Firstly, All of your Apple devices will play iTunes media..
Secondly, your Blu-Ray discs have just as much DRM and are more limited than iTunes content as they won't play on anything other than your PS3 or another Blu-Ray player.
I do understand what you mean by the quality isn't there yet with iTunes HD, but it is still very good for a rental.
That is one way of looking at it. A movie on Blu-ray disc will play on any BD player - mine, my friends, my brother's. HD movies only work in Appletv only from iTunes and cannot be taken to another Appletv. BD player will also play DVD's which means a much more vast library. Standard def movies can be purchased on iTunes but the titles are much more limited. So yes, more limited.
That is one way of looking at it. A movie on Blu-ray disc will play on any BD player - mine, my friends, my brother's. HD movies only work in Appletv only from iTunes and cannot be taken to another Appletv. BD player will also play DVD's which means a much more vast library. Standard def movies can be purchased on iTunes but the titles are much more limited. So yes, more limited.
Blu-Ray isn't as tradeable as DVD yet, but I think that's a concern too. I can loan DVDs with ease. That's not so much of a concern with buying a missed episode.
Actually, there is nothing contradictory in my statement..
Yes, iTunes media has DRM, but you have options, you can transfer that media from your computer (Mac or PC,) as well as an iPod, iPhone or Apple TV.. So you do have the option of portability and taking that content with you as well as watching it on the big screen at home.
Blu-Ray content also has DRM but it is more "limited" in that there is no portability offered. Sure, you can choose to buy a player from Sony, Pioneer or other, but they are essentially all the same type of device, a Blu-Ray player.. Most people don't buy multiple Blu-Ray players for different needs, but they do buy multiple home and portable devices for different purposes. You can't rip, burn or take Blu-Ray content with you on ANY brand music player or phone.
I think the fair comparison for Blu-ray content would be HD movies from iTunes which cannot be transferred from the Appletv.
Blu-Ray isn't as tradeable as DVD yet, but I think that's a concern too. I can loan DVDs with ease. That's not so much of a concern with buying a missed episode.
I borrow and loan movies to friends and family. It brings down the cost of movies quite a bit. I think buying a missed episode is one of the great things about iTunes.
That is one way of looking at it. A movie on Blu-ray disc will play on any BD player - mine, my friends, my brother's. HD movies only work in Appletv only from iTunes and cannot be taken to another Appletv. BD player will also play DVD's which means a much more vast library. Standard def movies can be purchased on iTunes but the titles are much more limited. So yes, more limited.
This is just an opinion... But I personally think that most people would rather have the ability to share content between their own devices than being able to let their brother borrow it.. I mean, if brother really wants to watch a movie, let him pony up the $4 to rent it himself..
Less than 2000, probably no way to know for sure how many. The point is that Netflix doesn't have more titles available, as some people assumed.
Jump over to the iTunes Store under Movies. There is a link for Rentals. Just add up the number per page, multiply the number of pages minus 1, and then add the number of rentals on the last page.
(I'd do it but I have no access to iTunes right now)
I think the fair comparison for Blu-ray content would be HD movies from iTunes which cannot be transferred from the Appletv.
True, although, the HD restriction is studio imposed, not Apple.. Every DRM has different limitations, I still think that because Apple is so dominant with iTunes and portable devices, that even with limitations, it is still the most flexible and offers the most options as far as transferring and portability.. Blu-Ray does not offer any similar options.
Jump over to the iTunes Store under Movies. There is a link for Rentals. Just add up the number per page, multiply the number of pages minus 1, and then add the number of rentals on the last page.
(I'd do it but I have no access to iTunes right now)
AppleTvJunkie keeps a running tally of the iTunes HD content. Currently there are 387 HD movie titles available for rent and purchase. SD content is somewhere around 2000 titles..
Less than 2000, probably no way to know for sure how many. The point is that Netflix doesn't have more titles available, as some people assumed.
I thought it was pretty clear that Netflix had more to rent than Apple did have to rent. Apple having more but it being mostly purchased, is a different game and different market in my opinion. The selection each has appears to largely complement each other as well.
