Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

4jasontv

Suspended
Jul 31, 2011
6,272
7,548
It seems like you’re really intent on re-defining the word “free”.

If you can’t afford ad-free streams feel free to watch TV for free with just an antenna. But no one is going to buy you a TV, an antenna and pay your electricity bill so there are no costs associated with it. No one is forcing you to watch the commercials anyway.

And if I tell you I’ll give you a couch for free, feel free to pick it up and leave without paying me, though a thank you would be a nice gesture. But don’t expect me to rent a truck and deliver it to you so there’s no costs associated with it.

People use the word “free” to mean “without charge”. Get over it, you’re not going to get the world to change how they use the word free just to suit your pet peeve.

I’m not asking the world to change because ads are “a charge”. Do you tell yourself ads are not payment so you don’t feel bad about blocking ads and stealing content?
 

PickUrPoison

macrumors G3
Sep 12, 2017
8,131
10,720
Sunnyvale, CA
I’m not asking the world to change because ads are “a charge”. Do you tell yourself ads are not payment so you don’t feel bad about blocking ads and stealing content?
As I’ve said several times now, ad-supported is ad supported. When it’s available free of charge, that’s what the rest of the world calls “for free”. It’s literally the definition.

You want to re-define free as “it must not have any costs associated with it”. You don’t get to do that. The free couch I give you is no less free, just because I won’t pay for your gas or rental truck for you to pick it up.

No one is entitled to ad-free streaming services for free. But there are ad-supported services where you can watch for free. You can also get an antenna and watch over-the-air TV for free. But if you want ad-free streams, you’ve got to open up that wallet.

At least we have the option now. Before streaming (and pay channels like HBO since the ’70s) there were zero options for ad-free TV. Even if you were willing to pay, there was no way to watch TV without the commercial breaks (except PBS, which was taxpayer supported). Now we have a choice :)
 
Last edited:

4jasontv

Suspended
Jul 31, 2011
6,272
7,548
As I’ve said several times now, ad-supported is ad supported. When it’s available free of charge, that’s what the rest of the world calls “for free”. It’s literally the definition.

You want to re-define free as “it must not have any costs associated with it”. You don’t get to do that. The free couch I give you is no less free, just because I won’t pay for your gas or rental truck for you to pick it up.

No one is entitled to ad-free streaming services for free. But there are ad-supported services where you can watch for free. You can also get an antenna and watch over-the-air TV for free. But if you want ad-free streams, you’ve got to open up that wallet.

At least we have the option now. Before streaming (and pay channels like HBO since the ’70s) there were zero options for ad-free TV. Even if you were willing to pay, there was no way to watch TV without the commercial breaks (except PBS, which was taxpayer supported). Now we have a choice :)

My point, from the beginning, is that most people get this wrong. Just because most people don’t use the term correctly doesn’t make the incorrect usage correct. just don’t use the term free incorrectly and you make a good point.
 

PickUrPoison

macrumors G3
Sep 12, 2017
8,131
10,720
Sunnyvale, CA
My point, from the beginning, is that most people get this wrong. Just because most people don’t use the term correctly doesn’t make the incorrect usage correct. just don’t use the term free incorrectly and you make a good point.
My point, from the beginning, is that you are the one who is using it wrong. Not most people.

The accepted definition of “for free” is “without charge”. If someone says why pay for streaming video when you can watch over-the-air TV for free with an antenna, they mean they can watch it without charge. Even if they’re broke. Because it’s free.

I understand you don’t want people to use the word free in this context. But I also understand that if you want to stop everyone—or anyone—from using the word free in that manner, you’ve got an uphill battle.

Telling people they’re using the word incorrectly is not likely to accomplish that task. You’re tilting at windmills... but I’ll play along:

Free TV is actually ad-supported TV :)

It has ads, because you don’t get something for nothing. That said, no one is forced to watch the commercials. Mute the TV, read a book, play on your iPhone, run get the mail, get a snack in the kitchen, go to the bathroom, flip to another input and watch something else, make your dinner, etc. It’s not hard to beat them at their own game and get over on them!!

And speaking of beat, this horse is well dead. I can’t imagine we’re going to agree, but give it a shot :)
 

4jasontv

Suspended
Jul 31, 2011
6,272
7,548
The accepted definition of “for free” is “without charge”.

Yes, and ads are a charge. We trade our time and attention to earn money and some people are willing to accept that instead of money as payment. It’s really not that complicated.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.