What are you talking about? This would totally impact Hulu.
Apple's service would include a monthly fee. HULU is free and advertising supported. Hulu will not be impacted by the introduction of Apple's paid service. If anything, this will bring more attention to Hulu's product.
I don't care about owning last weeks episode of Lost for a $1.99 and being able to watch it over and over again– I DO want to watch the episode though and I'd pay a monthly fee to be able to stream whenever, wherever...
How do you know that's not what this is exactly about? I.E. a subscription service.
You can use your home internet connection to stream whatever you want to your iPhone (music, videos, etc.) and I'm running it with the cheapest DSL I can buy and the bandwidth is good enough that a single person can watch uninterrupted video, with minor buffering.
This service could also be used to host music. One of the reasons I have an iPod but not an iPhone is that the iPod can store so much music. If I could get all my tunes on demand wirelessly, then I don't need the big hard drive... seems like a no-brainer to me!
Not so sure about the streaming of video as it eats the internet and we all end up paying whether we realise or not.
I do like the idea of Apple knowing what digital content we own and allowing us to delete and re-download to better manage our local storage. I'd like this extended to music and applications too. I wouldn't mind an automated version of this based on my MobileMe subscription. So i could uninstall a large app or remove rarely listened to music. Maybe even use the service to reduce my Time machine backup, since Time Machine could know what's supposed to be there and just recover online content from Apple's servers. Stuff like this is where the cloud starts to come into its own, with seamless integrated experiences. A Time Machine with OSX on it could get really smart at shifting content around, perhaps at night when the net is quiet or when you think your Mac is sleeping.
Doesn't matter how fast your internet connection is, if the servers are busy, you won't be able to watch a streaming video. There is nothing more annoying than to be watching something and have it pause because it must wait for the download. At that point, continued viewing is not possible because the real time playback is sometimes faster than the content downloading due to general internet traffic. With more and more people trying to receive streaming content, it would be even worse.
At least when it is downloaded, you have uninterrupted viewing. But I would still rather watch a DVD, Blu-Ray, or live/recorded HD broadcast. All three provide a better picture quality than anything on AppleTV.
This service could also be used to host music. One of the reasons I have an iPod but not an iPhone is that the iPod can store so much music. If I could get all my tunes on demand wirelessly, then I don't need the big hard drive... seems like a no-brainer to me!
Ha ha, looks like my post was prescient of that one. Check out ooTunes
NOTE: I'm the developer of it so this is somewhat self serving, just want that to be clear.
I don't care about owning last weeks episode of Lost for a $1.99 and being able to watch it over and over again? I DO want to watch the episode though and I'd pay a monthly fee to be able to stream whenever, wherever...
Even more than a subcription, I'd prefer an option to rent TV shows for, say, 99 cents. I have no interest in owning any TV show content and only need to fill in the occassional gaps in service from cable (a subscription would be overkill).
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison
They should. With FIOS, Uverse and DOCSIS 3 for cableco if you live anywhere but rural neighborhood you should get fast speeds. Couple that with encoding efficiency and in 5 years people will probably download and stream content depending on their needs.
Interesting thing about DOCSIS 3, as the cable company reserves more and more space on their networks for faster internet connections (to keep up with FIOS), the quality of their TV service is suffering. At least in my area, I'd almost prefer that Comcast would broadcast a clean, 720p signal than their over-compresssed 1080i.
In the end they may put themselves out of the TV business. You'll be able to get better quality video via download, and they'll even provide the fast internet connection to enable you to dump their TV service and rely on iTunes, etc. In fact, I've recently downgraded to a cheaper channel package and the money I save monthly is more then enough to purchases the HD version of the shows I'd normally watch on the channels I lost when downgrading.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathilda
Why is everyone ok with buying things they won't own?
On a related point, iTunes occassionaly removes content from their offerings. What happens when you purchase a show, but you leave it on Apple's Replay service instead of downloading it. If that show is later removed from the iTunes Store, will it still be available for you to stream?
Why is everyone ok with buying things they won't own?
Because in the case of movies, a large percentage of people only watch them once, which is why video "rentals" has been a multi-billion dollar business since the 80's.
A subscription service for iTunes movies/tv shows would be the best thing that could happen to AppleTV.
EDIT: Even if a streaming/subscription service was offered, I'm sure the option to purchase would not go away.
