Maybe that's because Netflix is what many of us use? Why compare it against something we don't use if that thing isn't competitive with what we're using? Ideally, like-for-like may be more valid, but here, it's not a realistic expectation for consumers to accept. If we think On-Demand is priced unrealistically, then what's the point of considering Apple's service if it's only comparable to an unrealistic option? That's stretching the argument too far.
I see your point but people need to compare it to what the iTunes rental model will be competing against. To watch decide I want a Netflix rented movie on my iPod is not instant, it's not simple and it's illegal. VOD services offer a simple and instant service that I have used a multitude of times while keeping my Netflix subscription.
I don't plan on canceling my Netflix yet plan on using the iTunes rental option in leu of my cable companies VOD service. Surely, some that hardly utilize Netflix may find that the iTunes service is a better option and switch, but that won't be the majority. Netflix offers something that Apple will not.
Most affected to least affected by iTunes Rentals:
1) VOD services
2) Brick-and-mortar rental stores
3) Netflix
If the AppleTV can finally allow the renting of video and instant viewing (the way iTunes can) then it will be a success that Apple intended. It will no longer be labeled as a lemon and will push the AppleTV even further ahead of every media extender available.
The 3GB figure is on the upper end, I think iTunes movies can be as small as 1.5GB.
You can stream to AppleTV from your computer, no need to copy the entire file over. On a computer, the user can start watching movies before it's done downloading. You'll want a connection that's faster than real time though. If Apple hasn't already done it, then they need to allow the user to start playing the download before it's done. The part that I know they need to add is to allow buying & renting through AppleTV. Otherwise, it's not really a video on demand system at all, so it's the worst of both worlds, the expense of VOD, but without the same level of convenience as a real VOD.
If the Movie is 2 hours long and is in HD format then it should be, at the very least, 3GB in size. ATV does not stream video except for some You-Tube shows, Movie Trailers, and TV Show Trailers. If they somehow do the same streaming for rented movies, then that would be awesome, but the quality would be ho-hum, try watching the Beowulf Trailer on ATV.
As for FiOS it is not very friendly with Airport, it requires large packets for it to run at 15Mbps (they required me to run a PC install to reach that speed), try doing a speed test on verizon.net/speedtest I got 7Mbps for my 15Mbps connection, that is why I switched back to Cable.
If the Movie is 2 hours long and is in HD format then it should be, at the very least, 3GB in size. ATV does not stream video except for some You-Tube shows, Movie Trailers, and TV Show Trailers. If they somehow do the same streaming for rented movies, then that would be awesome, but the quality would be ho-hum, try watching the Beowulf Trailer on ATV.
I didn't realize you were talking HD. 3GB is really scraping by.
What I mean is that movies do not need to be stored on AppleTV. They can be stored on a local computer and played from that computer. It's probably not streaming it would seem like it to the user.
Quote:
As for FiOS it is not very friendly with Airport, it requires large packets for it to run at 15Mbps (they required me to run a PC install to reach that speed), try doing a speed test on verizon.net/speedtest I got 7Mbps for my 15Mbps connection, that is why I switched back to Cable.
Apple does have a tweaking utility to optimize a Mac for FIOS. It would seem to be pretty odd if Airport is unaware of how to handle that.
I hope this isn't just movies. I'd love to see rentals of TV shows that come in at significantly less than it currently is to purchase - say, 5 or so episodes for the price of a movie (or about as many TV episodes as fit on a DVD). Then, if they were available soon after the network airing, that would be an incentive for lots of people to think about dumping cable.
I personally think that the DVD era will end. Do you remember video tapes?
I don't know anyone who uses VHS anymore. If we could be able to rent movies
off of iTunes or maybe put them on Apple TV, life would be just perfect. No more waiting for DVD's in the mail or driving to the store. Rentals right in your home, when you want it.
What do you think?
That is why BluRay and HD DVD aren't being widely accepted. Physical media is an intermediate that will be replaced with electronic media.
