If they're not at least 720p quality movie rentals, Apple shouldn't even bother. Anyone who's serious about renting movies will want to watch them on their television, which will require the purchase of a $300 Apple TV, which only works with HDTVs, where current iTunes video looks craptacular. Oh, and if they don't implement some kind of instant-on streaming capability, then your 24 hour limit ought not begin until the download completes; for some people their 24 hours would be up before their 1-7GB film ever finished downloading.
If they're not at least 720p quality movie rentals, Apple shouldn't even bother. Anyone who's serious about renting movies will want to watch them on their television, which will require the purchase of a $300 Apple TV, which only works with HDTVs, where current iTunes video looks craptacular. Oh, and if they don't implement some kind of instant-on streaming capability, then your 24 hour limit ought not begin until the download completes; for some people their 24 hours would be up before their 1-7GB film ever finished downloading.
1) Current iTunes Store video looks just as good as a non-upconverting DVD player on an HDTV though and AppleTV. Through an iPod plugged into via composite video, not so much.
2) You don't need an HDTV to use an AppleTV just a TV with component video cables (or any TV if you want to by a junction box).
There are many reasons why HD optical media isn't being adopted quickly:
? DVDs suit most people's needs
? Upconverting DVD players are cheaper than HD optical players while offering better quality than DVD
? HD optical players are still too expensive for most people
? The HD optical media war shows no clear winner which makes people afraid of buying into a dead-end futureless technology
I think the last reason also currently applies to video downloads even more than physical media. Look at how many completely incompatible sources there currently are:
Amazon Unbox (PC's and TiVo's only)
iTunes Store (PC/Mac/Apple portable players only)
XBox 360 Marketplace (XBox 360 only?)
And then there's all the ad-supported services like Joost and Hulu with all their varying compatibilities and most with no easy way to get to a TV.
It's a mess of formats that makes the HD-DVD/Blu-Ray format war look pretty simplistic. At least you can buy devices capable of playing both physical formats. You'll never see a Tivo unit that is capable of playing iTunes videos or an AppleTV playing XBox purchases.
This is really where the studios have to come together and create one standard format with one standard of DRM that can be licensed by any hardware/software manufacturer that so chooses. The public needs to know that they can buy downloads anywhere and watch on the device of their choosing.
This will also lead thing to a great thing called competition. Maybe some people consider $9.99 - $14.99 a fair price for movies from iTunes, but I look at the selection and a good deal of them you could go to Wal-Mart and find for less than that on DVD. For example, all the Star Trek movies are available for $7.50 each at Wal-Mart and are 2-disc sets; Why would I want to buy less than DVD-quality from iTunes or any other online store? I look at Amazon Unbox and see Spider-Man 1 & 2 are $5.99 each which strikes me as a much more reasonable price for what I'm getting. At the very least, that is less than the DVD price at Wal-Mart.
The way Appple currently runs the iTunes Store, I would hate to see them come out on top in the video download market since their prices are pretty much static and there are generally no sales or discounts to speak of ever. I can't imagine Apple ever doing any sort of K-Mart inspired Blue Light Specials, but just about every weekend Amazon has several movies for rent at 99 cents, generally fairly new releases as well. It's hard to argue with that price. Even if I don't get around towatching it before it expires, I don't mind because the price is right for what I'm paying for. Could anyone ever imagine Apple offering 99 cent rentals? I personally can't.
rentals is a convenience media after one drives to a theater, pays for parking, buys popcorn etc etc.. what the others lack is the customer base of portable video players.. end of story.. the "triple play" is coming soon.. it will be a plan to allow playback on the computer, the TV (ITV) and the ipod..
1.. it is a total solution for hardware choice
2. it will be user friendly as are all the other features of Itunes
3. there will be a long list of specialty "podcast" and "third world market" video selection that comes via a master catalog updated daily ..
4. there will be room for new creative talent to pursue selling movies via itunes
5. the simplicity of choice overshadows price .. maybe AI readers are penny pinchers who compare costs of things as cheap as a movie rental - but consumer electronics flourishes with impulse purchase ready vendors.. it might be as much as 50% or more of the business. How far will one go to rent a movie? Put finger tips on the key board wins.
6. rentals are a convenience to the enormous customer base as well as a competitive wealth protection of hardware format. the less vendors that participate the weaker the program.
