Apple's iTunes 9 rumored to have Blu-ray, social media support - Page 3

That sounds like a blessing in disguise, if anything.

Nice one there Drow!

Totally agree with you. And i thought iTunes was so slow because i'm using a PC it's way slower than any single program i have. I second the iTunes Reboot idea. And when the heck are they going to let us download our movies to iTunes!!! Come on Apple...get with it. DVD's have only been around for like 20 years already! Figure out the licensing and coding so i can watch my DVD's on my Apple TV put the discs in storage!!! It's crazy they haven't done this yet. It works for Music, so why not movies?


I had to look up "Cocoa" because i'm not an IT person. Personally, i think for Apple to cater to people wining about not having a "Cocoa" version is just unrealistic. I'd like to see a quote of how many Mac Users actually use Cocoa or even know what it is. Then we can start asking Apple for favors...


As much as i doubt they will, i wouldn't put it past them. Personally, i think what they mean by "Blu-Ray Support" is for iMovie or Premiere or Final Cut Pro. A lot of video cameras now have standard HDTV resolution and it would be tough to make copies of these home movies without Blu-Ray support. Also, a lot of Podcasts out there may want to offer HD versions as well. So that's my thought.

As much as you'd like to think this is true, i really doubt it. VHS is still in production, hate to break it to you; even though stores don't sell them, they still exist and people are using them. How's that for a shocker. So i don't think your time frame of 2-4 years is accurate. I really love reading how all you people out there think that digital media is going to make physical media obsolete. Hate to break it to you for a second time. but not everyone has a digital home storage system. I would say less than 1% (my prediction) of all households own some kind of digital storage (other than a DVR).

Computers crash, hard drives crash. Storage is lost in computer glitches. Back-ups are fogotten and time consuming and costly. Most people don't have a second back-up hard drive. You're never going to replace Physical media, at least not in the next 15-20 years is my prediction. Try telling a 40-60 year old with no computer and a storage cabinet full of VHS' and DVD's that digital downloads are taking over and they'll have to replace everything.

This will make you laugh:
http://www2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs...72009023243932

Nice one there.

Here, here! I'm glad to see i'm not the only one on these forums that think like you.

[/QUOTE]Hopefully, they're finally rolling DVD player into iTunes. It (and quicktime for that matter) should have been merged in iTunes years ago. We only need one media app.[/QUOTE]

Well, what if you don't want all your videos in iTunes? Not all videos or short clips that i own are iTunes compatible, even though they are playable in quicktime. I have vacation movies and clips that i want to just quickly view, without the time consuming task of opening iTunes, quicktime works just fine for me.

yeah, i think it's funny that a lot of reality TV shows only want video tape when receiving submissions for casting (i.e. The Amazing Race and Survivor). My guess is that the TV industry still relies on VHS or tape-based media since digital is too easy to manipulate.

Again, I have to say it kills me to see all you people with these inflated ideas of big, small, good, bad, etc...

A 42" TV is NOT small!!! If you compare the vertical dimension to a standard 4:3 TV it's about equivalent to a 36" TV. That was considered a BIG TV before 16:9 TVs came out.

However, i do agree that BD kills Apple TV with 720p playback. And, as i've stated in previous posts...license or not, I think it's ridiculous that if you want to watch a movie you already own on DVD or BD on your iPhone or iPod, you have to buy the it again!!! Sorry apple, that marketing strategy is about a flimsy as Panasonic's dual deck BD/VHS i posted a couple up...

Why do i have re buy scores of discs to BD when HD is already here.
Even ROKU netflix HAS HD and apple itunes has HD . BLURAY lost .
FOR A 50 dollar machine they charge 800 dollars /

I agree that BD is way too expensive. I'm not sure where you shop but i got my panasonic BD player for $299 at best buy, which is pretty average. Now i'm not saying that isn't a rip-off either, but that's what DVD players cost after being on the market for 2 years. And yes, BD movies are crazy expenisve. If they really want to compete with Digital and DVD sales, they need to make the movies close enough in price to make worth it.

