I for one would see the the PSP screen as for ideal iPod photo. Slap on the abilaty to watch video just for the fun of it. email would be cool. ta ta tablet. it's gonna be made sooner or later.
Is anybody actually going to buy movies for the PSP for a continued duration? Are sales of PSP movies even big enough to make this a lasting format? Is it just me or are these movies going to go away because of lack of a future in sales of the tiny movies? It's a ridiculous idea if you ask me. I wouldn't get one, and I am not planning on watching movies on a screen 2 inches squared anywhere. Not even if Apple makes one. I think I'd rather spend the extra coin and buy a iBook, or a PowerBook, and watch that on a Plane. iTab (tablet) would be great announcement. iHome media center would be even better. iTunes on demand straight from your living room. They could incorporate some of that AirTunes technology into an iHome, and have your stereo be a receiver.
One more thing. = It's probably a new product, but not a tiny video one, and/or some long awaited upgrades to existing product, or products.
I've bought a few PSP movies, and I was suppressed how enjoyable they were, but i cannot imagine seeing movies on a screen smaller than the PSPs. Of course, since there are over a dozen hand held TVs with screens ranging from 1.8" to 2.5" currently being sold, I cannot say that there would not be a market for a micro screen device if Apple made one.
If they made a video iPod with a screen at least as good as the PSPs, it would sell. If they add in a iTunes like video service that lets you download TV shows for a dollar an episode they would sell millions of them. Unfortunately, I think that they bandwidth costs would make the price per episode higher, and I don't think people are willing to pay much more then a buck for a TV episode.
Humm, now that I think about it, an integrated tivo like devise to which you could dock your video iPod so you could easily transfer recorded shows would be something worth getting. I don't know if Apple is going to go there, but I would certainty get one if they did .
I've bought a few PSP movies, and I was suppressed how enjoyable they were, but i cannot imagine seeing movies on a screen smaller than the PSPs. Of course, since there are over a dozen hand held TVs with screens ranging from 1.8" to 2.5" currently being sold, I cannot say that there would not be a market for a micro screen device if Apple made one.
If they made a video iPod with a screen at least as good as the PSPs, it would sell. If they add in a iTunes like video service that lets you download TV shows for a dollar an episode they would sell millions of them. Unfortunately, I think that they bandwidth costs would make the price per episode higher, and I don't think people are willing to pay much more then a buck for a TV episode.
Humm, now that I think about it, an integrated tivo like devise to which you could dock your video iPod so you could easily transfer recorded shows would be something worth getting. I don't know if Apple is going to go there, but I would certainty get one if they did .
There was a market for sony of course because these things were niche products when they came out. The 1.8" Watchman TV was a sony niche, and sales of those devices are very small now, but sony can afford to gamble, and have these small devices lying around because they are a huge electronics company that makes everything under the sun, They are practically made from spare parts of theirs, but for Apple to be a success with it they would need like 50% of iPod users to get one, and continue buying them in the future with upgrades. I don't see it happening. The Market is way too small. Regular people like so see quality movies on Large screens.
There was a market for sony of course because these things were niche products when they came out. The 1.8" Watchman TV was a sony niche, and sales of those devices are very small now, but sony can afford to gamble, and have these small devices lying around because they are a huge electronics company that makes everything under the sun, They are practically made from spare parts of theirs, but for Apple to be a success with it they would need like 50% of iPod users to get one, and continue buying them in the future with upgrades. I don't see it happening. The Market is way too small. Regular people like so see quality movies on Large screens.
I don't see how a vPod doesn't fit in to the larger video download market.
I agree most people will want to see movies on large screens, which is why it needs dock/video out/airport express companions. But if video downloads takes off, and you want to visit friends/relatives and bring some movies along to watch, how will you do that once the DVD is taken out of the picture? This is the same reason why the iPod Photo works. I don't want to view my pics on the iPod, but I need a transport device.
The vPod solves this. Buy your tv/movies through iTMS and store them on your computer. Sync them to your vPod when you want to go. Plug into TV at the destination and play back.
The point of the setup is that you aren't carrying around little matchbook sized movies but full-size ones that the vPod scales down on screen but provides full playback through the video out. Toss in a .11g link, a TV onscreen menu, and a remote control and you have a damn fine setup.
First off. What Larger video Download market are you talking about?
Because resolution takes up GHZ. HD resolution movies are going to be in the neighborhood of 30GB. Transportation of movies is not that simple. Apple would would have to #1 make deals with every distributor, and #2 have a more bandwidth than individual T1 lines to every user that has iTunes to deliver.