7. Nobody has anything close to a triple play format for all three choices of how to watch. Nobody has a monopoly on video - and makes a good profit too. Nobody will be a monopoly on video because the studios are so greedy with so many extra hands in the pot that it will be a next generation solution that picks away at studio business until some small producers get their first big hits that are not introduced via the networks or big players. In the end the consumer will win and format will be universal in that it will be offered in various formats to all players. This is a software based next generation - there is not more single format DVD, CD, CASSETTE etc etc (looking back over time) that the studios can implement going forward. It just won't happen again.. THIS IS ALL ABOUT BEING ABLE TO OFFER A TOTAL SOLUTION VIA SOFTWARE THAT CAN BE UPDATED AT WILL - THIS IS ABOUT WANTING SOMETHING NOW AND HAVING IT AVAILABLE.. NOW. SOME FORMATS COME CLOSE = BUT APPLE HAS A TRIPLE PLAY FOR THEIR BASE OF APPLE USERS. NOBODY HAS ANYTHING CLOSE .. NO OTHER VENDER EVEN HAS A BASE OF HARDWARE USERS FOR THEIR GOODS AND SERVICES WORTH MENTIONING.
5. the simplicity of choice overshadows price .. maybe AI readers are penny pinchers who compare costs of things as cheap as a movie rental - but consumer electronics flourishes with impulse purchase ready vendors.. it might be as much as 50% or more of the business. How far will one go to rent a movie? Put finger tips on the key board wins.
You are right to a certain extent. The real problem is that Apple has to convince consumers to pony up for $300 AppleTV box in the first place. If download prices aren't attractive enough or is the selection broad enough or the quality isn't good enough then this won't be an easy task for Apple regardless of one-click convenience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxmann
7. Nobody has anything close to a triple play format for all three choices of how to watch.
Don't rule out Microsoft. Their Zune/XBOX 360/Windows strategy potentially could be more effective than Apple's (since the studios are very anti-Apple right now).
Apple has a lot of work to do to make the Apple an attractive, mass-accepted electronic device. If they fail to impress, the AppleTV may become the next Cube. January should be interesting....
1) Current iTunes Store video looks just as good as a non-upconverting DVD player on an HDTV though and AppleTV.
.
BS. Even Jobs repeatedly said the quality is "Near DVD " when it's really more like "near VHS". The movies on iTunes only look decent on an iPod because the screen is so small. I agree with the previous post that if it's not at least 720P- why bother?
rentals is a convenience media after one drives to a theater, pays for parking, buys popcorn etc etc.. what the others lack is the customer base of portable video players.. end of story.. the "triple play" is coming soon.. it will be a plan to allow playback on the computer, the TV (ITV) and the ipod..
1.. it is a total solution for hardware choice
2. it will be user friendly as are all the other features of Itunes
3. there will be a long list of specialty "podcast" and "third world market" video selection that comes via a master catalog updated daily ..
4. there will be room for new creative talent to pursue selling movies via itunes
5. the simplicity of choice overshadows price .. maybe AI readers are penny pinchers who compare costs of things as cheap as a movie rental - but consumer electronics flourishes with impulse purchase ready vendors.. it might be as much as 50% or more of the business. How far will one go to rent a movie? Put finger tips on the key board wins.
6. rentals are a convenience to the enormous customer base as well as a competitive wealth protection of hardware format. the less vendors that participate the weaker the program.
7. Nobody has anything close to a triple play format for all three choices of how to watch. Nobody has a monopoly on video - and makes a good profit too. Nobody will be a monopoly on video because the studios are so greedy with so many extra hands in the pot that it will be a next generation solution that picks away at studio business until some small producers get their first big hits that are not introduced via the networks or big players. In the end the consumer will win and format will be universal in that it will be offered in various formats to all players. This is a software based next generation - there is not more single format DVD, CD, CASSETTE etc etc (looking back over time) that the studios can implement going forward. It just won't happen again.. THIS IS ALL ABOUT BEING ABLE TO OFFER A TOTAL SOLUTION VIA SOFTWARE THAT CAN BE UPDATED AT WILL - THIS IS ABOUT WANTING SOMETHING NOW AND HAVING IT AVAILABLE.. NOW. SOME FORMATS COME CLOSE = BUT APPLE HAS A TRIPLE PLAY FOR THEIR BASE OF APPLE USERS. NOBODY HAS ANYTHING CLOSE .. NO OTHER VENDER EVEN HAS A BASE OF HARDWARE USERS FOR THEIR GOODS AND SERVICES WORTH MENTIONING.
