This man is nuts. Apple has made it easy for people to watch movies via iTunes. Additionally, Apple has carefully curated a demographic that is willing to spend the money on movies where as other platforms do not have an audience who is proven to spend the amount of money Apple customers will for a given product. \ If they don't want my business I'm happy to spend my money elsewhere.
This guy is just upset that he is no longer the distribution channel ... if he focuses on good content, it will get distributed to a wide audience by Apple and others.
1080 is gonna be about +4 times the file size of 720 and definitely not a 4x improvement in quality.
And it depends on the source. If the original is not recorded in 1080/HD, then there will be no quality gain, just a larger download.
See, I'm so sure about that.
Sorry, I'll clarify: just the very beginning. I'm not so sure about that.
Apple's 720p stuff is generally 4GB and, from what I've read, heard, and seen, not the best quality, even for 720p.
However, I encode my 1080p stuff at 4GB and, to me, it looks great. I'd love to provide screenshots for comparison with other people's 720p stuff, so if that's desired, we could find movies in common and compare qualities.
I dunno. 1080p won't be a huge deal (either in file sizes or migration thereto), but that's what I think.
as other have pointed out, there are plenty of platforms for media owners to use to get their product to consumers. What really irks him is that, because apple/itunes is the biggest game in town, the studios have to agree to apple's terms in order to get access to apple's user base.
What he really wants is for more platforms to become viable so that apple will have less leverage during negotiations of licensing deals.
True, many of his comments support your statement. If there's one thing that every Hollywood exec knows about Apple, it's that "They killed the music industry.... but they won't kill us".
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe
The issue is usually conceptualized as limited distribution being a major problem, and Apple, WRT the music industry, is dominant. Apple didn't kill the industry, but limited distribution choices are seen as bad for the industry. The limited distribution did little to counter piracy, and still does little.
There's a grain of truth there, but the issues are, of course, much more complex.
I don't see how that's Apple's fault. The use of ridiculous hyperbole doesn't exactly help their case. The music industry was fruitlessly trying to push the $10-$15/mo "buffet" model. Also, start-ups found the media industries to be hard to work with, so who knows how many opportunities they scuttled by being obstinate?
The only reason Apple dominates the music industry is because of momentum and ease of use. If the music industry hadn't had its collective head up its ass, they could have banded together to make a distribution system that worked as well as iTunes.
Similarly, the movie industry (and TV) could come up with a unified distribution system with a unified DRM schema across the industry that would negate the need for Apple, but again they cant seem to come to grips with what consumers want.
How can you blame Apple for filling a void that you refuse to fill?
It just doesn't add up. Hulu and Netflix streaming aren't even the same kind of service, the business model is very different. I doubt those services are paying as much as Apple does for the most equivalent offering. I also doubt that Apple is preventing them from dealing with other services, which I'm pretty sure would be illegal. One of the lines even implies that Apple isn't doing enough for them, which contradicts the suggestion that Apple has too much control. If you want someone to nanny your product at their expense, then you're implicitly giving up control.
Apple sets a rather firm cut on things and has tried to influence pricing. They never adopted blu-ray. I think these guys are worried about losing control with distribution being funneled primarily through one company. There is most likely a fear that without more distribution channels they will have little negotiating power.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison
He means:
"In order for profits to survive there must be parity within the digital distribution markets"
It makes sense. They want to make money like any other company (Apple included). Margins are always a consideration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwissMac2
The movie industry makes films. Apple wants to distribute them. What's the freakin' problem? The movie industry needs to move out of the 19th Century.
Just to state it once more, these guys fear one large company having too much control. If Apple becomes the primary method for distribution and the others wither, Apple will be able to dictate whatever terms it likes. Keep in mind if the situation was in reverse most of the people on this board would still take Apple's side on the matter. I'm really not sure this article gives a full context anyway.
Ok, now they say its better to pirate their films than buy from iTunes?!? Okay dokey! Im of to pirate some Miramax film that I would otherwise have bought!
Even if the iTunes store would dominate movie sales/rentals, which it doesn't right now, it is not the competition between suppliers that counts, but the competition between and the popularity of productions. Especially good productions will benefit.
