on the right track though! If you watch 5 or 6 movies a month... thats only 6 bucks. And you just click to get them. that is COOL  I can't wait till there is something like this for HD! Netflix and Blockbustrer will be hurting then! Sorry to ramble


I'll second that! We get an Unbox movie or TV show now and then but still watch DVD's when the PQ and sound are important.

If Unbox offered HD we'd be use them exclusively. It takes a regular movie about 40 minutes to download for us (Comcast regular broadband connection). Even if the data were quadrupled I'd be more than happy. Now that they're allowing programs to begin playing soon after the download starts, that might be a headache, but heck, I'd wait for an HD movie with that kind of convenience! :up:


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

If Unbox uses MPEG-4 for HD material then downloads would take less time than the current SD MPEG-2 download. The Series3 and TiVoHD units support MPEG-4, so I'm sure that's what'll happen when HD downloads eventually begin.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

dswallow said:


> If Unbox uses MPEG-4 for HD material then downloads would take less time than the current SD MPEG-2 download. The Series3 and TiVoHD units support MPEG-4, so I'm sure that's what'll happen when HD downloads eventually begin.


Cool. :up: We can only hope.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

dswallow said:


> If Unbox uses MPEG-4 for HD material then downloads would take less time than the current SD MPEG-2 download. The Series3 and TiVoHD units support MPEG-4, so I'm sure that's what'll happen when HD downloads eventually begin.


The compression may be better but I think it's a reach to say an HD MPEG4 would be a smaller file than an SD MPEG2.


----------