IT HAS TO BE HIGH QUALITY AND DOWNLOAD INCREDIBLY FAST OR IT WILL FAIL.
BS. Even Jobs repeatedly said the quality is "Near DVD " when it's really more like "near VHS". The movies on iTunes only look decent on an iPod because the screen is so small. I agree with the previous post that if it's not at least 720P- why bother?
I didn't say was as good, i said looks as good. One is an actual observation the other is not. I can't see any difference between my AppleTV on a 37" LG HDTV via HDMI or my DVD player via component. Is the AppleTV is doing anything to up-convert the video? I don't know; but my couch is about 10" from the TV and my eyesight is still keen.
This doesn't sound right, 24 hours is not long enough. And what would be the motivation for keeping it so short? I remember renting videos from Blockbuster back in the day, and their new releases were just 24-hr rentals, because they wanted them back so other people could rent them. What's the point of limiting a digital download to 24 hours?
My thinking is that this rental service is like movies on demand for cable. You would rent the movie when you want to watch it. Disadvantage is if you wanted to watch it again, you really don't have much time within the 24-hr. period. There is no reason to rent the movie and wait a few days to watch it. In this case, there is room for this type of service and Netflix too.
My thinking is that this rental service is like movies on demand for cable. You would rent the movie when you want to watch it. Disadvantage is if you wanted to watch it again, you really don't have much time within the 24-hr. period. There is no reason to rent the movie and wait a few days to watch it. In this case, there is room for this type of service and Netflix too.
24 hours is fine for VOD services from cable companies but for watching on Apple's portable devices I can see how that time frame may be too short. If they do go with 24 hours they have it start from the time you start watching it not when you first download it, otherwise there will be a lot of pissed off iPod/iPhone customers... me included.
24 hours is fine for VOD services from cable companies but for watching on Apple's portable devices I can see how that time frame may be too short. If they do go with 24 hours they have it start from the time you start watching it not when you first download it, otherwise there will be a lot of pissed off iPod/iPhone customers... me included.
Good point. I don't have an AppleTV and don't watch much video on my iPod but I would understand the disappointment. Starting the 24-hr. period from the time you watch it and not the download time is a good idea too.
Remember, Apple makes money here by selling hardware, not movies. The iPod/music pricing issue exemplifies this. Either Apple will change their strategy in the hopes of winning back content owners (sell Apple TV at breakeven and make $ on the rental) or they will make the ipod "play" all over again, wanting to sell Apple TVs and lots of them using movies as lost leaders.
Consider:
XBox probably loses cash on every sale, hoping to make it back on the games.
Apple TV actually makes money, probably, with a sale.
So what will make it better?
Speed:
Multicast, see recent article by Robert X Cringely. The amount of bits moved on the release day of "ratatouille" blows the doors off what the iTunes store can deliver. Perhaps they could be distributed in a ATV-to-ATV manner. This would be fast. Otherwise, they don't have a chance against cable companies.
Quality:
Why is it that ATV only hooks up to HDtV when the video it supplies isn't worthy of it? A change in the works?
Value:
I don't think they're going to be able to give away movie content like they did music. THe labels are smarter than that. Big media seems to be making money on DVD sales, despite hemorrhaging a fair amount with BitTorrent. Not a sector withering away like CD sales.
Experience:
Ease, but also tie-ins. Is apple TV ready to be a web browser as well? Go watch an episode of the OFFICE online at nbc.com... THere are all sorts of stupid contests to enter and tshirts and crap to buy, and chat about the show, etc. I personally dont' have the time for that stuff, but many do.
I seems to me that studios should be selling not only the movie but the trailers, the "making-of" featurette, the chat-room, the contests, all of that stuff. The movie is only incidental! They should be selling a community, an obsession, etc.
Make Apple TV the best way to sit on your couch and get your fix of Lost, complete with all the ancillary marketing, and then the industry might realize they have something better to sell through ATV than just TV.
Consider how insane the people who do fantasy football could get if they could sit on their couch and do all their research, see clips.
? The HD optical media war shows no clear winner which makes people afraid of buying into a dead-end futureless technology[/INDENT]
Maybe this is why AppleTV isn't selling too well. From a consumer's point of view, this is just another format, playable only on AppleTV and computer. I am not very interested in watching movies on my computer.
24 hours is fine for VOD services from cable companies but for watching on Apple's portable devices I can see how that time frame may be too short. If they do go with 24 hours they have it start from the time you start watching it not when you first download it, otherwise there will be a lot of pissed off iPod/iPhone customers... me included.