HD movies will be at least 3Gs and take 3 hours to download. In don't think for a rental it will work this way with that hassle. Current downloads on itunes are for buying not renting and the long download time doesn't matter. However, if you rent something you usually want to view it immediately at the point of sale- video pay per view as an example.
Maybe Apple will start streaming content from their Cupertino servers just like porn sites do!
24 hours would be a HUGE mistake. Limited amount of plays would be a HUGE mistake. I can't tell you how many times I've fallen asleep watching a movie. In either of those scenarios, you'd be screwed. Either your "one play" would be up, because it ran to the end while you were sleeping, or your 24 hours would run out if you don't finish it before the following evening, before you started watching the night before.
I just can't see Jobs going for any system that restrictive to the user, no matter how desperate he was to get the rentals going.
I know that On Demand services are set up that way, but that's exactly why I don't pay for On Demand movies. I get mad enough when I choose a free video and it "expires" in 24 hours, forcing me to select it again and then fast forward to where I left off the night before.
I'll say it again: monthly subscription (as done by Netflix) is the best option for Apple. No play number restrictions, no time limit for individual movies. If they can't convince the studios of that, then they need something far less restrictive than one play, 24 hours.
And they need to add a store front to the Apple TV interface, so you can choose movies to rent or buy from the couch, and start watching immediately. That's the only way to compete with On Demand, and it's the best way to get the advantage over Netflix.
I can't help thinking about the poster who mentioned on these boards some time ago that they'd heard that Apple would be leveraging the technology behind ProRes422 to deliver better material at lower data rates to consumers. In the Pro market, Apple's pitch at NAB was that ProRes422 delivers uncompressed HD at uncompressed SD data rates- that represents a huge drop in file size!. If this is the case, then Apple may be developing a "smarter" encoder in order to deliver HD formats without the huge file size increases many expect.
I can't help thinking about the poster who mentioned on these boards some time ago that they'd heard that Apple would be leveraging the technology behind ProRes422 to deliver better material at lower data rates to consumers. In the Pro market, Apple's pitch at NAB was that ProRes422 delivers uncompressed HD at uncompressed SD data rates- that represents a huge drop in file size!. If this is the case, then Apple may be developing a "smarter" encoder in order to deliver HD formats without the huge file size increases many expect.
Wasn't that at uncompressed SD data rates? That is, circa 15GB/hour?
Anyone else notice the growing trend of 'worst case' scenario rumor press over the past three or four years leading up to major special events?
This wreaks of testing the waters to see the test the range of reactions based on the price options they themselves have no doubt tested in closed groups that include Apple corporate employees.
I believe in marketing this is known as "Door In The Face Technique" - you leak that something really bad is going to happen, and the actual outcome seems much better. Governments often do this. If there is going to be an unpopular tax rise - say 5% - there will be an anonymous leak to the press that it's going to be 10%. Then when it's "only" 5%, they look good, instead of bad
I think the 24 hour issue is going to bigger than most expect. Americans, at least, have become used to the renting of movies and watching at their convenience; Blockbuster came to find that out when they were forced to expand their rental periods and drop late charges. Netflix offers the best time/rental solution.
/
I think the same for ipods. I'd pay cheap money to rent a movie to watch on the ipod on the plane (yah it's tiny, but flying stinks. I'm busy packing 24 hours before the flight, not downloading movies. What about my flight back a few days later? Sorry, movies have timed out.
$2 for 24 hours? With the Walmart RedBox at only $0.99 per day, it won't be very appealing except maybe for the older movies that have moved out of the RedBox.
Not leaving your home could be a slight advantage I guess, but Walmart for me is less than a 5 minute drive.
haha americans. you never add the cost of petrol do you? or your grandchildrens' lives?
Ever try a HHD plus DVD recorder? it records the programme to HDD then when you are sure you have a viable recording that you want to archive you burn it to DVD. Panasonic do a few of these, as do Sony and Samsung.
Alternatively the Elgato EyeTV will record to your mac mini.