I, for one, only buy movies for the special features. If i like a movie enough, i will buy it, but really only for the special stuff. Like LOTR. now you can't get the 8+ hours of bonus content from those extended editions on iTunes can you? Thought so. Plus, Netflix is just such a better deal than iTunes movie rentals. I can watch as many DVD/BD movies as i like and instant download for $18 a month. I'd like to say that iTunes single use rentals are just as cheap but they are far off the mark.

Now, look at what it costs to buy a HD movie on iTunes...$19.99. I just bought the Extended Edition of "Watchmen" with the digital copy and all bonus features for $19.99 at Best Buy. Prices are coming down and you get so much more with physical media still.

you also seem to miss the point with Netflix. They RELY on DVD and BD for business. If BD and DVD die, then so does Netflix.

One thing the link to the BD/VHS player also demonstrates is that people don't want a dozen boxes connected to their TVs. I think this is one of the major failings of the AppleTV. It's yet another box to connect, and it doesn't allow me to get rid of any of the boxes I already have. If they had put a DVD player in it it really wouldn't have increased the production cost much, and I think it would have little impact to iTunes sales (because if I want to own the physical disc, I'm going to buy the physical disc regardless). A DVD player would be the perfect Trojan horse to get AppleTVs into living rooms. Then let people discover the convenience of online video renting, buying the TV episodes you forget to record, etc. Instead, they went straight for forced reliance for iTunes content and as a result have a much smaller installed base.

As for the rest of your post, I agree wholeheartedly. Many of us on these forums have good home theater PC set-ups, we have large storage systems with backup, and fat broadband pipes. Most people don't have that. And until they do, downloaded movies are not ideal. Another issue with downloaded content...what happens to the content when you and your significant other breakup/divorce, or when your kids go off to college, or you die? Who ones it? How do you transfer ownership? It essentially become a lifetime license to the person who purchased it. You can't sell, trade, or give it away.

Downloaded content is great for renting, but it's a bad purchase proposition unless it's significantly discounted from the cost of physical media (and it's not).

Quicktime doesn't support DVD, I seriously doubt it will support Blu-ray.

Yeah, I think most of the weak points about the aTV are in Job's dislike for physical media. You know if that guy wasn't so stubborn about stuff we'd never have the iPod or iMac, but...that ego can also hurt great products, like the aTV. totally agree with you.

I disagree with that its a flimsy excuse. Ten years ago CD was a superior option in every respect. It was superior storage and playback medium.

The only advantage BR has is storing an HD movie on a portable disc. Other than that BR has no real advantages over many other options. The fact that Apple would need to implement more DRM in OS X is a minus.

Its only a matter of time as the price of flash memory comes down. They will be able to sell movies on SD cards. You slip them into the slot in your television or computer and enjoy 1080P.

Blu-ray may stand a chance if the disc price come down to $5-$10 at Wal-mart. Few people are ever going to buy discs at $20-$30.

I've seen people watching a horrible $5 bootleg on an HD television. The majority of the consumer market cares about price far more than quality.

Yes. It's very annoying.

It should be up to the users whether they want to watch a movie on their computer or not.

In fact, I've watched more than a few DVDs on my 24" monitor. They look very good, better than they do on many widescreen Tvs. B-R would look better. And certainly, those with 30" monitors would appreciate this.

Streaming/downloads is the future. Clinging to physical media is clinging to the old business model and not embracing the future. That's why Sony is in the terrible shape its in now.

I agree that Jobs is being stubborn to the detriment of ATV. The problem is forcing ATV to be locked to iTunes and not opening it to other services. The ATV would be a much more popular device if it were open to Hulu, Netflix, and iPlayer. It would be much more able to replace the cable box and the physical media player.

Not just the 60 year old with the computer, but most people who look a little deeper into digital downloads too. The iTunes HD movies is less than 5 Mbps. Most of those folks isn't going to upgrade from DVD's to this. Even the average guy with a bunch of DVD's won't upgrade to digital downloads. Try selling him a device that play digital download but will not work with any of the DVD's he already owns.

I don't say "small" pejoratively. I say it because I know, and read of so many people who think that at their normal viewing distance, they can appreciate 1080p with a 42" set, which is the most popular size, though larger sets are being bought more now that prices have dropped.