How big is the market for mobile video? I remember the study from a while back that said very little was spent watching videos on iPods (less than 2% of their time). Having owned a video-capable iPod for over a year I've only watched perhaps 2 full-length TV episodes. It has played in total probably 10 TV shows when it was hooked up a TV acting as a poor-man's TiVo.
Maybe I've just passed out of that range for mobile video as I suspect it would be larger with college-age and under users. But for the adult population, there's only 2 times I could see it being big, on a commute or during flights/layovers while traveling. The majority of people's commutes involves driving themselves to work, so that really just leaves travel which is a fairly short and specific even to most.
In the end, my point is do that many people really care about mobile video. Especially long videos like TV shows and movies? Who really has time for that?
How big is the market for mobile video? I remember the study from a while back that said very little was spent watching videos on iPods (less than 2% of their time). Having owned a video-capable iPod for over a year I've only watched perhaps 2 full-length TV episodes. It has played in total probably 10 TV shows when it was hooked up a TV acting as a poor-man's TiVo.
Maybe I've just passed out of that range for mobile video as I suspect it would be larger with college-age and under users. But for the adult population, there's only 2 times I could see it being big, on a commute or during flights/layovers while traveling. The majority of people's commutes involves driving themselves to work, so that really just leaves travel which is a fairly short and specific even to most.
In the end, my point is do that many people really care about mobile video. Especially long videos like TV shows and movies? Who really has time for that?
There are many things to consider when determining the future of mobile video.
1) Is the device watchable?
? Since getting my iPhone I spend a lot of time watching video. on it. I even purchase a great deal more video from iTS whereas i never did this with my 5.5G iPod w/ video. I can now wait for excessive amounts of time pretty much anywhere so long as my iPhone is companion. A 3G nano won't cu tit for me but may for someone else.
2) Is the content accessible?
? While there will always be a segment of any market will prefer to steal, most people just want ease of use. Torrents and newsgroups provide ease of use once you understand how it works (there is a learning curve). If Apple can make rental simple enough and make the options for the mobile devices worthwhile then iTunes Rentals will work. Netflix becomes a complex, lengthy and illegal when you try to copy DVD content for your portable device.
3) If you build it, will they come?
? The keynote in which jobs presented the first iPod shows a confused audience wondering how quickly they can sell their remaining Apple shares and put their C.V. somewhere else (speculation). It wasn't until the iPod mini came on the market that the iPod appealed to me whereas before that I had absolutely zero interest in such a device. It was short-sided on my part but I don't think I am alone. Apple has proven that you can create a market overnight where none once existed. But can they do with video rentals while kowtowing to the content owners?
I don't know anyone who uses VHS anymore. If we could be able to rent movies.
I do for the simple rerason DVDs are a pain in the arse, you get the slightest mark on them, which its impossible not to and they refuse to work and the picture quality is no different to VHS, despite all the signing and dancing adverts when they first came out.
Plus, you're buying into the studios draconian DRM control
I do for the simple rerason DVDs are a pain in the arse, you get the slightest mark on them, which its impossible not to and they refuse to work and the picture quality is no different to VHS, despite all the signing and dancing adverts when they first came out.
Plus, you're buying into the studios draconian DRM control
1) Optical media do work with scratches. Many scratches can be repaired and if you keep them in the case between viewings they can last a very long time, unlike tape video which wears out from excessive viewings.
2) DVD DRM was broken a long time ago. There are free programs that will re-encode DVD MPEG-2 files to other video formats.
3) VHS quality is not the same to DVD, but on an SDTV over an composite or S-Video connection you may not be able to tell the difference.
Some items for comparison (emphasis mine):
Analog:
350×240 (260 lines): Video CD
330×480 (250 lines): Umatic, Betamax, VHS, Video8
400×480 (300 lines): Super Betamax, Betacam (pro)
440×480 (330 lines): analog broadcast
560×480 (420 lines): LaserDisc, Super VHS, Hi8
670×480 (500 lines): Enhanced Definition Betamax
Digital:
720×480 (520 lines): D-VHS, DVD, miniDV, Digital8, Digital Betacam (pro)
720×480 (400 lines): Widescreen DVD (anamorphic)
1280×720 (720 lines): D-VHS, HD DVD, Blu-ray, HDV (miniDV)
1440×1080 (810 lines): HDV (miniDV)
1920×1080 (1080 lines): D-VHS, HD DVD, Blu-ray, HDCAM SR (pro)
I do for the simple rerason DVDs are a pain in the arse, you get the slightest mark on them, which its impossible not to and they refuse to work and the picture quality is no different to VHS, despite all the signing and dancing adverts when they first came out.