Interesting thing about DOCSIS 3, as the cable company reserves more and more space on their networks for faster internet connections (to keep up with FIOS), the quality of their TV service is suffering. At least in my area, I'd almost prefer that Comcast would broadcast a clean, 720p signal than their over-compresssed 1080i.
In the end they may put themselves out of the TV business. You'll be able to get better quality video via download, and they'll even provide the fast internet connection to enable you to dump their TV service and rely on iTunes, etc. In fact, I've recently downgraded to a cheaper channel package and the money I save monthly is more then enough to purchases the HD version of the shows I'd normally watch on the channels I lost when downgrading.
Agreed 720p with less artifacts would be more pleasing as I only have a 32" I think Comcast and other broadband providers are pretty worried about cannibalizing their video options. I'm going to get a 22 or 30 Mbps connection primarily because I "can" stream Netflix and HULU so in one way they get the broadband fees but they can forget the other components of the fabled "Triple Play"
On a related point, iTunes occassionaly removes content from their offerings. What happens when you purchase a show, but you leave it on Apple's Replay service instead of downloading it. If that show is later removed from the iTunes Store, will it still be available for you to stream?
Interesting point. They'd definitely have to address that somehow. Overall though, I'm extremely excited to hear this. It's the service I've been wanting all along. Why does there need to be hundreds of thousands of copies of a movie on iTunes when one copy can be shared by all? Why should I have to pay and manage storage and back of these files when all that's already being done by Apple? It's double work, uses a lot of resources and costs a lot of money. By paying for (unlimited?) streams of the content I purchase from iTunes all those negatives are eliminated.
Of course there's a trade off. That's how the universe works. I may have to keep or upgrade my internet access and worry about excessive traffic on the servers, but overall I don't have many troubles with my service in streaming now. Plus streaming gives me access to the content on my Mac, iPod, iPhone and Apple TV. All with no synching or management.
Why is everyone ok with buying things they won't own?
I would LOVE to not have to deal with a physical medium like a DVD or CD forever. I think having a subscription for music/movie/tv show would essentially kill A LOT of distribution models out there. I could care less if I don't own an episode of Heroes and merely subscribe to it. This is truly where it's going...on-demand digital streaming. And for those who want to own, I'm sure Apple will still happily take your money.
Because in the case of movies, a large percentage of people only watch them once, which is why video "rentals" has been a multi-billion dollar business since the 80's.
A subscription service for iTunes movies/tv shows would be the best thing that could happen to AppleTV.
EDIT: Even if a streaming/subscription service was offered, I'm sure the option to purchase would not go away.
Part of me agrees with your statement but when I want to watch a man movie I pull out my trusty copy of The Hunt For Red October and when I need a comedy I love to watch Sean of the Dead, Super Troopers and Bubba Hotep and when S.W.M.B.O (She Who Must Be Obeyed) wants to watch a chick flick I pull out my trusty copy of the Princess Bride. I can see the value of this service but I would still prefer to have a physical copy of my favorites. I see this as a complimentary service rather then a complete replacement for having a physical or locally stored copy for many people. And I believe you are right about this helping Atv as I think that streaming would really drive Atv growth.
The real fly in the ointment is the broadband providers and their bandwidth caps. While Comcast etal may be working on ever faster service they are also trying to cap your monthly bandwidth and are known for blocking traffic they don't like. What is to stop them from throttling your download speeds on apple media content like they keep trying to do with bittorent? \
Here in the UK, where broadband is mainly ADSL, the average broadband speed is about 3Mbit, so a service like this should be fine. From this article, I'd guess that ADSL in the US is worse than ours... We can get ADSL up to 24Mbit (in theory, more like 18-20Mbit in practice)...
Apple's service would include a monthly fee. HULU is free and advertising supported. Hulu will not be impacted by the introduction of Apple's paid service. If anything, this will bring more attention to Hulu's product.
I couldn't disagree with you more. Hulu needs a set top box to be main stream. Boxee on the AppleTv is not a mainstream option. I don't even think AppleTV could be considered mainstream. However, iTunes is. If Apple makes its streaming service easy to get on your big screen, something Hulu doesn't do, then I think many people, including this avid hulu watcher would jump ship on Hulu.