I say small because in order to get the full resolution of 1080p from it, a person with 20/20 vision needs to sit no further than 5 feet away. How many people do that? In order to see the full 720p you need to sit no further away than 8 feet. Even that's closer than most people sit.

So for the average seating distance that most people have, a 42" set is "small".

These numbers are based on known, and agreed upon viewing abilities of people, it's not an opinion.

You are only looking at one of two options. Buy a physical disc or buy a digital download. While many people don't do either of those two. There are many many other options for watching movies and television.

First of all, B-R has not "lost". It's growing faster than DVD did at the same time after its introduction. It hasn't been very long since Toshiba gave up the ghost with HD-DVD. That's the actual beginning of the format. In fact, Toshiba finally admitted that they will be making B-D themselves, after first saying that they wouldn't. Too much money being left on the table they've said.

In addition, we're in the middle of the worst recession around the entire world since the Great Depression of the 1930's. Bringing out a new format during that time is very difficult.

You can now get B-R players for $250, and by the holiday, it's expected we'll see them for $200, possibly less. Movies on the format have dropped considerably in price as well.

Downloaded HD movies look terrible when compared to the same movie on B-R. That's very easy to see.

Yes, but it's much farther off than many bleeding-edgers would like to think. Just like Beta vs VHS and blu-ray vs HD DVD slowed the adoption of those new formats, the many different sources and incompatibilities of various download services is going to greatly slow its adoption.

Think 5-7 years.

double

Exactly what are you saying will happen in 5 - 7 years?

I'm not saying I expect streaming/downloading to become the dominant way people watch video. I am saying it will quickly become one of the primary ways.

I do agree however that lack of compatibility and ubiquity that the physical media formats have has stunted the growth of downloads.

I'd guess again before predicting the demise of BD. it took VHS almost 30 years before it' finally died in 2006 to the commercial market. If you want to predict the end of Phyical Media, a safe bet would be 20 years more.

At the time, you could see the difference between the really bad VHS and DVD on the average Tv. On a good Tv, like my XBR, the difference was greater. So, yes, there was a big improvement.


I don't agree with this. First of all, no one can argue that B-R isn't a much higher quality than DVD. Not only is it sharper, but the color is better as well. On a good Tv this is pretty obvious.

On a good 24" or larger monitor, it's even more obvious, and decent monitors have better color and sharpness than even LCD and plasma sets.

I enjoy B-R on my Tv, and the difference between that and the DVD version is quite noticeable.

And honestly, I couldn't care less about the DRM. That's not a real issue. All downloadable movies, Tv shows, and videos are already DRM heavy. If the ability to use DRM for B-R is implemented, it would only affect B-R playback. And what DVD isn't full of DRM? The OS already needs to recognize that, so don't kid yourself about DRM.


I doubt we'll see that for a long time, if ever. I can't see any advantage to that at this point. In order to hold a movie at the quality level of a B-R movie, the stick will need to be 25 GB at least. Until those sticks, with packaging, drop to $1 apiece, about what it costs to do a DVD with artwork and jewel case, it won't be competitive. And the cost of producing B-R movies is dropping rapidly with the construction of new plants in China and elsewhere. It will be at that level in another couple of years at the latest.

It will also take a good 8 years or so for downloading to be practical for most people. At least a 10Mb/s connection will be required, and that's a minimum. 50 Mb/s is more practical. If we want to see a movie on our increasingly larger sets, we're going to need less compression as time goes by. how long would it take you to download a full quality B-R movie? What about the extras that they give, and people like?

Spontaneity goes out the door with downloads unless the speed is good enough, or you also have the bandwidth for streaming. When will Apple. or others stream a full quality 1080p with 5 channel sound over the internet?

Most B-R movies these days are going for under $20. Many are $15. You can find older ones on sale on Amazon and other places, J&R for example for under $10. Price isn't an issue.

Ok man...you should first read up the page a bit to see all the arguments as to why digital media will probably not be fully accepted; so i don't have to repeat things.