What? Maybe if you're recording your own videos from TV, then SVHS might be close, but if you think that the picture quality is comparable between DVD and regular VHS, then something is seriously wrong. Even on an RF connector to a 20" SDTV, DVD is better, but if you're passing it through a VCR, then Macrovision might cause some problems.
DVDs don't damage that easily such that they're unplayable, nor is it difficult to handle them in a way that doesn't scratch them. Almost none of my DVDs have any scratches. I do occasionally have problems with rental discs, maybe 1 in 50, and usually it's a matter of wiping the fingerprints of the knuckle draggers that touch the data side when handling the DVD.
Comments
If they're not at least 720p quality movie rentals, Apple shouldn't even bother. Anyone who's serious about renting movies will want to watch them on their television, which will require the purchase of a $300 Apple TV, which only works with HDTVs, where current iTunes video looks craptacular. Oh, and if they don't implement some kind of instant-on streaming capability, then your 24 hour limit ought not begin until the download completes; for some people their 24 hours would be up before their 1-7GB film ever finished downloading.
1) Current iTunes Store video looks just as good as a non-upconverting DVD player on an HDTV though and AppleTV. Through an iPod plugged into via composite video, not so much.
2) You don't need an HDTV to use an AppleTV just a TV with component video cables (or any TV if you want to by a junction box).
There are many reasons why HD optical media isn't being adopted quickly:
I think the last reason also currently applies to video downloads even more than physical media. Look at how many completely incompatible sources there currently are:
Amazon Unbox (PC's and TiVo's only)
iTunes Store (PC/Mac/Apple portable players only)
XBox 360 Marketplace (XBox 360 only?)
And then there's all the ad-supported services like Joost and Hulu with all their varying compatibilities and most with no easy way to get to a TV.
It's a mess of formats that makes the HD-DVD/Blu-Ray format war look pretty simplistic. At least you can buy devices capable of playing both physical formats. You'll never see a Tivo unit that is capable of playing iTunes videos or an AppleTV playing XBox purchases.
This is really where the studios have to come together and create one standard format with one standard of DRM that can be licensed by any hardware/software manufacturer that so chooses. The public needs to know that they can buy downloads anywhere and watch on the device of their choosing.
This will also lead thing to a great thing called competition. Maybe some people consider $9.99 - $14.99 a fair price for movies from iTunes, but I look at the selection and a good deal of them you could go to Wal-Mart and find for less than that on DVD. For example, all the Star Trek movies are available for $7.50 each at Wal-Mart and are 2-disc sets; Why would I want to buy less than DVD-quality from iTunes or any other online store? I look at Amazon Unbox and see Spider-Man 1 & 2 are $5.99 each which strikes me as a much more reasonable price for what I'm getting. At the very least, that is less than the DVD price at Wal-Mart.
The way Appple currently runs the iTunes Store, I would hate to see them come out on top in the video download market since their prices are pretty much static and there are generally no sales or discounts to speak of ever. I can't imagine Apple ever doing any sort of K-Mart inspired Blue Light Specials, but just about every weekend Amazon has several movies for rent at 99 cents, generally fairly new releases as well. It's hard to argue with that price. Even if I don't get around towatching it before it expires, I don't mind because the price is right for what I'm paying for. Could anyone ever imagine Apple offering 99 cent rentals? I personally can't.
1.. it is a total solution for hardware choice
2. it will be user friendly as are all the other features of Itunes
3. there will be a long list of specialty "podcast" and "third world market" video selection that comes via a master catalog updated daily ..
4. there will be room for new creative talent to pursue selling movies via itunes
5. the simplicity of choice overshadows price .. maybe AI readers are penny pinchers who compare costs of things as cheap as a movie rental - but consumer electronics flourishes with impulse purchase ready vendors.. it might be as much as 50% or more of the business. How far will one go to rent a movie? Put finger tips on the key board wins.
6. rentals are a convenience to the enormous customer base as well as a competitive wealth protection of hardware format. the less vendors that participate the weaker the program.