Interesting point. They'd definitely have to address that somehow. Overall though, I'm extremely excited to hear this. It's the service I've been wanting all along. Why does there need to be hundreds of thousands of copies of a movie on iTunes when one copy can be shared by all? Why should I have to pay and manage storage and back of these files when all that's already being done by Apple? It's double work, uses a lot of resources and costs a lot of money. By paying for (unlimited?) streams of the content I purchase from iTunes all those negatives are eliminated.
Of course there's a trade off. That's how the universe works. I may have to keep or upgrade my internet access and worry about excessive traffic on the servers, but overall I don't have many troubles with my service in streaming now. Plus streaming gives me access to the content on my Mac, iPod, iPhone and Apple TV. All with no synching or management.
I really hope this turns out to be true!
It would be nice if you had the option to download locally any of your own stuff anytime and then wipe when not needed knowing it was still on the cloud. I am thinking like when going on a trip and you might not have access to net or only slow one. Also be good if HD Movies had a more lenient policy too, maybe be able to watch several times over the years once rented.
This service could also be used to host music. One of the reasons I have an iPod but not an iPhone is that the iPod can store so much music. If I could get all my tunes on demand wirelessly, then I don't need the big hard drive... seems like a no-brainer to me!
No, and if it's a subscription service it won't be movies either, only the replay part will be.
Here in the UK, where broadband is mainly ADSL, the average broadband speed is about 3Mbit, so a service like this should be fine. From this article, I'd guess that ADSL in the US is worse than ours... We can get ADSL up to 24Mbit (in theory, more like 18-20Mbit in practice)...
I don't see much ADSL over here at all these days, most broadband is FiOS (Fiber Optic) or Cable (Copper wire), in Florida at least. Your quoted speed is is the same sort of range though. have 25 Mb/ down and 5 Mb up. My family live in UK and complain about contention ratios still being a problem, cable here used to slow down badly during peak usage a few years back but I am not sure since we moved over to fiber optics which never slows. FiOS is sweet! From what i read the French have some pretty spectacular speeds.
Comments
What are you talking about? This would totally impact Hulu.
Apple's service would include a monthly fee. HULU is free and advertising supported. Hulu will not be impacted by the introduction of Apple's paid service. If anything, this will bring more attention to Hulu's product.
Agh! Apple do you not get it?
I don't care about owning last weeks episode of Lost for a $1.99 and being able to watch it over and over again– I DO want to watch the episode though and I'd pay a monthly fee to be able to stream whenever, wherever...
How do you know that's not what this is exactly about? I.E. a subscription service.
These guys must have great confidence on bandwidth growth and ISPs over the next few years.
Depending on where you are and your ISP it's already totally doable, at least with iPhone sized videos...
Check out ooTunes server and the accompanying iphone app http://ootunes.com/app/
You can use your home internet connection to stream whatever you want to your iPhone (music, videos, etc.) and I'm running it with the cheapest DSL I can buy and the bandwidth is good enough that a single person can watch uninterrupted video, with minor buffering.
But it will all depend on your network, isp, etc.
I do like the idea of Apple knowing what digital content we own and allowing us to delete and re-download to better manage our local storage. I'd like this extended to music and applications too. I wouldn't mind an automated version of this based on my MobileMe subscription. So i could uninstall a large app or remove rarely listened to music. Maybe even use the service to reduce my Time machine backup, since Time Machine could know what's supposed to be there and just recover online content from Apple's servers. Stuff like this is where the cloud starts to come into its own, with seamless integrated experiences. A Time Machine with OSX on it could get really smart at shifting content around, perhaps at night when the net is quiet or when you think your Mac is sleeping.
At least when it is downloaded, you have uninterrupted viewing. But I would still rather watch a DVD, Blu-Ray, or live/recorded HD broadcast. All three provide a better picture quality than anything on AppleTV.
This service could also be used to host music. One of the reasons I have an iPod but not an iPhone is that the iPod can store so much music. If I could get all my tunes on demand wirelessly, then I don't need the big hard drive... seems like a no-brainer to me!
Ha ha, looks like my post was prescient of that one. Check out ooTunes
NOTE: I'm the developer of it so this is somewhat self serving, just want that to be clear.
Agh! Apple do you not get it?
