Still Block Buster right now blows the pants off . . .
Y'know, that could be a very good thing! Depending, of course, on who's doing the blowing.
I have both Blockbuster and AppleTV. The immediacy of AppleTV is making it a big winner in our house. Since we watch an average of about a movie a week, the cost is about a wash. If you are a more frequent movie-watcher, the Blockbuster can work out cheaper.
I don't know if it's just me, but often when my next DVD comes from Blockbuster, I think, "WTF was I thinking?" (I shouldn't be updating My Queue when I'm drunk ) I find the interface for working on My Queue to be quite clunky, so if BBTV is anything like that, Apple has nothing to worry about.
Since I have a good cable connection, every movie I've downloaded, even HD, is ready to watch in less that 60 SECONDS. Apple has made that technology practical. Now comes the wave of the me-too products by the less-creative players.
As Apple's selection gets better, I plan to get rid of the BB. Anyone stupid enough to think that Apple's offerings will grow linearly deserves to be saddled with their clumsy alternatives. These things go in fits and starts and as they achieve critical mass, they increase exponentially until they eventually approach saturation.
So, based on the title of this thread I have to ask: is AppleTV (Take 2) successful? So much so that it now has rivals? I hope so, but I haven't paid for a movie yet...maybe this weekend.
The lack of movies on Apple TV does make me think twice about getting one. You have to wonder what the hold up is and how vicious the studios are going to be with them. Without Steve's Pixar/Disney connection how many movies would they have?
Still, I'd expect Blockbuster to f* this up, far worse than Zune.
This is excellent. My wife and I were searching for yet another device to add to our multimedia arsenal that requires yet another monthly subscription fee.
Since TiVo, Apple TV (iTunes), Comcast, at&t, Netflix don't suck enough out of us on a monthly basis, we were waiting for yet another device from a company that knows a thing or two about delivering multimedia directly to households--and, lo and behold, here's Blockbuster with what I'm sure will be a, um, blockbuster device.
Sign me up! I'm sure this device won't get lost in the noise...I mean, have you seen the interface on Apple TV and other Apple products? Someone needs to come in and teach them a thing or two about human interface design. They probably don't even have a Human Interface Guideline to adhere to. I'm sure Apple just wings it as they go along...Blockbuster, on the other hand, might have something that rivals the Comcast/Motorola DVR in terms of user interface excellence.
This is excellent. My wife and I were searching for yet another device to add to our multimedia arsenal that requires yet another monthly subscription fee.
.
Monthly (annual /12) fees - don't forget : Web hosting, Yahoo Pop Mail, .Mac, Flickr,
Dash GPS , OnStar, (they both found a way to charge for GPS, nice), Starbucks, T-Mobile...
How is a nerd supposed to save for retirement?
And before anyone tells me how dumb I am - I don't have all those. I do have Yahoo pop mail, can't cut the cord. Too tied into the address. It hurts. Just pointing out that there are more and more things that want a piece of your pie.
The problem with AppleTV is the massive bottleneck of adding movies. Netflix currently has over 90,000 titles. ... But the number of video titles on AppleTV has yet to break 1,000. That's pathetic, and it's starting to worry AppleTV owners.
And how many of those 90,000+ titles are direct to DVD, are weight/exercise DVDs, etc? When Tower Records was going out of business, I got there late and while they had maybe a few thousand titles, only a handful were titles I recognized as theatrical releases. Having a lot of **** to choose from is a good thing only if you like ****.
This whole thing is just another obvious "put-up" by the content companies. They whisper in BB's ear ... "Make a set-top box like AppleTV and we'll give you all the content you need." Since they are already in financial trouble, they agree.
I really don't understand why the USA doesn't have laws against this sort of thing. How is it that for more than a year now, virtually all the leading content companies are able to arrange what can only be described as a cartel or oligopoly, where they engage in active collusion to destroy Apple's chance of success? How can they legally supply anything they want to their chosen flunkies and not sell the same thing to Apple? We all know it's immoral, but why isn't it illegal as well?
Of course a company has the right to do business (or not) with anyone they want, but when *multiple* companies that pretty much comprise the whole industry gang up and refuse content to only *one* company, how is that right?
Doesn't the USA have any laws at all? In Canada and Europe this would be highly illegal. It's collusion, price fixing and a bunch of other things besides, and it's gone on for more than a year now.
Such a law as you outline, would be out of line. There are already laws against collusion, but you have to prove that the companies communicated with each other to organize such a collusion. Saying they collude or saying it looks like they collude is not the same as *proving* that they do.