7. Nobody has anything close to a triple play format for all three choices of how to watch. Nobody has a monopoly on video - and makes a good profit too. Nobody will be a monopoly on video because the studios are so greedy with so many extra hands in the pot that it will be a next generation solution that picks away at studio business until some small producers get their first big hits that are not introduced via the networks or big players. In the end the consumer will win and format will be universal in that it will be offered in various formats to all players. This is a software based next generation - there is not more single format DVD, CD, CASSETTE etc etc (looking back over time) that the studios can implement going forward. It just won't happen again.. THIS IS ALL ABOUT BEING ABLE TO OFFER A TOTAL SOLUTION VIA SOFTWARE THAT CAN BE UPDATED AT WILL - THIS IS ABOUT WANTING SOMETHING NOW AND HAVING IT AVAILABLE.. NOW. SOME FORMATS COME CLOSE = BUT APPLE HAS A TRIPLE PLAY FOR THEIR BASE OF APPLE USERS. NOBODY HAS ANYTHING CLOSE .. NO OTHER VENDER EVEN HAS A BASE OF HARDWARE USERS FOR THEIR GOODS AND SERVICES WORTH MENTIONING.
5. the simplicity of choice overshadows price .. maybe AI readers are penny pinchers who compare costs of things as cheap as a movie rental - but consumer electronics flourishes with impulse purchase ready vendors.. it might be as much as 50% or more of the business. How far will one go to rent a movie? Put finger tips on the key board wins.
You are right to a certain extent. The real problem is that Apple has to convince consumers to pony up for $300 AppleTV box in the first place. If download prices aren't attractive enough or is the selection broad enough or the quality isn't good enough then this won't be an easy task for Apple regardless of one-click convenience.
7. Nobody has anything close to a triple play format for all three choices of how to watch.
Don't rule out Microsoft. Their Zune/XBOX 360/Windows strategy potentially could be more effective than Apple's (since the studios are very anti-Apple right now).
Apple has a lot of work to do to make the Apple an attractive, mass-accepted electronic device. If they fail to impress, the AppleTV may become the next Cube. January should be interesting....
Dave
haha americans. you never add the cost of petrol do you?
That's because we pay half what you do for it, and most of us live in areas that don't have usable alternative public transportation to rely on...
1) Current iTunes Store video looks just as good as a non-upconverting DVD player on an HDTV though and AppleTV.
.
BS. Even Jobs repeatedly said the quality is "Near DVD " when it's really more like "near VHS". The movies on iTunes only look decent on an iPod because the screen is so small. I agree with the previous post that if it's not at least 720P- why bother?
rentals is a convenience media after one drives to a theater, pays for parking, buys popcorn etc etc.. what the others lack is the customer base of portable video players.. end of story.. the "triple play" is coming soon.. it will be a plan to allow playback on the computer, the TV (ITV) and the ipod..
1.. it is a total solution for hardware choice
2. it will be user friendly as are all the other features of Itunes
3. there will be a long list of specialty "podcast" and "third world market" video selection that comes via a master catalog updated daily ..
4. there will be room for new creative talent to pursue selling movies via itunes
5. the simplicity of choice overshadows price .. maybe AI readers are penny pinchers who compare costs of things as cheap as a movie rental - but consumer electronics flourishes with impulse purchase ready vendors.. it might be as much as 50% or more of the business. How far will one go to rent a movie? Put finger tips on the key board wins.
6. rentals are a convenience to the enormous customer base as well as a competitive wealth protection of hardware format. the less vendors that participate the weaker the program.
7. Nobody has anything close to a triple play format for all three choices of how to watch. Nobody has a monopoly on video - and makes a good profit too. Nobody will be a monopoly on video because the studios are so greedy with so many extra hands in the pot that it will be a next generation solution that picks away at studio business until some small producers get their first big hits that are not introduced via the networks or big players. In the end the consumer will win and format will be universal in that it will be offered in various formats to all players. This is a software based next generation - there is not more single format DVD, CD, CASSETTE etc etc (looking back over time) that the studios can implement going forward. It just won't happen again.. THIS IS ALL ABOUT BEING ABLE TO OFFER A TOTAL SOLUTION VIA SOFTWARE THAT CAN BE UPDATED AT WILL - THIS IS ABOUT WANTING SOMETHING NOW AND HAVING IT AVAILABLE.. NOW. SOME FORMATS COME CLOSE = BUT APPLE HAS A TRIPLE PLAY FOR THEIR BASE OF APPLE USERS. NOBODY HAS ANYTHING CLOSE .. NO OTHER VENDER EVEN HAS A BASE OF HARDWARE USERS FOR THEIR GOODS AND SERVICES WORTH MENTIONING.
