No it's not. The elephant in the room that no wants to talk about is that Popcorn Time doesn't work on a television. Television is where people watch movies.
Back in the late 90s when Napster was a real mainstream thing, people didn't just listen to the music on their computers, they burnt them to CDs and took them to their cars, to parties, etc.
Even then, my girlfriend could not care less about even having a TV. She watches everything on her computer and is perfectly happy.
That's fine and all, but it's very important today. There were file sharing services before Napster, but Napster became popular after cdrw started being put in desktops you could buy at the local computer store (yes, people went to those back then).
> Even then, my girlfriend could not care less about even having a TV. She watches everything on her computer and is perfectly happy.
Sure, and people have been watching DVDs on their computers for years as well, but is there any data that this trend has gone up to a significant degree, or that watching movies is not still done overwhelmingly on a television?
are you forgetting Apple TV, Chromecast, Amazon Fire TV, HDMI cables, etc?
If someone were to build Popcorn Time as an iPhone or Android app that streams to Chromecast / AppleTV, that would be the next logical step, and then we might be able to talk about it being the new Napster.
> If someone were to build Popcorn Time as an iPhone or Android app that streams to Chromecast / AppleTV
why does moving Popcorn Time from the desktop iOS environment to the mobile iOS environment suddenly make this more so much more viable? seems like a pretty insignificant detail if you ask me.
My TV has HDMI inputs; if I wanted to move my computer, I could hook my computer up to the TV. Apple has an accessory where the primary selling point (for me) is that it can bounce output from a computer to a TV. There's an entire family of computers where the entire point of them is to be hooked up to TVs and used as media centers.
Saying that popcorn-time isn't napster for movies because people don't watch movies on their computer, they watch them on their tv isn't really different from saying that napster isn't napster for music because people don't listen to music on their computer, they listen to music on their stereo.
This was my entire point. People didn't just listen to their Napster-downloaded music on their computer, they listened to them in the car, they brought burnt discs to friends house, etc.
Timing is important. The things you mentioned like Apple TV and HDMI-out are not yet refined. It's not easy, and most importantly, it's not ubiquitous. By the time Napster came out every tower computer came with a CDRW drive.
The argument is honestly irrelevant. Popcorn time is a UX leap from what was previously possible. There may be another UX leap in the physical device on which the content is played, but you can't ignore the moon landing just because it didn't happen on Mars.
It won't be long before any digital content is simply available. It will eventually equilibrate into its natural state: a public good, non-rival and non-exclusive in consumption.
Eventually, we'll pay for our bandwidth and content in one utility package, track usage in a legal and unlimited way, and divvy proceeds of our utility subscription to content creators based on popularity. A systematic solution is necessary, and the faster we're able to do it, the better.
And since in a lot of countries pirated movies are often way quicker than regular distribution, this can really swing people towards PC based "television" or media consumption vs old-time television.
I think people are forgetting just how mainstream Napster was. People are forgetting how common burnt discs were at this time, full of music downloaded from Napster.