BBC iPlayer official; Gameloft iPhone games; Beatles in 2008?

[AppleInsider]

The BBC has finalized the first version of its iPlayer TV service for the iPhone and iPod touch. Also, Gameloft and id Software have weighed in on iPhone gaming, and Paul McCartney's divorce may be the last obstacle to the Beatles on iTunes.

BBC iPlayer launches for iPhone, iPod

True to its word, the British Broadcasting Corporation has formally launched its iPlayer service for Apple's iPhone and iPod touch media players.

While still a beta, the feature is the first instance of the on-demand TV replay service to be available for a portable device. Visiting the site from a normal computer requires either Adobe Flash (for streaming) or a Windows PC (for downloads) for copyright reasons.

The UK media outlet explains that the Apple-friendly version works by streaming a 516Kbps H.264 video feed over the website; as it's limited to just a narrow set of devices, no Flash plugins or software development kit support is necessary. The bandwidth does mean Wi-Fi is necessary. "The iPhone's EDGE connectivity is too slow," says the BBC's digital media head, Anthony Rose.

The BBC has promised a Mac-native iPlayer sometime in 2008.

Gameloft vows iPhone games this year

Although the iPhone and iPod touch have gone without any native games from its launch until the present, Gameloft on Friday said it would publish a full 15 titles for the devices by the end of the year.

The French company is considered one of the click wheel iPod's premier game developers and recently hinted at iPhone development through a mockup video just weeks before Apple's iPhone SDK presentation.

id Software's Carmack impressed by early iPhone development

Best known as the technology pioneer behind Doom and Quake, id Software co-founder John Carmack has weighed in on the merits of Apple's iPhone development process.

Initially, the software proves promising with ways to test iPhone apps either on the actual device or in software emulation. The App Store on iTunes is also described as an essential component: the 70/30 revenue split is good compared to many mobile app stores, and the sheer scope of the App Store for reaching customers is a "more important aspect than a lot of people understand," he says.

Still, he notes, his longstanding connection to Mac game development hasn't won him any favors from Apple, which didn't provide an advance build as it did to EA and a handful of other teams.

"I think Steve is still pissed at me over some negative comments I made about iPod development tools a while ago," Carmack says.

Sir Paul's divorce only roadblock to Beatles on iTunes soon?

Of all the described obstacles to the Beatles' catalog launching on the iTunes Store this year, the one major issue left may be Sir Paul McCartney's divorce from Heather Mills, claims the British newspaper The Evening Standard.

Digital versions of the Fab Four's rock group are a double-edged sword for McCartney, according to the source. While posting the albums on iTunes would help pay for his divorce from Heather Mills -- providing as much as $403.5 million to be split between the group -- it may also lead Mills to demand a settlement of $60.5 million or more. She knows that the digital catalog will inflate McCartney's future income, the paper says.

After having struck a truce with Apple Inc. last year, the Beatles' label Apple Corps is known to have sped up the process of remastering the group's collection for digital stores with the aim of a release before the end of 2008.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Digital versions of the Fab Four's rock group are a double-edged sword for McCartney, according to the source. While posting the albums on iTunes would help pay for his divorce from Heather Mills -- providing as much as $403.5 million to be split between the group -- it may also lead Mills to demand a settlement of $60.5 million or more. She knows that the digital catalog will inflate McCartney's future income, the paper says.

That's just crazy in my mind. I thought much of the principle behind divorce settlements is because of the value supposedly derived from the support of companionship when work was being done by the other spouse during the marriage. But the relationship didn't take place until three decades after the band split up, it's the same old work being cleaned up & repackaged. I guess the old fart should have insisted on a pre-nup, but then, it looks like those don't work in the U.K.

[SpamSandwich]

John Carmack won't kiss anyone's rear end.. heh, heh.

Oh, and who cares about the iPlayer... it'll all end up on BitTorrent or YouTube anyway.

[NanoAkron]

Can someone explain to me again why that lying slag deserves a penny of unearned cash for being a famous person's sperm recepticle for 6 years?

[John French]

Originally Posted by NanoAkron

Can someone explain to me again why that lying slag deserves a penny of unearned cash for being a famous person's sperm recepticle for 6 years?

Can someone explain to me WTF this guy is talking about?

[coolfactor]

Originally Posted by John French

Can someone explain to me WTF this guy is talking about?

Basically, she wants to lay claim to money that he _will_ make in the future. That's just ridiculous in my mind, too.