IT HAS TO BE HIGH QUALITY AND DOWNLOAD INCREDIBLY FAST OR IT WILL FAIL.
BS. Even Jobs repeatedly said the quality is "Near DVD " when it's really more like "near VHS". The movies on iTunes only look decent on an iPod because the screen is so small. I agree with the previous post that if it's not at least 720P- why bother?
I didn't say was as good, i said looks as good. One is an actual observation the other is not. I can't see any difference between my AppleTV on a 37" LG HDTV via HDMI or my DVD player via component. Is the AppleTV is doing anything to up-convert the video? I don't know; but my couch is about 10" from the TV and my eyesight is still keen.
DVD: Full D1 NTSC is 720 × 480 pixels
iTS Video: 640 x 480 pixels
This doesn't sound right, 24 hours is not long enough. And what would be the motivation for keeping it so short? I remember renting videos from Blockbuster back in the day, and their new releases were just 24-hr rentals, because they wanted them back so other people could rent them. What's the point of limiting a digital download to 24 hours?
My thinking is that this rental service is like movies on demand for cable. You would rent the movie when you want to watch it. Disadvantage is if you wanted to watch it again, you really don't have much time within the 24-hr. period. There is no reason to rent the movie and wait a few days to watch it. In this case, there is room for this type of service and Netflix too.
My thinking is that this rental service is like movies on demand for cable. You would rent the movie when you want to watch it. Disadvantage is if you wanted to watch it again, you really don't have much time within the 24-hr. period. There is no reason to rent the movie and wait a few days to watch it. In this case, there is room for this type of service and Netflix too.
24 hours is fine for VOD services from cable companies but for watching on Apple's portable devices I can see how that time frame may be too short. If they do go with 24 hours they have it start from the time you start watching it not when you first download it, otherwise there will be a lot of pissed off iPod/iPhone customers... me included.
24 hours is fine for VOD services from cable companies but for watching on Apple's portable devices I can see how that time frame may be too short. If they do go with 24 hours they have it start from the time you start watching it not when you first download it, otherwise there will be a lot of pissed off iPod/iPhone customers... me included.
Good point. I don't have an AppleTV and don't watch much video on my iPod but I would understand the disappointment. Starting the 24-hr. period from the time you watch it and not the download time is a good idea too.
Consider:
XBox probably loses cash on every sale, hoping to make it back on the games.
Apple TV actually makes money, probably, with a sale.
So what will make it better?
Speed:
Multicast, see recent article by Robert X Cringely. The amount of bits moved on the release day of "ratatouille" blows the doors off what the iTunes store can deliver. Perhaps they could be distributed in a ATV-to-ATV manner. This would be fast. Otherwise, they don't have a chance against cable companies.
Quality:
Why is it that ATV only hooks up to HDtV when the video it supplies isn't worthy of it? A change in the works?
Value:
I don't think they're going to be able to give away movie content like they did music. THe labels are smarter than that. Big media seems to be making money on DVD sales, despite hemorrhaging a fair amount with BitTorrent. Not a sector withering away like CD sales.
Experience:
Ease, but also tie-ins. Is apple TV ready to be a web browser as well? Go watch an episode of the OFFICE online at nbc.com... THere are all sorts of stupid contests to enter and tshirts and crap to buy, and chat about the show, etc. I personally dont' have the time for that stuff, but many do.
I seems to me that studios should be selling not only the movie but the trailers, the "making-of" featurette, the chat-room, the contests, all of that stuff. The movie is only incidental! They should be selling a community, an obsession, etc.
Make Apple TV the best way to sit on your couch and get your fix of Lost, complete with all the ancillary marketing, and then the industry might realize they have something better to sell through ATV than just TV.
Consider how insane the people who do fantasy football could get if they could sit on their couch and do all their research, see clips.
? The HD optical media war shows no clear winner which makes people afraid of buying into a dead-end futureless technology[/INDENT]
Maybe this is why AppleTV isn't selling too well. From a consumer's point of view, this is just another format, playable only on AppleTV and computer. I am not very interested in watching movies on my computer.
24 hours is fine for VOD services from cable companies but for watching on Apple's portable devices I can see how that time frame may be too short. If they do go with 24 hours they have it start from the time you start watching it not when you first download it, otherwise there will be a lot of pissed off iPod/iPhone customers... me included.