This is just an opinion... But I personally think that most people would rather have the ability to share content between their own devices than being able to let their brother borrow it.. I mean, if brother really wants to watch a movie, let him pony up the $4 to rent it himself..
If I were to limit myself from lending and borrowing, that would make BD more limiting. Thank goodness I do not have to do that.
Interesting to finally see a number on apple's videos.
So they offer 22k titles, compared with the 10k for Netflix downloads. So much for the assumed Netflix advantage there.
And is a pace of 18 million movie downloads per year so bad? Seems decent for an industry in its infancy and likely to grow pretty quickly over the next few years.
Isn't the most important factor that apple is the number one video/movie download site (by far), not whether the raw numbers seem big enough? As long as Apple is on top and growing, I don't see any reason for concern. Like studios are going to abandon the most successful seller in favor of smaller ones? No way.
Apple's biggest hurdle is that they are SO successful, studios are afraid of giving them too much content and them monopolizing the market.
That is one way of looking at it. A movie on Blu-ray disc will play on any BD player - mine, my friends, my brother's. HD movies only work in Appletv only from iTunes and cannot be taken to another Appletv. BD player will also play DVD's which means a much more vast library. Standard def movies can be purchased on iTunes but the titles are much more limited. So yes, more limited.
Is this my cue to state how an AppleTV with built-in blu-ray drive would be nirvana?
I really don't think it would have a huge impact on iTunes revenue. Personally, I will never purchase a movie from iTunes. If I want to own something, I will buy the disc for it's better quality and not having to have a bank of hard drives to store downloaded movies. But for rentals, even if I had a blu-ray drive, I'd still use iTunes. Even the SD content has better overall picture quality than cable's HD channels. And you can't beat the convenience. I see them as complimentary more than competitors.
Just like the PlayStation was the Trojan horse to get blu-ray drives into homes and help defeat HD-DVD, a blu-ray drive would be the Trojan horse to get more AppleTV units into homes. Once they get critical mass with iTunes content, people will just start using iTunes more and more and the optical drive would be relegated to just playing the discs you already own. (Just think how big of a flop the iPod would have been if from day one the only way to get music on it was to buy it from Apple instead of also being able to listen to the music you already had on CD!)
The content industry needs to quit dicking around and release ALL NEW AND CATALOG TITLES for digital rental NOW! And that means all the HD titles available as well. WTF is with this crapshoot of titles available on iTunes or Amazon/Tivo ? Why isn't every single title I can rent from blockbuster or netflix available for download? I'm so sick of the arrogance and sheer incompetence of hollywood. Why are they holding everything hostage? Is this the doing of big-box stores AKA WALMART and rental stores??
on a side note, I'm sure HD digital content delivery will be the norm sometime in the 22nd century when more than 5% of the population of the USA has access to fiber-to-the-home internet connections -- something which will NOT happen from market forces, and needs to be encouraged by the state with subsidies, tax incentives, etc, just as the laying of phone lines was a hundred years ago.
30 minute shows are about 22 minutes long. They tend to have 6 to 8 episodes per disk.
One hour shows are about 42 minutes long. They tend to have 3 to 4 episodes per disk.
somethings wrong there!
a one hour show is one hour long, a 45 min show is 45 mins.
its only the verbose clutter of adverts that pump up the time it takes to watch a particular show.
I'm in the UK and cant stand adverts, thanks to the BBCs 4 channels (no adverts) I'm well served with pretty good broadcasting.
Admittedly we seem to be pretty spoiled here, a 45 min drama show can run for 42 mins one week if the script was a bit short, or 48 mins the next week if the script was a bit long. brilliant IMO. Long may it continue.
50,000 a DAY! thats outstanding at this point in the game, just a slight doubt over THAT figure given that the 22,000 / 2000 figure has been chopped and changed.
I'm sure (hope) that number will increase, there seems to be no stopping Apple at this point, quite the turn around.
Nothing is wrong with my assessment. But I agree that it's annoying to have your show interrupted with commercials. If you watch a US show without commercials you still know when they would have come and gone as they done in acts between the commercial interruptions. I am not a fan of them so i tend to DL later and watch, even when I'm available to watch them on TV when they air.