I don't care about owning last weeks episode of Lost for a $1.99 and being able to watch it over and over again? I DO want to watch the episode though and I'd pay a monthly fee to be able to stream whenever, wherever...
Even more than a subcription, I'd prefer an option to rent TV shows for, say, 99 cents. I have no interest in owning any TV show content and only need to fill in the occassional gaps in service from cable (a subscription would be overkill).
They should. With FIOS, Uverse and DOCSIS 3 for cableco if you live anywhere but rural neighborhood you should get fast speeds. Couple that with encoding efficiency and in 5 years people will probably download and stream content depending on their needs.
Interesting thing about DOCSIS 3, as the cable company reserves more and more space on their networks for faster internet connections (to keep up with FIOS), the quality of their TV service is suffering. At least in my area, I'd almost prefer that Comcast would broadcast a clean, 720p signal than their over-compresssed 1080i.
In the end they may put themselves out of the TV business. You'll be able to get better quality video via download, and they'll even provide the fast internet connection to enable you to dump their TV service and rely on iTunes, etc. In fact, I've recently downgraded to a cheaper channel package and the money I save monthly is more then enough to purchases the HD version of the shows I'd normally watch on the channels I lost when downgrading.
Why is everyone ok with buying things they won't own?
On a related point, iTunes occassionaly removes content from their offerings. What happens when you purchase a show, but you leave it on Apple's Replay service instead of downloading it. If that show is later removed from the iTunes Store, will it still be available for you to stream?
Why is everyone ok with buying things they won't own?
Because in the case of movies, a large percentage of people only watch them once, which is why video "rentals" has been a multi-billion dollar business since the 80's.
A subscription service for iTunes movies/tv shows would be the best thing that could happen to AppleTV.
EDIT: Even if a streaming/subscription service was offered, I'm sure the option to purchase would not go away.
Interesting thing about DOCSIS 3, as the cable company reserves more and more space on their networks for faster internet connections (to keep up with FIOS), the quality of their TV service is suffering. At least in my area, I'd almost prefer that Comcast would broadcast a clean, 720p signal than their over-compresssed 1080i.
In the end they may put themselves out of the TV business. You'll be able to get better quality video via download, and they'll even provide the fast internet connection to enable you to dump their TV service and rely on iTunes, etc. In fact, I've recently downgraded to a cheaper channel package and the money I save monthly is more then enough to purchases the HD version of the shows I'd normally watch on the channels I lost when downgrading.
Agreed 720p with less artifacts would be more pleasing as I only have a 32" I think Comcast and other broadband providers are pretty worried about cannibalizing their video options. I'm going to get a 22 or 30 Mbps connection primarily because I "can" stream Netflix and HULU so in one way they get the broadband fees but they can forget the other components of the fabled "Triple Play"
I've got Vonage so the phone is cool
On a related point, iTunes occassionaly removes content from their offerings. What happens when you purchase a show, but you leave it on Apple's Replay service instead of downloading it. If that show is later removed from the iTunes Store, will it still be available for you to stream?
Interesting point. They'd definitely have to address that somehow. Overall though, I'm extremely excited to hear this. It's the service I've been wanting all along. Why does there need to be hundreds of thousands of copies of a movie on iTunes when one copy can be shared by all? Why should I have to pay and manage storage and back of these files when all that's already being done by Apple? It's double work, uses a lot of resources and costs a lot of money. By paying for (unlimited?) streams of the content I purchase from iTunes all those negatives are eliminated.
Of course there's a trade off. That's how the universe works. I may have to keep or upgrade my internet access and worry about excessive traffic on the servers, but overall I don't have many troubles with my service in streaming now. Plus streaming gives me access to the content on my Mac, iPod, iPhone and Apple TV. All with no synching or management.
I really hope this turns out to be true!
Why is everyone ok with buying things they won't own?
I would LOVE to not have to deal with a physical medium like a DVD or CD forever. I think having a subscription for music/movie/tv show would essentially kill A LOT of distribution models out there. I could care less if I don't own an episode of Heroes and merely subscribe to it. This is truly where it's going...on-demand digital streaming. And for those who want to own, I'm sure Apple will still happily take your money.
Because in the case of movies, a large percentage of people only watch them once, which is why video "rentals" has been a multi-billion dollar business since the 80's.
A subscription service for iTunes movies/tv shows would be the best thing that could happen to AppleTV.