How big is the market for mobile video? I remember the study from a while back that said very little was spent watching videos on iPods (less than 2% of their time). Having owned a video-capable iPod for over a year I've only watched perhaps 2 full-length TV episodes. It has played in total probably 10 TV shows when it was hooked up a TV acting as a poor-man's TiVo.
Maybe I've just passed out of that range for mobile video as I suspect it would be larger with college-age and under users. But for the adult population, there's only 2 times I could see it being big, on a commute or during flights/layovers while traveling. The majority of people's commutes involves driving themselves to work, so that really just leaves travel which is a fairly short and specific even to most.
In the end, my point is do that many people really care about mobile video. Especially long videos like TV shows and movies? Who really has time for that?
How big is the market for mobile video? I remember the study from a while back that said very little was spent watching videos on iPods (less than 2% of their time). Having owned a video-capable iPod for over a year I've only watched perhaps 2 full-length TV episodes. It has played in total probably 10 TV shows when it was hooked up a TV acting as a poor-man's TiVo.
Maybe I've just passed out of that range for mobile video as I suspect it would be larger with college-age and under users. But for the adult population, there's only 2 times I could see it being big, on a commute or during flights/layovers while traveling. The majority of people's commutes involves driving themselves to work, so that really just leaves travel which is a fairly short and specific even to most.
In the end, my point is do that many people really care about mobile video. Especially long videos like TV shows and movies? Who really has time for that?
There are many things to consider when determining the future of mobile video.
1) Is the device watchable?
? Since getting my iPhone I spend a lot of time watching video. on it. I even purchase a great deal more video from iTS whereas i never did this with my 5.5G iPod w/ video. I can now wait for excessive amounts of time pretty much anywhere so long as my iPhone is companion. A 3G nano won't cu tit for me but may for someone else.
2) Is the content accessible?
? While there will always be a segment of any market will prefer to steal, most people just want ease of use. Torrents and newsgroups provide ease of use once you understand how it works (there is a learning curve). If Apple can make rental simple enough and make the options for the mobile devices worthwhile then iTunes Rentals will work. Netflix becomes a complex, lengthy and illegal when you try to copy DVD content for your portable device.
3) If you build it, will they come?
? The keynote in which jobs presented the first iPod shows a confused audience wondering how quickly they can sell their remaining Apple shares and put their C.V. somewhere else (speculation). It wasn't until the iPod mini came on the market that the iPod appealed to me whereas before that I had absolutely zero interest in such a device. It was short-sided on my part but I don't think I am alone. Apple has proven that you can create a market overnight where none once existed. But can they do with video rentals while kowtowing to the content owners?
I don't know anyone who uses VHS anymore. If we could be able to rent movies.
I do for the simple rerason DVDs are a pain in the arse, you get the slightest mark on them, which its impossible not to and they refuse to work and the picture quality is no different to VHS, despite all the signing and dancing adverts when they first came out.
Plus, you're buying into the studios draconian DRM control
I do for the simple rerason DVDs are a pain in the arse, you get the slightest mark on them, which its impossible not to and they refuse to work and the picture quality is no different to VHS, despite all the signing and dancing adverts when they first came out.
Plus, you're buying into the studios draconian DRM control
1) Optical media do work with scratches. Many scratches can be repaired and if you keep them in the case between viewings they can last a very long time, unlike tape video which wears out from excessive viewings.
2) DVD DRM was broken a long time ago. There are free programs that will re-encode DVD MPEG-2 files to other video formats.
3) VHS quality is not the same to DVD, but on an SDTV over an composite or S-Video connection you may not be able to tell the difference.
Some items for comparison (emphasis mine):
I do for the simple rerason DVDs are a pain in the arse, you get the slightest mark on them, which its impossible not to and they refuse to work and the picture quality is no different to VHS, despite all the signing and dancing adverts when they first came out.
What? Maybe if you're recording your own videos from TV, then SVHS might be close, but if you think that the picture quality is comparable between DVD and regular VHS, then something is seriously wrong. Even on an RF connector to a 20" SDTV, DVD is better, but if you're passing it through a VCR, then Macrovision might cause some problems.
DVDs don't damage that easily such that they're unplayable, nor is it difficult to handle them in a way that doesn't scratch them. Almost none of my DVDs have any scratches. I do occasionally have problems with rental discs, maybe 1 in 50, and usually it's a matter of wiping the fingerprints of the knuckle draggers that touch the data side when handling the DVD.