Sure, the movie theatres may suffer if everybody starts watching movies at home, but the movie industry as a whole can only benefit from the bigger accessibility of movies to the masses. If there is any disequilibrium between movie pricing, it is the tickets in the movie theatres that are way too expensive. You usually don't go to the movies alone, transportation and parking tickets are not free either, beverages and pop corn at ridiculous prices all add to the bill of one night at the flicks. The consumer's decision is quickly made.
People who go to the movies (e.g., a mall with 12 theatres) often haven't decided on what movie they intend to see. If they can't get into one of their favorites, they will buy a ticket for a lesser grade movie, much like what happens with buying music CDs, where the lesser tracks are bought because they come together with what people are really interested in.
Increased competition may mean better quality, not something Miramax seems to be worrying about.
---
One more thing: What exactly is the Movie Industry (which needs to survive, obviously) ? Check all that apply.
The problems of the American entertainment industry have nothing to do with communications technology and everything to do with their their product. They've very little to offer beyond a hyper-conservative, formulaic, rehash of 20th century clichés, sensationally degraded beyond recognition in a futile attempt to inject novelty into what has long since become as tediously uniform as the dripping of a leaky faucet. Both the film and music industries have been aesthetically, intellectually, artistically, ethically, and spiritually bankrupt for so long that it's financial failure is a consummation devoutly to be wished. They're parasitic, sapping the vitality out of an entire culture by depriving it of art, which - all bombast aside - is a basic human need up there with food, companionship, and a reasonably safe place to sleep.
Their obsession with short-term profits and form over content has finally caught up with them. Their market now treats their products and their producers with all the respect due disposable trash. Given that the primary goal of the industry is duping people into paying to be targets for advertising, stealing their product, giving it no more than the 30 seconds of attention it deserves, throwing it away, and forgetting about it is not just the only sane approach to it, but a decidedly moral one.
After all, what would we call someone who avidly purchased a $25 bag of potato chips and treated it as haute cuisine? A chump.
Ok, now they say its better to pirate their films than buy from iTunes?!? Okay dokey! Im of to pirate some Miramax film that I would otherwise have bought!
Damned, I bought a movie yesterday. Maybe I should request a refund from Apple on the base Miramax prefers piracy?
As other have pointed out, there are plenty of platforms for media owners to use to get their product to consumers. What really irks him is that, because Apple/itunes is the biggest game in town, the studios have to agree to Apple's terms in order to get access to Apple's user base.
What he really wants is for more platforms to become viable so that Apple will have less leverage during negotiations of licensing deals.
Except that he then goes on to declare, "May the best service win." WTF is that supposed to mean? It's the very fact that the best service is winning that he doesn't like!
Comments
What a moroon.
Isn't that what Bugs Bunny says?
Quit whining.
1080 is gonna be about +4 times the file size of 720 and definitely not a 4x improvement in quality.
And it depends on the source. If the original is not recorded in 1080/HD, then there will be no quality gain, just a larger download.
See, I'm so sure about that.
Sorry, I'll clarify: just the very beginning. I'm not so sure about that.
Apple's 720p stuff is generally 4GB and, from what I've read, heard, and seen, not the best quality, even for 720p.
However, I encode my 1080p stuff at 4GB and, to me, it looks great. I'd love to provide screenshots for comparison with other people's 720p stuff, so if that's desired, we could find movies in common and compare qualities.
I dunno. 1080p won't be a huge deal (either in file sizes or migration thereto), but that's what I think.
as other have pointed out, there are plenty of platforms for media owners to use to get their product to consumers. What really irks him is that, because apple/itunes is the biggest game in town, the studios have to agree to apple's terms in order to get access to apple's user base.
What he really wants is for more platforms to become viable so that apple will have less leverage during negotiations of licensing deals.
precisely!
True, many of his comments support your statement. If there's one thing that every Hollywood exec knows about Apple, it's that "They killed the music industry.... but they won't kill us".
The issue is usually conceptualized as limited distribution being a major problem, and Apple, WRT the music industry, is dominant. Apple didn't kill the industry, but limited distribution choices are seen as bad for the industry. The limited distribution did little to counter piracy, and still does little.