EDIT: Even if a streaming/subscription service was offered, I'm sure the option to purchase would not go away.
Part of me agrees with your statement but when I want to watch a man movie I pull out my trusty copy of The Hunt For Red October and when I need a comedy I love to watch Sean of the Dead, Super Troopers and Bubba Hotep and when S.W.M.B.O (She Who Must Be Obeyed) wants to watch a chick flick I pull out my trusty copy of the Princess Bride. I can see the value of this service but I would still prefer to have a physical copy of my favorites. I see this as a complimentary service rather then a complete replacement for having a physical or locally stored copy for many people. And I believe you are right about this helping Atv as I think that streaming would really drive Atv growth.
The real fly in the ointment is the broadband providers and their bandwidth caps. While Comcast etal may be working on ever faster service they are also trying to cap your monthly bandwidth and are known for blocking traffic they don't like. What is to stop them from throttling your download speeds on apple media content like they keep trying to do with bittorent?
Jim
And remember real men don't watch porno.
We make it! ;-)
I believe Apple will announce a new video subscription service - iTunes Replay.
For 19.99 per month, you will be able to stream any video within the iTunes video store - movies, TV shows, or short films.
This would be the killer app for the Apple TV.
I swear to fracking GOD, if that happens, GOODBYE NETFLIX!
App store remembers your purchase so if lost you download
It free
They should do this with all iTunes purchases reduces the
Need for a home server and backup issues
This would also tie more to apple universe
This can also help with clones and push atv purchases
I wouldn't need cable box so long as I could get nick and
Disney content for my little girls
This would allow a true alacart programing that many--
Myself have wanted. With the money u save from cable
Dish pay for many apple products
Also offer lower red for slower Internet connection
Yea apple
Apple's service would include a monthly fee. HULU is free and advertising supported. Hulu will not be impacted by the introduction of Apple's paid service. If anything, this will bring more attention to Hulu's product.
I couldn't disagree with you more. Hulu needs a set top box to be main stream. Boxee on the AppleTv is not a mainstream option. I don't even think AppleTV could be considered mainstream. However, iTunes is. If Apple makes its streaming service easy to get on your big screen, something Hulu doesn't do, then I think many people, including this avid hulu watcher would jump ship on Hulu.
Interesting point. They'd definitely have to address that somehow. Overall though, I'm extremely excited to hear this. It's the service I've been wanting all along. Why does there need to be hundreds of thousands of copies of a movie on iTunes when one copy can be shared by all? Why should I have to pay and manage storage and back of these files when all that's already being done by Apple? It's double work, uses a lot of resources and costs a lot of money. By paying for (unlimited?) streams of the content I purchase from iTunes all those negatives are eliminated.
Of course there's a trade off. That's how the universe works. I may have to keep or upgrade my internet access and worry about excessive traffic on the servers, but overall I don't have many troubles with my service in streaming now. Plus streaming gives me access to the content on my Mac, iPod, iPhone and Apple TV. All with no synching or management.
I really hope this turns out to be true!
It would be nice if you had the option to download locally any of your own stuff anytime and then wipe when not needed knowing it was still on the cloud. I am thinking like when going on a trip and you might not have access to net or only slow one. Also be good if HD Movies had a more lenient policy too, maybe be able to watch several times over the years once rented.
This service could also be used to host music. One of the reasons I have an iPod but not an iPhone is that the iPod can store so much music. If I could get all my tunes on demand wirelessly, then I don't need the big hard drive... seems like a no-brainer to me!
No, and if it's a subscription service it won't be movies either, only the replay part will be.
Here in the UK, where broadband is mainly ADSL, the average broadband speed is about 3Mbit, so a service like this should be fine. From this article, I'd guess that ADSL in the US is worse than ours... We can get ADSL up to 24Mbit (in theory, more like 18-20Mbit in practice)...
I don't see much ADSL over here at all these days, most broadband is FiOS (Fiber Optic) or Cable (Copper wire), in Florida at least. Your quoted speed is is the same sort of range though. have 25 Mb/ down and 5 Mb up. My family live in UK and complain about contention ratios still being a problem, cable here used to slow down badly during peak usage a few years back but I am not sure since we moved over to fiber optics which never slows. FiOS is sweet! From what i read the French have some pretty spectacular speeds.