[Buck]

What's that I hear? Carmack trying to maintain his relevance by dropping childish phrases such as "This billionaire is still pissed at me"?

[ikir]

Originally Posted by Buck

What's that I hear? Carmack trying to maintain his relevance by dropping childish phrases such as "This billionaire is still pissed at me"?

Anyway Carmack is a legend, he simply state his point. The same a Steve (who is evena legend for me) but everytime somone don't agree with him they attack him on forums. He is the leader and he says his opinion, everyone can disagree.

[jowie74]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Oh, and who cares about the iPlayer... it'll all end up on BitTorrent or YouTube anyway.

I think you're missing the point of the iPlayer. It's not really for watching things over and over again, or owning an entire series, it's being able to catch up on missed television shows. It's like TiVo or Sky+ but for BBC shows only and on your iPhone.

I for one (who torrents every-so-often) find the iPlayer a welcome break from having to trawl through torrent sites just to find the stuff I've missed. Then seed it for months, all because I missed a 30 minute show from last night.

iPlayer shows are up shortly after they are shown and are available for a week. Not only that but it's a great place to browse for shows you never even realised were on. Yesterday I went on to iPlayer to watch Mitchell & Webb (which was rather disappointing). Only while I was there I noticed a Horizon about life in the Universe. I'd have never known about that! Great programme.

¡Viva iPlayer!

[samurai1999]

Originally Posted by jowie74

Yesterday I went on to iPlayer to watch Mitchell & Webb (which was rather disappointing).

I agree - not as good as the 1st series...

Only while I was there I noticed a Horizon about life in the Universe. I'd have never known about that! Great programme.

¡Viva iPlayer!

Thanks for the tip - I'll check it out!

Hopefully they'll get the iPlayer intergrated into AppleTV soon
- which'll finally give it a purpose in the UK!

[samurai1999]

Originally Posted by ikir

Anyway Carmack is a legend, he simply state his point. The same a Steve (who is evena legend for me) but everytime somone don't agree with him they attack him on forums. He is the leader and he says his opinion, everyone can disagree.

Carmack usually speaks wise-words, even when he's critising the Mac (shock)
- but he's pretty on the money with all his points on the SDK
- it looks to be a pretty good development platform
- the Appstore pricing is pretty good compared to the alternatives
- and the Appstore distribution model is great for small & large developer alike.

Also, I think it's great the way apple has kept pretty quite about the 3D & sound capabilities of the iPhone/Touch, then, BAM!, suddenly, they've got a great handheld gaming machine!
- with an installed base of probably 10M already, 20M by year end (iPhone + Touch)

- like they said, it's a great platform on many levels....

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by ikir

Anyway Carmack is a legend, he simply state his point. The same a Steve (who is evena legend for me) but everytime somone don't agree with him they attack him on forums. He is the leader and he says his opinion, everyone can disagree.

I don't think anyone can reasonably disagree that he has been a very strong influence in the past in computer games. I don't know if he's still a relevant figure today. It's been a good while since his last major game / game engine, and it sounded like the response to that was tepid. Even if his recent work is solid, his influence has waned.

In a way, it's kind of like Steve Wozniak, I don't think Apple would exist without his input at the beginning, but, sad to say, he doesn't seem to have nearly the same creative influence today, even though he still does sound like a very bright individual. I know he's still active in the development of technology and active in society too, both of which are highly commendable. But as far as I know, he has no major pull with Apple or the direction of technology today, he's well known for what he did 30 years ago, but not for anything special that he did lately.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by coolfactor

Basically, she wants to lay claim to money that he _will_ make in the future. That's just ridiculous in my mind, too.

Agreed. I wish a judge would just allow her a flat fee, say 10M UK Pounds, say be grateful and shut the heck up and go away.

Pre nuptial or not, common sense says she did zero to help him earn a single penny before or since they met and if anything has personally been able to make big money herself because of Paul's name. A very large sum such as 10M is far more than she deserves and any more is ridiculous.

As to her expecting anything from the iTunes business; that is beyond ridiculous!

[Walter Slocombe]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

That's just crazy in my mind. I thought much of the principle behind divorce settlements is because of the value supposedly derived from the support of companionship when work was being done by the other spouse during the marriage. But the relationship didn't take place until three decades after the band split up, it's the same old work being cleaned up & repackaged. I guess the old fart should have insisted on a pre-nup, but then, it looks like those don't work in the U.K.