There's a grain of truth there, but the issues are, of course, much more complex.
I don't see how that's Apple's fault. The use of ridiculous hyperbole doesn't exactly help their case. The music industry was fruitlessly trying to push the $10-$15/mo "buffet" model. Also, start-ups found the media industries to be hard to work with, so who knows how many opportunities they scuttled by being obstinate?
Similarly, the movie industry (and TV) could come up with a unified distribution system with a unified DRM schema across the industry that would negate the need for Apple, but again they cant seem to come to grips with what consumers want.
How can you blame Apple for filling a void that you refuse to fill?
That's what scares them to death.
Artists will control the process.
It just doesn't add up. Hulu and Netflix streaming aren't even the same kind of service, the business model is very different. I doubt those services are paying as much as Apple does for the most equivalent offering. I also doubt that Apple is preventing them from dealing with other services, which I'm pretty sure would be illegal. One of the lines even implies that Apple isn't doing enough for them, which contradicts the suggestion that Apple has too much control. If you want someone to nanny your product at their expense, then you're implicitly giving up control.
Apple sets a rather firm cut on things and has tried to influence pricing. They never adopted blu-ray. I think these guys are worried about losing control with distribution being funneled primarily through one company. There is most likely a fear that without more distribution channels they will have little negotiating power.
He means:
"In order for profits to survive there must be parity within the digital distribution markets"
It makes sense. They want to make money like any other company (Apple included). Margins are always a consideration.
The movie industry makes films. Apple wants to distribute them. What's the freakin' problem? The movie industry needs to move out of the 19th Century.
Just to state it once more, these guys fear one large company having too much control. If Apple becomes the primary method for distribution and the others wither, Apple will be able to dictate whatever terms it likes. Keep in mind if the situation was in reverse most of the people on this board would still take Apple's side on the matter. I'm really not sure this article gives a full context anyway.
Sure, the movie theatres may suffer if everybody starts watching movies at home, but the movie industry as a whole can only benefit from the bigger accessibility of movies to the masses. If there is any disequilibrium between movie pricing, it is the tickets in the movie theatres that are way too expensive. You usually don't go to the movies alone, transportation and parking tickets are not free either, beverages and pop corn at ridiculous prices all add to the bill of one night at the flicks. The consumer's decision is quickly made.
People who go to the movies (e.g., a mall with 12 theatres) often haven't decided on what movie they intend to see. If they can't get into one of their favorites, they will buy a ticket for a lesser grade movie, much like what happens with buying music CDs, where the lesser tracks are bought because they come together with what people are really interested in.
Increased competition may mean better quality, not something Miramax seems to be worrying about.
---
One more thing: What exactly is the Movie Industry (which needs to survive, obviously) ? Check all that apply.
- The movie studios
- Some (or every possible) middle man
- The consumer
I am skeptical
Their obsession with short-term profits and form over content has finally caught up with them. Their market now treats their products and their producers with all the respect due disposable trash. Given that the primary goal of the industry is duping people into paying to be targets for advertising, stealing their product, giving it no more than the 30 seconds of attention it deserves, throwing it away, and forgetting about it is not just the only sane approach to it, but a decidedly moral one.
After all, what would we call someone who avidly purchased a $25 bag of potato chips and treated it as haute cuisine? A chump.
Ok, now they say its better to pirate their films than buy from iTunes?!? Okay dokey! Im of to pirate some Miramax film that I would otherwise have bought!
Damned, I bought a movie yesterday. Maybe I should request a refund from Apple on the base Miramax prefers piracy?
Isn't that what Bugs Bunny says?
I was channelling Bugs.
As other have pointed out, there are plenty of platforms for media owners to use to get their product to consumers. What really irks him is that, because Apple/itunes is the biggest game in town, the studios have to agree to Apple's terms in order to get access to Apple's user base.
What he really wants is for more platforms to become viable so that Apple will have less leverage during negotiations of licensing deals.
Except that he then goes on to declare, "May the best service win." WTF is that supposed to mean? It's the very fact that the best service is winning that he doesn't like!