I for one think physical media will be around for a very long time. BD, DVD, chips, whatever. there will be physical media. you just can't get past the fact that:

1. maybe less than 1% of users actually back up their stuff on a secondary hard disc; or even own a 2nd hard drive.
2. people don't want to re-purchase what they already have digitally. Hopefully Apple is working on this.
3. hard drives last up to 5-7 years on most normal computers. so once that crashes, you're screwed. Optical Discs from the factory (meaning the movie quality ones) typically can last up to 100 years.
4. transferring of digital licenses is a pain, from what i've read, i've never had a problem transferring music from one computer to another but we'll see.
5. No additional features or content on digital. Physical copies have way more special features. No commentaries on digital copies.
6. BD is coming down (see my post about "Watchmen" extended copy for $19.99 at Best Buy, vs. the iTunes copy standard HD version for the same price.)

To me, Digital Downloads will be the new rental service, but not the be-all, end-all of home entertainment. It's just a large piece of the Home Theater Puzzle.

Yeah, but with the recent changes in Blu-Ray licensing it is now more a bag of pinch.

Another advantage for BR is the player will play my existing DVD collection. Digital downloads and SD cards mean cutting ties with my old media. I don't think being superior storage is going to obsolete optical media. Most people will look at price first.

We're already seeing sales of B-R players drop below $200. I just got this e-mail from J&R. By Christmas, when player prices are expected to drop to $200 as the regular price, we'll see even lower sale pricing. And after that, it will move even lower.

http://www.jr.com/sharp/pe/SHA_BDHP2...dSale.08072009

This right here, puts you in the tiniest of minorities out of those that buy movies. Most people who buy movies buy them to own or collect the movies themselves.

The vast majority of the movie buying public doesn't care at all about the supposed extras that they shovel onto the disc. The "extra content" thing was revealed to be mostly a scam years and years ago. Almost all you get is advertisements for other movies or promotions for the movie you have already bought. Not one movie company has ever used the full capabilities of the DVD medium for "extras" as they were originally envisioned when the format was designed.

Most buyers, when asked in a survey, would rather have them taken off the disc given that they are mostly advertisements and that the viewer is "locked in" to viewing said advertisements when they don't even want to. I bought a disc just last week for $45 and I had to watch 15 minutes of advertisements before I was *allowed* to access the movie.

While some of the better dics like criterion etc. have some valuable extras, the majority of movie extras are junk and most people would rather not have them at all.

iTunes already has an extraordinary social capacity that is seriously underdeveloped, in the form of Library Sharing. The fact that Sharing does not does not already have basic social tools - you can't chat, comment, or even log what items in my Library people have been checking out (duh! )- is a stunning oversight that I hope will be soon addressed. All those iPod Touches and iPhones provide interesting possibilities for viral and site-specific ambient distribution, too.

triple post

I've never heard of a survey where "most buyers" said that they would like the extras removed from the disk. Those extras are a big selling point. So are the special disk sets with games and an extra disk of interviews and such that won't fit onto the movie disk. Boxed editions at much higher prices with fold out pictures and other extras as well as various cuts are very popular, and very expensive, but sell well.

I'd like to see some of those surveys. While I believe that many people don't look at some of the extra stuff. I've never read anywhere that most would rather not have it at all. Maybe a few people, thinking it would be cheaper.

edits

I agree with you.
I feel like Apple really missed an opportunity to make iTunes more of an interactive experience with friends. Myspace's initial focus was all about the music. I'm no Myspace fan, but there is something to be learned from sites like Myspace, facebook, and twitter where people are spending more and more of their time.

It should be an optional feature. I could care less about social networking, but for most people it's a big part of their online life.

Why not allow users to develop profiles and recommend music? Why not allow anyone to view music videos for free? I think all of these things would only help sales.

Bruce, you are really out of it. It was all over the news last year that HD-DVD died. And good riddance!

The "bonus content" for the extended edition was kind of cool because it was like you were watching the feature with the director right there. he would pause the movie to talk about particular scenes, focus on areas you might miss. The bonus features on the added disc were just OK, i think the first one was the best, more about he history of the Graphic novel.

The extended scenes are seamlessly integrated and if you read the graphic novel, you'll appreciate the added content. Much like LotR extended editions. Nothing compares to the quality of the bonus features on LotR. I've yet to find anything as comprehensive.