Well she gave an interview on national TV here and said she had never heard of the beatles.. if that didnt sound alarm bells then i reckon he deserves all he gets, its always been patently clear she IS a money grabbing gold digger.

honestly, IMO the wrong wife died.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by Walter Slocombe

Well she gave an interview on national TV here and said she had never heard of the beatles..

Wow, what's next, an admission that she's never heard of England before meeting Paul?

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by John French

Can someone explain to me WTF this guy is talking about?

Frankly, I cannot understand why a person like McCartney would even be interested in getting married. Shouldn't he just have his lawyers set him up on dates?

[Rot'nApple]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

That's just crazy in my mind. I thought much of the principle behind divorce settlements is because of the value supposedly derived from the support of companionship when work was being done by the other spouse during the marriage. But the relationship didn't take place until three decades after the band split up, it's the same old work being cleaned up & repackaged. I guess the old fart should have insisted on a pre-nup, but then, it looks like those don't work in the U.K.

Is this divorce resolved yet?

Hey anybody threw 60 million of most anything at me (be nice people) and I'd be happy!

The way I hear it, it's not about when Mills came along and to any degree, how much of a help she was during her marriage to Sir Paul, but rather, the lifestyle she and their child is accustomed to. Apparently, 60 to 80 million and two homes just isn't enough for some people.

I do wonder how much money and how many homes Mills had before the marriage and although I am sure Sir Paul would take great care to provide for the baby between them, really, how much "accustom to things" is a 4 year old expecting???

Although I do not wish ill will to Mills, I do have a comment for Sir Paul...

Sir Paul, keep "Little John" in your pants, it's causing you to suffer a new STD called RHS, 'Robin Hood Syndrome', where your riches are being robbed and given to the poor!

Sorry, at this time, apparently there no known cure for RHS as long as a little hottie can shake her thing and make 'Little Johns' all over the world stand up and salute! So just make sure you can afford to catch RHS!!

[Mr Underhill]

Oh, and who cares about the iPlayer... it'll all end up on BitTorrent or YouTube anyway

iCare

Works really well and the picture quality is really good.

[anantksundaram]

Groan. Do we have to suffer through "The Beatles are coming to iTunes! The Beatles are coming to iTunes!" stories all over again!?

Does anyone seriously think there is a human being left on this planet who does not already have all of his/her Beatles on iTunes already?

[tmizerek]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

Groan. Do we have to suffer through "The Beatles are coming to iTunes! The Beatles are coming to iTunes!" stories all over again!?

Does anyone seriously think there is a human being left on this planet who does not already have all of his/her Beatles on iTunes already?

Imagine if iTunes carries all the Beatles videos, clips and Christmas greetings. Not many of us has that!

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

Wow, what's next, an admission that she's never heard of England before meeting Paul?

Probably not, she is from Newcastle

[John.B]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Digital versions of the Fab Four's rock group are a double-edged sword for McCartney, according to the source. While posting the albums on iTunes would help pay for his divorce from Heather Mills -- providing as much as $403.5 million to be split between the group -- it may also lead Mills to demand a settlement of $60.5 million or more. She knows that the digital catalog will inflate McCartney's future income, the paper says.

IMO before being allowed to get married, all guys (from seventeen to seventy) should have to pass a test showing they understand how a divorce would affect them financially. In this case, I don't think Paul ever realized how completely different this marriage would be from his marriage to Linda. IMO, he was incredibly lucky in his first marriage and incredibly foolish in the second one.

[quinney]

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

Groan. Do we have to suffer through "The Beatles are coming to iTunes! The Beatles are coming to iTunes!" stories all over again!?

Does anyone seriously think there is a human being left on this planet who does not already have all of his/her Beatles on iTunes already?

If they are remixed, remastered, and rehyped
many people will repurchase them anyway.

[John.B]

Originally Posted by quinney

If they are remixed, remastered, and rehyped
many people will repurchase them anyway.

Actually, with the release of the album "1", most of the singles that were never released on any of the original albums were finally available including "Paperback Writer", "Day Tripper", "Hey Jude", and "Lady Madonna". AFAIK, the only way to get some of the catalog like "Revolution" (the rippin' version that was techically the B-side to the "Hey Jude" single) is from I think Past Masters Vol. 2.

Likewise, I know a few people that would like to pick up a couple of key downloads from the White Album that don't want to shell out $30 for the two-CD set. There would be quite the demand for a song here and a song there, IMO. Of course at this rate, we may never know...