Yeah, I'm aware of some ways I could cobble together a device to do what I want. My frustration is that a company has yet to deliver an off the shelf product that does this. It seems the natural evolution of things, a VCR-like DVR, but I think most companies are too greedy. They want a permanent revenue stream and therefore want us to "subscribe" to get this.
I just figured that Apple would be the perfect company to do this. With high product margins, Apple could make a MacMini DVR that could do it all (connect to the internet for streaming TV, use iTunes for TV shows and movies purchased; allow manual or programmed recording; & allow me to use my TV as my computer with a small, compact and attactive device).
Anyhow, despite the obvious product potential, I expect this will not come along for awhile. But I just can't understand what they were thinking with AppleTV when they could have gone this route instead.
I'm sorry about your frustrations, but that is only one way DVD might be worse than VCR. You didn't say what else about DVD is inferior.
I don't use real-time DVD recording, it's often a waste of a DVD anyway.
Well DVD is obviously better for playing. Especially with the upconverting DVD players. But when it comes to recording, there are many deficiencies. I believe I actually listed 4, not 1.
1 - takes to long to power up, 2 - takes too long to pause, 3 - cannot switch stations while paused (i.e. record on the fly, and 4 - they often result in corrupted discs (especially with -R/+R discs, I have had better luck with the RW discs, but only if I buy Sony or Memorex for some reason). I've tried about 12 different brands but those are the only two that have been consistently successful at recording, and even then its only the +/-RW discs.
But as long as the industry believes that it can convince us to pay more for a product that they do not have to store in warehouses, do not have to ship to retailers, do not have to package with materials and do not have to physically manufacture... as long as they think that, the DVD will not die because it is ultimately a superior product to the digitial copy. A digital movie usually does not come in HD, and cannot be upconverted like regular non-HD DVDs can. A digital movie does not include the menus and the special features of a DVD and a digital movie can be corrupted or deleted. Besides, they want you to pay as much to rent in for 24 hours as you can to purchase it. At least the video store gives you 3-5 days to watch it!!!
The minor convenience of being able to download a movie is more than offset by the decrease in cost to the distribution company and therefore should not be used as an excuse to over charge customers.
Comments
Maybe that's because Netflix is what many of us use? Why compare it against something we don't use if that thing isn't competitive with what we're using? Ideally, like-for-like may be more valid, but here, it's not a realistic expectation for consumers to accept. If we think On-Demand is priced unrealistically, then what's the point of considering Apple's service if it's only comparable to an unrealistic option? That's stretching the argument too far.
I see your point but people need to compare it to what the iTunes rental model will be competing against. To watch decide I want a Netflix rented movie on my iPod is not instant, it's not simple and it's illegal. VOD services offer a simple and instant service that I have used a multitude of times while keeping my Netflix subscription.
I don't plan on canceling my Netflix yet plan on using the iTunes rental option in leu of my cable companies VOD service. Surely, some that hardly utilize Netflix may find that the iTunes service is a better option and switch, but that won't be the majority. Netflix offers something that Apple will not.
Most affected to least affected by iTunes Rentals:
1) VOD services
2) Brick-and-mortar rental stores
3) Netflix
If the AppleTV can finally allow the renting of video and instant viewing (the way iTunes can) then it will be a success that Apple intended. It will no longer be labeled as a lemon and will push the AppleTV even further ahead of every media extender available.
The 3GB figure is on the upper end, I think iTunes movies can be as small as 1.5GB.
You can stream to AppleTV from your computer, no need to copy the entire file over. On a computer, the user can start watching movies before it's done downloading. You'll want a connection that's faster than real time though. If Apple hasn't already done it, then they need to allow the user to start playing the download before it's done. The part that I know they need to add is to allow buying & renting through AppleTV. Otherwise, it's not really a video on demand system at all, so it's the worst of both worlds, the expense of VOD, but without the same level of convenience as a real VOD.
If the Movie is 2 hours long and is in HD format then it should be, at the very least, 3GB in size. ATV does not stream video except for some You-Tube shows, Movie Trailers, and TV Show Trailers. If they somehow do the same streaming for rented movies, then that would be awesome, but the quality would be ho-hum, try watching the Beowulf Trailer on ATV.