But if each company decided on their own to not deal with a certain company, without contact with other industry competitors, what business is it of a government that gives right of contract (IIRC, most of the West) to force their cooperation with a given said company?
(slightly off topic here) Apple TV should be able to record incoming programs (from the air or cable) in addition to renting video from iTunes. I.e., everything that TiVo does, Apple TV should be able to do. I'm sure TiVo is quickly going in the direction of adding everything Apple TV does onto what TiVo already does, and their UI is every bit as elegant and functional as the Apple UI.
That would up the cost - then you could just buy a Mac mini and EyeTV - in fact, why not just do that now?
I think people are forgetting that Apple is more than a movie rental box. It's also an iPod for your TV. You can't rent movies in Canada, but I still want an AppleTV. Then I could stream the shows that I record with eyeTV on my Mac, play music, look at photos, etc.
The only thing holding me back is the AppleTV does not have an S-Video output and I'm not planning on buying an HDTV in the near future.
That would up the cost - then you could just buy a Mac mini and EyeTV - in fact, why not just do that now?
The additional parts necessary have been estimated to be something like $5 or less. I'm pretty sure it can be sold at a $100 premium. The cost of going with a mini is 3x that increase.
The problem with AppleTV is the massive bottleneck of adding movies. Netflix currently has over 90,000 titles. iTunes started out with, if I remember correctly, 200,000 songs right out of the gate. But the number of video titles on AppleTV has yet to break 1,000. That's pathetic, and it's starting to worry AppleTV owners.
As of late, Apple only adds one or two titles a day, and often deletes movies that were recently added. At the average rate they are adding, it would take 90 years for AppleTV to reach 90,000 titles!
And this is a serious problem because the major studio are playing hardball with Apple. They want to see downloadable movies succeed but it's an "anyone but Apple' mentality these days.
After seeing how Apple manhandled the record labels, they're not about to let Apple grab a stranglehold on in the movie business.
And this is a serious problem because the major studio are playing hardball with Apple. They want to see downloadable movies succeed but it's an "anyone but Apple' mentality these days.
After seeing how Apple manhandled the record labels, they're not about to let Apple grab a stranglehold on in the movie business.
True - but that's also old news.
Apple TV's Take2 OS is OK, not great. It needs to do a whole lot more than simply just be a conduit for iTunes purchases/rentals- that is the real problem.
Apple TV's Take2 OS is OK, not great. It needs to do a whole lot more than simply just be a conduit for iTunes purchases/rentals- that is the real problem.
Well, if the problem hasn't been rectified, it's current news.
Being keepers of content is a major advantage...the one thing Apple doesn't have in it's otherwise vast riches.
AppleTV/iTunes biggest problem is content - they just don't have the numbers like Netflix. What would be wrong with Apple BUYING Netflix, keeping the mail-out rental stuff but also adding tons of content to Apple TV overnight.
Does Netflix have rights to many more movies than Apple for ONLINE distribution?
I mean, it seems clear that at the moment they are considered entirely different things. Licensing wise, Netflix pays for 500 copies of a DVD which it then physically mails out - if it rents enough then it gets its money back and makes a profit (I assume that is still the model). The studios make money per DVD, whereas the download model has the studios wondering how much they can make per rental.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408
This is excellent. My wife and I were searching for yet another device to add to our multimedia arsenal that requires yet another monthly subscription fee.
A very good point. I'm not sure about the US, but in Australia we have a number of ISPs independently starting to develop their own set-top boxes. What a waste of their r&d budget. Then I assume they're looking at their own movie and tv deals. The last thing we want is half the movie studios on one service and half on the other (as we had here with cable TV for 10 years). Are we at a stage where we need providers to get together and agree on a set-top box standard - one set top box that can not just replace a DVD player but also replace the DVR &/or cable box.
Perhaps for now several different models of IPTV will compete and we'll begin to see the most effective model emerge. I just hope the winner is the best one (edit) rather than an artificial winner based on whoever the studios support.
On a related note, imagine if TiVo approached Netflix and Blockbuster (and anyone else in the IPTV market) and offered to sell their content. Buy a TiVo, work with anyone/everyone. That would appeal to me much more than individual Blockbuster/Netflix trying to design custom boxes.
Yeah the MS approach with Zune. That worked out well.
I agree that their future looks a bit on the bleak side. But I don't give this venture much chance of success at this point. Who knows maybe they'll prove me wrong.