[samurai1999]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

I don't think anyone can reasonably disagree that he has been a very strong influence in the past in computer games. I don't know if he's still a relevant figure today. It's been a good while since his last major game / game engine, and it sounded like the response to that was tepid. Even if his recent work is solid, his influence has waned.

In a way, it's kind of like Steve Wozniak, I don't think Apple would exist without his input at the beginning, but, sad to say, he doesn't seem to have nearly the same creative influence today, even though he still does sound like a very bright individual. I know he's still active in the development of technology and active in society too, both of which are highly commendable. But as far as I know, he has no major pull with Apple or the direction of technology today, he's well known for what he did 30 years ago, but not for anything special that he did lately.

Carmack is not a 'Woz' type of character at all
- he's still very much active in game engine design
- he even demo'd the new id Tech 5 engine at the 2007 WWDC

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/06/11/id...le-conference/

[mrbrightside]

I agree. the iPlayer is probably one of the best things our TV license fee has gone towards paying for!

I used it on my iPod Touch and found it great to use. It downloaded fast, and was ready to play within seconds. The quality was amazing, with both a good picture and sound.

A fantastic way to catch up on any missed Tv whilst laying hungover in bed on a sunday morning!

[BenRoethig]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

I don't think anyone can reasonably disagree that he has been a very strong influence in the past in computer games. I don't know if he's still a relevant figure today. It's been a good while since his last major game / game engine, and it sounded like the response to that was tepid. Even if his recent work is solid, his influence has waned.

In a way, it's kind of like Steve Wozniak, I don't think Apple would exist without his input at the beginning, but, sad to say, he doesn't seem to have nearly the same creative influence today, even though he still does sound like a very bright individual. I know he's still active in the development of technology and active in society too, both of which are highly commendable. But as far as I know, he has no major pull with Apple or the direction of technology today, he's well known for what he did 30 years ago, but not for anything special that he did lately.

I think a lot of the tech 3/4 games have been pretty special and the tech 5 engine is looking really good. The man one of the few who is not afraid of Steve Jobs has no qualms about calling the iCEO out when he's dead wrong about something.

[gizmo2k2k]

looks like it still might be a while before we see the beatles on itunes

http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-989...tag=nefd.pulse

"The company that owns the rights to a vast majority of The Beatles music catalog has questioned reports that the Fab Four have cut a deal with Steve Jobs.

Sony/ATV Music Publishing, the joint venture owned by Sony and singer Michael Jackson, has thrown cold water on newspaper stories out of London that The Beatles catalog would soon be available on iTunes. A spokeswoman for Sony/ATV Music Publishing told CNET News.com that the reports are "untrue."

Sony/ATV is a pretty good source. While EMI Group owns the recording rights to The Beatles catalog, Sony and Jackson own the rights to the vast majority of the catalog's publishing rights. Had a deal been cut, Sony/ATV would "absolutely be informed," the Sony/ATV spokeswoman said.

Stories about the Fab Four heading to iTunes crop up every few months, it seems, and rumors and unconfirmed reports have been circulating for years. This time, the story appeared to have legs as it was reported by three large British newspapers. They all cited unnamed sources.

Under media scrutiny, the stories began showing cracks on Sunday. One of the newspapers reported that Apple was willing to pay the Beatles about $600 million. The blog Silicon Alley Insider noted that Apple, which grosses about 33 cents for every song sale, would have to sell 1.8 billion Beatles songs to break even.

A high-level music industry source said an agreement between The Beatles and Apple could still get inked in 2008. They emphasized, however, that the British papers were wrong to say the deal was finalized.

Representatives for EMI and Apple declined to comment for the story.

Beatles-iTunes partnership would make sense
One has to wonder why these rumors and unconfirmed reports continue to crop up. Is it a case of wishful thinking on the part of Beatles fans or Apple?

The availability of The Beatles, the best-selling band of all time, on iTunes would send the most dramatic signal to date that digital downloads are an integral part of mainstream music, said Susan Kevorkian, a music analyst with research group IDC.

"It's important for iTunes and online music services in general because it legitimizes IP-based music services," Kevorkian said. "It also points to the fact that digital music services are maturing when important groups that have been high-profile holdouts come onboard."

In the last several years, Madonna, Led Zeppelin, and Metallica--artists who once spurned Internet sales of their music--reversed themselves and embraced iTunes.