Our commercials are nearly a 1/3 of the shows overall length. It's horrible, but it does mean that US television can hire more writers, more producers, have better sets, etc. because the moeny is there to support it. For example, The Office UK was great but there are only 6 episodes per the two seasons/series and 2 parter Xmas special. That is horrible! The US version has become so much better than the UK version ever was because they have the finances to do so.
Actually, there is nothing contradictory in my statement..
Yes, iTunes media has DRM, but you have options, you can transfer that media from your computer (Mac or PC,) as well as an iPod, iPhone or Apple TV.. So you do have the option of portability and taking that content with you as well as watching it on the big screen at home.
Blu-Ray content also has DRM but it is more "limited" in that there is no portability offered. Sure, you can choose to buy a player from Sony, Pioneer or other, but they are essentially all the same type of device, a Blu-Ray player.. Most people don't buy multiple Blu-Ray players for different needs, but they do buy multiple home and portable devices for different purposes. You can't rip, burn or take Blu-Ray content with you on ANY brand music player or phone.
I think you're missing the point. I don't like nor want to be locked into buying hardware from only one vendor. With iTunes DRM, my only options are from Apple. If media player X has features that the iPod lacks, with a computer full of iTunes DRM'ed tracks I'd be of luck.
And you sort of killed your own argument in the second paragraph. Blu-Ray isn't designed to be portable media. It's prime use is at a stationary location enjoyed on a large TV; Watching a Blu-Ray movie on an iPod's tiny screen would sort of kill the point. I don't desire or expect to be able to play Blu-Ray media on a portable player (but they'll probably be portable players in a few years time regardless). And again, I can get a Blu-Ray player from multiple vendors. Which means I can pick the features and price point that I want. I'm not limited to what one manufacturer deems worthy to give me.
Comments
Firstly, All of your Apple devices will play iTunes media..
Secondly, your Blu-Ray discs have just as much DRM and are more limited than iTunes content as they won't play on anything other than your PS3 or another Blu-Ray player.
I do understand what you mean by the quality isn't there yet with iTunes HD, but it is still very good for a rental.
That is one way of looking at it. A movie on Blu-ray disc will play on any BD player - mine, my friends, my brother's. HD movies only work in Appletv only from iTunes and cannot be taken to another Appletv. BD player will also play DVD's which means a much more vast library. Standard def movies can be purchased on iTunes but the titles are much more limited. So yes, more limited.
That is one way of looking at it. A movie on Blu-ray disc will play on any BD player - mine, my friends, my brother's. HD movies only work in Appletv only from iTunes and cannot be taken to another Appletv. BD player will also play DVD's which means a much more vast library. Standard def movies can be purchased on iTunes but the titles are much more limited. So yes, more limited.
Blu-Ray isn't as tradeable as DVD yet, but I think that's a concern too. I can loan DVDs with ease. That's not so much of a concern with buying a missed episode.
Actually, there is nothing contradictory in my statement..
Yes, iTunes media has DRM, but you have options, you can transfer that media from your computer (Mac or PC,) as well as an iPod, iPhone or Apple TV.. So you do have the option of portability and taking that content with you as well as watching it on the big screen at home.
Blu-Ray content also has DRM but it is more "limited" in that there is no portability offered. Sure, you can choose to buy a player from Sony, Pioneer or other, but they are essentially all the same type of device, a Blu-Ray player.. Most people don't buy multiple Blu-Ray players for different needs, but they do buy multiple home and portable devices for different purposes. You can't rip, burn or take Blu-Ray content with you on ANY brand music player or phone.
I think the fair comparison for Blu-ray content would be HD movies from iTunes which cannot be transferred from the Appletv.
Blu-Ray isn't as tradeable as DVD yet, but I think that's a concern too. I can loan DVDs with ease. That's not so much of a concern with buying a missed episode.
I borrow and loan movies to friends and family. It brings down the cost of movies quite a bit. I think buying a missed episode is one of the great things about iTunes.
How many of those 22k are for rent?