Yeah its almost as bad as Apple Tv trying to beat out DVR/Tivo.
Comments
Still Block Buster right now blows the pants off . . .
Y'know, that could be a very good thing! Depending, of course, on who's doing the blowing.
I have both Blockbuster and AppleTV. The immediacy of AppleTV is making it a big winner in our house. Since we watch an average of about a movie a week, the cost is about a wash. If you are a more frequent movie-watcher, the Blockbuster can work out cheaper.
I don't know if it's just me, but often when my next DVD comes from Blockbuster, I think, "WTF was I thinking?" (I shouldn't be updating My Queue when I'm drunk
Since I have a good cable connection, every movie I've downloaded, even HD, is ready to watch in less that 60 SECONDS. Apple has made that technology practical. Now comes the wave of the me-too products by the less-creative players.
As Apple's selection gets better, I plan to get rid of the BB. Anyone stupid enough to think that Apple's offerings will grow linearly deserves to be saddled with their clumsy alternatives. These things go in fits and starts and as they achieve critical mass, they increase exponentially until they eventually approach saturation.
Still, I'd expect Blockbuster to f* this up, far worse than Zune.
We all know it's immoral...
Since TiVo, Apple TV (iTunes), Comcast, at&t, Netflix don't suck enough out of us on a monthly basis, we were waiting for yet another device from a company that knows a thing or two about delivering multimedia directly to households--and, lo and behold, here's Blockbuster with what I'm sure will be a, um, blockbuster device.
Sign me up! I'm sure this device won't get lost in the noise...I mean, have you seen the interface on Apple TV and other Apple products? Someone needs to come in and teach them a thing or two about human interface design. They probably don't even have a Human Interface Guideline to adhere to. I'm sure Apple just wings it as they go along...Blockbuster, on the other hand, might have something that rivals the Comcast/Motorola DVR in terms of user interface excellence.
This is excellent. My wife and I were searching for yet another device to add to our multimedia arsenal that requires yet another monthly subscription fee.
.
Monthly (annual /12) fees - don't forget : Web hosting, Yahoo Pop Mail, .Mac, Flickr,
Dash GPS , OnStar, (they both found a way to charge for GPS, nice), Starbucks, T-Mobile...
How is a nerd supposed to save for retirement?
And before anyone tells me how dumb I am - I don't have all those. I do have Yahoo pop mail, can't cut the cord. Too tied into the address. It hurts. Just pointing out that there are more and more things that want a piece of your pie.
Something to be said for the Kindle model....
The problem with AppleTV is the massive bottleneck of adding movies. Netflix currently has over 90,000 titles. ... But the number of video titles on AppleTV has yet to break 1,000. That's pathetic, and it's starting to worry AppleTV owners.
And how many of those 90,000+ titles are direct to DVD, are weight/exercise DVDs, etc? When Tower Records was going out of business, I got there late and while they had maybe a few thousand titles, only a handful were titles I recognized as theatrical releases. Having a lot of **** to choose from is a good thing only if you like ****.
It's sort of funny that Blockbuster was founded to capitalize an Americans sitting on their lazy asses.
I don't understand that. That would be cable TV. With Blockbuster, you have to go somewhere.
This whole thing is just another obvious "put-up" by the content companies. They whisper in BB's ear ... "Make a set-top box like AppleTV and we'll give you all the content you need." Since they are already in financial trouble, they agree.
I really don't understand why the USA doesn't have laws against this sort of thing. How is it that for more than a year now, virtually all the leading content companies are able to arrange what can only be described as a cartel or oligopoly, where they engage in active collusion to destroy Apple's chance of success? How can they legally supply anything they want to their chosen flunkies and not sell the same thing to Apple? We all know it's immoral, but why isn't it illegal as well?
Of course a company has the right to do business (or not) with anyone they want, but when *multiple* companies that pretty much comprise the whole industry gang up and refuse content to only *one* company, how is that right?
Doesn't the USA have any laws at all? In Canada and Europe this would be highly illegal. It's collusion, price fixing and a bunch of other things besides, and it's gone on for more than a year now.
Such a law as you outline, would be out of line. There are already laws against collusion, but you have to prove that the companies communicated with each other to organize such a collusion. Saying they collude or saying it looks like they collude is not the same as *proving* that they do.
But if each company decided on their own to not deal with a certain company, without contact with other industry competitors, what business is it of a government that gives right of contract (IIRC, most of the West) to force their cooperation with a given said company?