Earlier Monday, Chris Castle, a music lawyer and former record label executive predicted that a Web-based Beatlemania would be big for iTunes and Beatles fans alike.

He said The Beatles could release formerly unreleased music "that they might have lying around," and the offering could also include some kind of video element. Even though The Beatles broke up nearly 40 years ago, Castle said Apple Corps, the band's media company, would find a way to "dress up the offering" so that it would create excitement even among longtime Beatles fans.

Jeff Jones, the new head of Apple Corps, "is known as a catalog genius," Castle said. "If there is anybody that can figure out how to make this work it's him. I would expect to see some pleasant surprises from Jeff."

Castle said that what fans likely won't find with a Beatles offering on iTunes is a discount.

"This is a band that has sold music at premium prices for four decades," Castle said. "They've never been discounted. I would be shocked to see any competition on price. Think about it. The Beatles have kept (their brand) precious and popular for a long time. They've done this by knowing how to treat their fans and knowing what didn't work for them."

The Beatles were unlikely candidates to join iTunes. Apple Corps had a series of trademark disputes with Apple Inc. going back to 1976 when Beatle guitarist George Harrison saw an ad for the then Apple Computer. The band thought the new company had infringed on their trademark and sued. The case was settled out of court.

There were other legal skirmishes along the way but last year, Paul McCartney told reporters in Great Britain that he thought a deal with Apple CEO Steve Jobs was close to being finalized.

If and when The Beatles arrive at iTunes, there'll be plenty of people who will ask, "Why all the fuss?" The music has been available for free on peer-to-peer sites for years.

According to Castle, The Beatles were an unprecedented combination of talent and timing, and even after all this time, still possess an enormous following of people who will be willing to pay.

"You had the musical genius, business genius, and extraordinary popularity that crossed all genres and formats," Castle said. "You've never had that before or since."

[solipsism]

The Beatles are on iTunes... sorta. Last night's American Idol theme was The Beatles and iTunes has been posting the exclusive performances by the upstarts the following day in iTunes TV show fashion. This week they have n posted The Beatles song performances for $.99 but have posted the video performances for $1.99.

That is change from the previous weeks and I don't know how to interpret it. Does this mean that the talks were just to allow some facet of the beatles on iTunes, of which they settled on the contestant videos? Are music videos still seen as promotional, therefore circumventing any contractual limiter in place with Apple Corps and Apple, Inc.?

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by solipsism

The Beatles are on iTunes... sorta. Last night's American Idol theme was The Beatles and iTunes has been posting the exclusive performances by the upstarts the following day in iTunes TV show fashion. This week they have n posted The Beatles song performances for $.99 but have posted the video performances for $1.99.

That is change from the previous weeks and I don't know how to interpret it. Does this mean that the talks were just to allow some facet of the beatles on iTunes, of which they settled on the contestant videos? Are music videos still seen as promotional, therefore circumventing any contractual limiter in place with Apple Corps and Apple, Inc.?

I don't understand why it's supposedly a change. That's not the same thing as The Beetles being on iTunes. Aren't there a lot of Beetles songs covered by other performers on iTunes? Helter Skelter has been on iTunes for some time in the form of U2's performance, not to mention as many as 48 other versions of the song performed by others.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

Aren't there a lot of Beetles songs covered by other performers on iTunes?

I know it's not the same, hence my first sentence.

All I know is that the iTunes/American Idol pattern changed and I have no good reason as to why.

PS: It's Beatles.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by solipsism

The Beatles are on iTunes... sorta. Last night's American Idol theme was The Beatles and iTunes has been posting the exclusive performances by the upstarts the following day in iTunes TV show fashion. This week they have n posted The Beatles song performances for $.99 but have posted the video performances for $1.99.

That is change from the previous weeks and I don't know how to interpret it. Does this mean that the talks were just to allow some facet of the beatles on iTunes, of which they settled on the contestant videos? Are music videos still seen as promotional, therefore circumventing any contractual limiter in place with Apple Corps and Apple, Inc.?

Beatles songs have always been on iTunes, just always sung by other performers not the Beatles (just search on Yesterday to see). However, the AI show made a big deal about getting permission to use their works for some reason. It is puzzling since any act on TV could always sing a Beatles song if they wished. Of course Paul is on there now so we are half way there lol. Well, living Beatles that is ... But something is in the air for sure ... (not trying to use a Mac ad there)