As for FiOS it is not very friendly with Airport, it requires large packets for it to run at 15Mbps (they required me to run a PC install to reach that speed), try doing a speed test on verizon.net/speedtest I got 7Mbps for my 15Mbps connection, that is why I switched back to Cable.
If the Movie is 2 hours long and is in HD format then it should be, at the very least, 3GB in size. ATV does not stream video except for some You-Tube shows, Movie Trailers, and TV Show Trailers. If they somehow do the same streaming for rented movies, then that would be awesome, but the quality would be ho-hum, try watching the Beowulf Trailer on ATV.
I didn't realize you were talking HD. 3GB is really scraping by.
What I mean is that movies do not need to be stored on AppleTV. They can be stored on a local computer and played from that computer. It's probably not streaming it would seem like it to the user.
As for FiOS it is not very friendly with Airport, it requires large packets for it to run at 15Mbps (they required me to run a PC install to reach that speed), try doing a speed test on verizon.net/speedtest I got 7Mbps for my 15Mbps connection, that is why I switched back to Cable.
Apple does have a tweaking utility to optimize a Mac for FIOS. It would seem to be pretty odd if Airport is unaware of how to handle that.
I didn't realize you were talking HD.
What I mean is that movies do not need to be stored on AppleTV. They can be stored on a local computer and played from that computer.
You're right. But after streaming it's gotta download it, and that gets annoying especially with multiple iTune accounts.
I personally think that the DVD era will end. Do you remember video tapes?
I don't know anyone who uses VHS anymore. If we could be able to rent movies
off of iTunes or maybe put them on Apple TV, life would be just perfect. No more waiting for DVD's in the mail or driving to the store. Rentals right in your home, when you want it.
What do you think?
That is why BluRay and HD DVD aren't being widely accepted. Physical media is an intermediate that will be replaced with electronic media.
Dave
That is why BluRay and HD DVD aren't being widely accepted. Physical media is an intermediate that will be replaced with electronic media.
There are many reasons why HD optical media isn't being adopted quickly:
Maybe Apple will start streaming content from their Cupertino servers just like porn sites do!
I just can't see Jobs going for any system that restrictive to the user, no matter how desperate he was to get the rentals going.
I know that On Demand services are set up that way, but that's exactly why I don't pay for On Demand movies. I get mad enough when I choose a free video and it "expires" in 24 hours, forcing me to select it again and then fast forward to where I left off the night before.
I'll say it again: monthly subscription (as done by Netflix) is the best option for Apple. No play number restrictions, no time limit for individual movies. If they can't convince the studios of that, then they need something far less restrictive than one play, 24 hours.
And they need to add a store front to the Apple TV interface, so you can choose movies to rent or buy from the couch, and start watching immediately. That's the only way to compete with On Demand, and it's the best way to get the advantage over Netflix.
I can't help thinking about the poster who mentioned on these boards some time ago that they'd heard that Apple would be leveraging the technology behind ProRes422 to deliver better material at lower data rates to consumers. In the Pro market, Apple's pitch at NAB was that ProRes422 delivers uncompressed HD at uncompressed SD data rates- that represents a huge drop in file size!. If this is the case, then Apple may be developing a "smarter" encoder in order to deliver HD formats without the huge file size increases many expect.
Wasn't that at uncompressed SD data rates? That is, circa 15GB/hour?
Amorya
Though I think the parallel I'm looking for is H264 HD at H264 SD data rate.
Anyone else notice the growing trend of 'worst case' scenario rumor press over the past three or four years leading up to major special events?
This wreaks of testing the waters to see the test the range of reactions based on the price options they themselves have no doubt tested in closed groups that include Apple corporate employees.