Less than 2000, probably no way to know for sure how many. The point is that Netflix doesn't have more titles available, as some people assumed.
That is one way of looking at it. A movie on Blu-ray disc will play on any BD player - mine, my friends, my brother's. HD movies only work in Appletv only from iTunes and cannot be taken to another Appletv. BD player will also play DVD's which means a much more vast library. Standard def movies can be purchased on iTunes but the titles are much more limited. So yes, more limited.
This is just an opinion... But I personally think that most people would rather have the ability to share content between their own devices than being able to let their brother borrow it.. I mean, if brother really wants to watch a movie, let him pony up the $4 to rent it himself..
Less than 2000, probably no way to know for sure how many. The point is that Netflix doesn't have more titles available, as some people assumed.
Jump over to the iTunes Store under Movies. There is a link for Rentals. Just add up the number per page, multiply the number of pages minus 1, and then add the number of rentals on the last page.
(I'd do it but I have no access to iTunes right now)
I think the fair comparison for Blu-ray content would be HD movies from iTunes which cannot be transferred from the Appletv.
True, although, the HD restriction is studio imposed, not Apple.. Every DRM has different limitations, I still think that because Apple is so dominant with iTunes and portable devices, that even with limitations, it is still the most flexible and offers the most options as far as transferring and portability.. Blu-Ray does not offer any similar options.
Jump over to the iTunes Store under Movies. There is a link for Rentals. Just add up the number per page, multiply the number of pages minus 1, and then add the number of rentals on the last page.
(I'd do it but I have no access to iTunes right now)
AppleTvJunkie keeps a running tally of the iTunes HD content. Currently there are 387 HD movie titles available for rent and purchase. SD content is somewhere around 2000 titles..
http://www.appletvjunkie.com/
Less than 2000, probably no way to know for sure how many. The point is that Netflix doesn't have more titles available, as some people assumed.
I thought it was pretty clear that Netflix had more to rent than Apple did have to rent. Apple having more but it being mostly purchased, is a different game and different market in my opinion. The selection each has appears to largely complement each other as well.
This is just an opinion... But I personally think that most people would rather have the ability to share content between their own devices than being able to let their brother borrow it.. I mean, if brother really wants to watch a movie, let him pony up the $4 to rent it himself..
If I were to limit myself from lending and borrowing, that would make BD more limiting. Thank goodness I do not have to do that.
Interesting to finally see a number on apple's videos.
So they offer 22k titles, compared with the 10k for Netflix downloads. So much for the assumed Netflix advantage there.
And is a pace of 18 million movie downloads per year so bad? Seems decent for an industry in its infancy and likely to grow pretty quickly over the next few years.
Isn't the most important factor that apple is the number one video/movie download site (by far), not whether the raw numbers seem big enough? As long as Apple is on top and growing, I don't see any reason for concern. Like studios are going to abandon the most successful seller in favor of smaller ones? No way.
Apple's biggest hurdle is that they are SO successful, studios are afraid of giving them too much content and them monopolizing the market.
2.2k titles. Not 22k titles.
The rest are Tv shows.
Mel,
Guess i wont bother putting my 2 cents up anymore. Your opinion = truth , unless that argument also "has no credence"
When your opinion is wrong, it's wrong. That's not my fault.
If you take facts into account, you will see it's wrong. That, and a little logic.
As someone said, I'm gruff and opinionated. So, prove me wrong. Sometimes it happens.
That is one way of looking at it. A movie on Blu-ray disc will play on any BD player - mine, my friends, my brother's. HD movies only work in Appletv only from iTunes and cannot be taken to another Appletv. BD player will also play DVD's which means a much more vast library. Standard def movies can be purchased on iTunes but the titles are much more limited. So yes, more limited.
Is this my cue to state how an AppleTV with built-in blu-ray drive would be nirvana?
I really don't think it would have a huge impact on iTunes revenue. Personally, I will never purchase a movie from iTunes. If I want to own something, I will buy the disc for it's better quality and not having to have a bank of hard drives to store downloaded movies. But for rentals, even if I had a blu-ray drive, I'd still use iTunes. Even the SD content has better overall picture quality than cable's HD channels. And you can't beat the convenience. I see them as complimentary more than competitors.