(slightly off topic here) Apple TV should be able to record incoming programs (from the air or cable) in addition to renting video from iTunes. I.e., everything that TiVo does, Apple TV should be able to do. I'm sure TiVo is quickly going in the direction of adding everything Apple TV does onto what TiVo already does, and their UI is every bit as elegant and functional as the Apple UI.
That would up the cost - then you could just buy a Mac mini and EyeTV - in fact, why not just do that now?
The only thing holding me back is the AppleTV does not have an S-Video output and I'm not planning on buying an HDTV in the near future.
That would up the cost - then you could just buy a Mac mini and EyeTV - in fact, why not just do that now?
The additional parts necessary have been estimated to be something like $5 or less. I'm pretty sure it can be sold at a $100 premium. The cost of going with a mini is 3x that increase.
Man if Apple doesn't pay attention to this elephant in the living room (meaning Blockbuster), it could mean the end of Apple TV.
Don't over look the fact that when there is an "elephant in the room" it is usually accompanied by a commensurate amount of elephant crap!
The problem with AppleTV is the massive bottleneck of adding movies. Netflix currently has over 90,000 titles. iTunes started out with, if I remember correctly, 200,000 songs right out of the gate. But the number of video titles on AppleTV has yet to break 1,000. That's pathetic, and it's starting to worry AppleTV owners.
As of late, Apple only adds one or two titles a day, and often deletes movies that were recently added. At the average rate they are adding, it would take 90 years for AppleTV to reach 90,000 titles!
And this is a serious problem because the major studio are playing hardball with Apple. They want to see downloadable movies succeed but it's an "anyone but Apple' mentality these days.
After seeing how Apple manhandled the record labels, they're not about to let Apple grab a stranglehold on in the movie business.
Still Block Buster right now blows the pants off Apple TV for content. Apple TV is so lacking it is silly.
And the OS for AppleTV is OK, not great- unlike the iPhone.
And this is a serious problem because the major studio are playing hardball with Apple. They want to see downloadable movies succeed but it's an "anyone but Apple' mentality these days.
After seeing how Apple manhandled the record labels, they're not about to let Apple grab a stranglehold on in the movie business.
True - but that's also old news.
Apple TV's Take2 OS is OK, not great. It needs to do a whole lot more than simply just be a conduit for iTunes purchases/rentals- that is the real problem.
True - but that's also old news.
Apple TV's Take2 OS is OK, not great. It needs to do a whole lot more than simply just be a conduit for iTunes purchases/rentals- that is the real problem.
Well, if the problem hasn't been rectified, it's current news.
Being keepers of content is a major advantage...the one thing Apple doesn't have in it's otherwise vast riches.
AppleTV/iTunes biggest problem is content - they just don't have the numbers like Netflix. What would be wrong with Apple BUYING Netflix, keeping the mail-out rental stuff but also adding tons of content to Apple TV overnight.
Does Netflix have rights to many more movies than Apple for ONLINE distribution?
I mean, it seems clear that at the moment they are considered entirely different things. Licensing wise, Netflix pays for 500 copies of a DVD which it then physically mails out - if it rents enough then it gets its money back and makes a profit (I assume that is still the model). The studios make money per DVD, whereas the download model has the studios wondering how much they can make per rental.
This is excellent. My wife and I were searching for yet another device to add to our multimedia arsenal that requires yet another monthly subscription fee.
A very good point. I'm not sure about the US, but in Australia we have a number of ISPs independently starting to develop their own set-top boxes. What a waste of their r&d budget. Then I assume they're looking at their own movie and tv deals. The last thing we want is half the movie studios on one service and half on the other (as we had here with cable TV for 10 years). Are we at a stage where we need providers to get together and agree on a set-top box standard - one set top box that can not just replace a DVD player but also replace the DVR &/or cable box.
Perhaps for now several different models of IPTV will compete and we'll begin to see the most effective model emerge. I just hope the winner is the best one (edit) rather than an artificial winner based on whoever the studios support.
On a related note, imagine if TiVo approached Netflix and Blockbuster (and anyone else in the IPTV market) and offered to sell their content. Buy a TiVo, work with anyone/everyone. That would appeal to me much more than individual Blockbuster/Netflix trying to design custom boxes.
Yeah the MS approach with Zune. That worked out well.
I agree that their future looks a bit on the bleak side. But I don't give this venture much chance of success at this point. Who knows maybe they'll prove me wrong.
Yeah its almost as bad as Apple Tv trying to beat out DVR/Tivo.