I believe in marketing this is known as "Door In The Face Technique" - you leak that something really bad is going to happen, and the actual outcome seems much better. Governments often do this. If there is going to be an unpopular tax rise - say 5% - there will be an anonymous leak to the press that it's going to be 10%. Then when it's "only" 5%, they look good, instead of bad
I think the 24 hour issue is going to bigger than most expect. Americans, at least, have become used to the renting of movies and watching at their convenience; Blockbuster came to find that out when they were forced to expand their rental periods and drop late charges. Netflix offers the best time/rental solution.
/
I think the same for ipods. I'd pay cheap money to rent a movie to watch on the ipod on the plane (yah it's tiny, but flying stinks. I'm busy packing 24 hours before the flight, not downloading movies. What about my flight back a few days later? Sorry, movies have timed out.
how about 3 complete viewings over say a week
24hrs is lame and i won't do it as my primary video rental agent
it's got to compete with netflix period
i've got kids and they watch a movie 50 times so for kids movies i will use netflix
if itunes rental to succeed for me it;s got to be family friendly
or say $15 monthly for say up to 5 movies.per month
$2 for 24 hours? With the Walmart RedBox at only $0.99 per day, it won't be very appealing except maybe for the older movies that have moved out of the RedBox.
Not leaving your home could be a slight advantage I guess, but Walmart for me is less than a 5 minute drive.
haha americans. you never add the cost of petrol do you? or your grandchildrens' lives?
haha americans. you never add the cost of petrol do you?
For us, it's just gas.....
Ever try a HHD plus DVD recorder? it records the programme to HDD then when you are sure you have a viable recording that you want to archive you burn it to DVD. Panasonic do a few of these, as do Sony and Samsung.
Alternatively the Elgato EyeTV will record to your mac mini.
Yeah, I'm aware of some ways I could cobble together a device to do what I want. My frustration is that a company has yet to deliver an off the shelf product that does this. It seems the natural evolution of things, a VCR-like DVR, but I think most companies are too greedy. They want a permanent revenue stream and therefore want us to "subscribe" to get this.
I just figured that Apple would be the perfect company to do this. With high product margins, Apple could make a MacMini DVR that could do it all (connect to the internet for streaming TV, use iTunes for TV shows and movies purchased; allow manual or programmed recording; & allow me to use my TV as my computer with a small, compact and attactive device).
Anyhow, despite the obvious product potential, I expect this will not come along for awhile. But I just can't understand what they were thinking with AppleTV when they could have gone this route instead.
Isn't that what I said? Uncompressed HD (248.58 MBytes/sec) at uncompressed SD data Rates (27.97 MBytes/sec).
Though I think the parallel I'm looking for is H264 HD at H264 SD data rate.
ProRes422 is in a completely different league and I don't think has anything to do with H.264.
I'm sorry about your frustrations, but that is only one way DVD might be worse than VCR. You didn't say what else about DVD is inferior.
I don't use real-time DVD recording, it's often a waste of a DVD anyway.
Well DVD is obviously better for playing. Especially with the upconverting DVD players. But when it comes to recording, there are many deficiencies. I believe I actually listed 4, not 1.
1 - takes to long to power up, 2 - takes too long to pause, 3 - cannot switch stations while paused (i.e. record on the fly, and 4 - they often result in corrupted discs (especially with -R/+R discs, I have had better luck with the RW discs, but only if I buy Sony or Memorex for some reason). I've tried about 12 different brands but those are the only two that have been consistently successful at recording, and even then its only the +/-RW discs.
But as long as the industry believes that it can convince us to pay more for a product that they do not have to store in warehouses, do not have to ship to retailers, do not have to package with materials and do not have to physically manufacture... as long as they think that, the DVD will not die because it is ultimately a superior product to the digitial copy. A digital movie usually does not come in HD, and cannot be upconverted like regular non-HD DVDs can. A digital movie does not include the menus and the special features of a DVD and a digital movie can be corrupted or deleted. Besides, they want you to pay as much to rent in for 24 hours as you can to purchase it. At least the video store gives you 3-5 days to watch it!!!
The minor convenience of being able to download a movie is more than offset by the decrease in cost to the distribution company and therefore should not be used as an excuse to over charge customers.