Just like the PlayStation was the Trojan horse to get blu-ray drives into homes and help defeat HD-DVD, a blu-ray drive would be the Trojan horse to get more AppleTV units into homes. Once they get critical mass with iTunes content, people will just start using iTunes more and more and the optical drive would be relegated to just playing the discs you already own. (Just think how big of a flop the iPod would have been if from day one the only way to get music on it was to buy it from Apple instead of also being able to listen to the music you already had on CD!)
on a side note, I'm sure HD digital content delivery will be the norm sometime in the 22nd century when more than 5% of the population of the USA has access to fiber-to-the-home internet connections -- something which will NOT happen from market forces, and needs to be encouraged by the state with subsidies, tax incentives, etc, just as the laying of phone lines was a hundred years ago.
30 minute shows are about 22 minutes long. They tend to have 6 to 8 episodes per disk.
One hour shows are about 42 minutes long. They tend to have 3 to 4 episodes per disk.
somethings wrong there!
a one hour show is one hour long, a 45 min show is 45 mins.
its only the verbose clutter of adverts that pump up the time it takes to watch a particular show.
I'm in the UK and cant stand adverts, thanks to the BBCs 4 channels (no adverts) I'm well served with pretty good broadcasting.
Admittedly we seem to be pretty spoiled here, a 45 min drama show can run for 42 mins one week if the script was a bit short, or 48 mins the next week if the script was a bit long. brilliant IMO. Long may it continue.
50,000 a DAY! thats outstanding at this point in the game, just a slight doubt over THAT figure given that the 22,000 / 2000 figure has been chopped and changed.
I'm sure (hope) that number will increase, there seems to be no stopping Apple at this point, quite the turn around.
somethings wrong there!
Nothing is wrong with my assessment. But I agree that it's annoying to have your show interrupted with commercials. If you watch a US show without commercials you still know when they would have come and gone as they done in acts between the commercial interruptions. I am not a fan of them so i tend to DL later and watch, even when I'm available to watch them on TV when they air.
Our commercials are nearly a 1/3 of the shows overall length. It's horrible, but it does mean that US television can hire more writers, more producers, have better sets, etc. because the moeny is there to support it. For example, The Office UK was great but there are only 6 episodes per the two seasons/series and 2 parter Xmas special. That is horrible! The US version has become so much better than the UK version ever was because they have the finances to do so.
Actually, there is nothing contradictory in my statement..
Yes, iTunes media has DRM, but you have options, you can transfer that media from your computer (Mac or PC,) as well as an iPod, iPhone or Apple TV.. So you do have the option of portability and taking that content with you as well as watching it on the big screen at home.
Blu-Ray content also has DRM but it is more "limited" in that there is no portability offered. Sure, you can choose to buy a player from Sony, Pioneer or other, but they are essentially all the same type of device, a Blu-Ray player.. Most people don't buy multiple Blu-Ray players for different needs, but they do buy multiple home and portable devices for different purposes. You can't rip, burn or take Blu-Ray content with you on ANY brand music player or phone.
I think you're missing the point. I don't like nor want to be locked into buying hardware from only one vendor. With iTunes DRM, my only options are from Apple. If media player X has features that the iPod lacks, with a computer full of iTunes DRM'ed tracks I'd be of luck.
And you sort of killed your own argument in the second paragraph. Blu-Ray isn't designed to be portable media. It's prime use is at a stationary location enjoyed on a large TV; Watching a Blu-Ray movie on an iPod's tiny screen would sort of kill the point. I don't desire or expect to be able to play Blu-Ray media on a portable player (but they'll probably be portable players in a few years time regardless). And again, I can get a Blu-Ray player from multiple vendors. Which means I can pick the features and price point that I want. I'm not limited to what one manufacturer deems worthy to give me.
So, prove me wrong. Sometimes it happens.
Someone has kidnapped melgross and taken over his AI identity.
Alert the media and law enforcement
Someone has kidnapped melgross and taken over his AI identity.
Alert the media and law enforcement
Insidious alien invasion.