Argue all day. My opinion is that I don't need a vPod neither does 90% of the world we live in. I'll bet Mac Zealots buy the first 20.000 units if they do make one though. And that's just from stupidity.
Because resolution takes up GHZ. HD resolution movies are going to be in the neighborhood of 30GB.
Not quite.
At 12 mbps using H.264 or VC-1, a feature length film (lets say 2 hours), only uses up about 10.8 GBs. Still a lot, but about a third of what you are talking about. Why only 12 mbps, because that is the point of diminishing returns with H.264 and VC-1, any higher doesn't get better looking video, just bigger file sizes. Hell, you might even be able to get away with less of a bitrate. DVDs can be up to 9mbps, most are only 3-4...
But why would we be downloading HD res material? I don't think we are ready for that just yet (bandwidth and playback devices supporting HD res material). Perhaps HD content shrunk down to SD res, and then transmitted? Good enough for TVs, and vPods alike. I am guessing (don't know the math here) that SD resolution 2 hour movie would be in the 1GB range (again using H.264 or VC-1 codecs). A 30 minute TV show (or should I say 22 minute TV show), would be even less.
Some people mention the iPod would store movies that you take around to mom's house and play back. Apple would have to deal with the MPAA about copying, dubbing, transferring etc.
Here, take this HD movie on your iPod over to Joey's house and let him watch it on his big screen. And if he likes it, download it to his computer? You'll fit all of one movie on the iPod, or maybe two small ones and then forget about your mp3s, you won't have any more room left!
I found this from last year and it still rings quite logical-
Quote:
Prediction 1: Apple won't release a video iPod.
According to a little bird I know whose employment contract was recently dropped by Apple, the company's initial ideas are fleshed out in the Product Development building, and if they're promising, they progress to the Industrial Design building. I know that Steve Jobs has someone in the Apple labs working on a video iPod. I take this to mean that engineers at the Industrial Design site are concocting and testing Apple-centric approaches to the PVP.
So, why don't I think that the video iPod will see the light of day in 2004? First of all, as Jobs himself has said, portable video has nothing equivalent to headphones. Sure, there are those virtual reality-style goggles, but you can't use them while doing anything else. Second, video is more complicated formatwise than audio, and consumers won't covet something that frustrates them with compatibility hassles.
Instead of a video iPod, 2004 will see the first Apple digital audio receiver (DAR), which will connect via the AirPort 802.11b solution. The device will make it easier for you to play songs from the iTunes Music Store on your home stereo. I think the product name will be iPod Home, but that's pure speculation.
Of course, I don't mean the Apple PVP is coming, but the airport idea is.
Because resolution takes up GHZ. HD resolution movies are going to be in the neighborhood of 30GB. Transportation of movies is not that simple. Apple would would have to #1 make deals with every distributor, and #2 have a more bandwidth than individual T1 lines to every user that has iTunes to deliver.
Argue all day. My opinion is that I don't need a vPod neither does 90% of the world we live in. I'll bet Mac Zealots buy the first 20.000 units if they do make one though. And that's just from stupidity.
I don't know why you all are fixated on movies. My sense is that people download television shows, too. Much smaller. More reasonable number of producers of content.
Imagine it. $2 for last week's Alias in HD. Stick it on the gadget. Plug gadget into TV. Maybe couple with some kind of airport express with an h.264 decoder built in.
Some people mention the iPod would store movies that you take around to mom's house and play back. Apple would have to deal with the MPAA about copying, dubbing, transferring etc.
How is this ANY DIFFERENT than for music on the iPod? C'mon people, the lessons learned from the iPod are still there. It's not a problem for music, it won't be a problem for video.
Quote:
Here, take this HD movie on your iPod over to Joey's house and let him watch it on his big screen. And if he likes it, download it to his computer? You'll fit all of one movie on the iPod, or maybe two small ones and then forget about your mp3s, you won't have any more room left!
All of one movie? What kind of crack are you on? I rip full res DVDs to H.264 and they average 600MB. A 40GB device will hold 50 movies.
So long as iTunes is managing your collection, won't the download on/off work exactly the same way as it does now with music? How again is this different for video than it currently is for audio?
How is this ANY DIFFERENT than for music on the iPod? C'mon people, the lessons learned from the iPod are still there. It's not a problem for music, it won't be a problem for video.
All of one movie? What kind of crack are you on? I rip full res DVDs to H.264 and they average 600MB. A 40GB device will hold 50 movies.
So long as iTunes is managing your collection, won't the download on/off work exactly the same way as it does now with music? How again is this different for video than it currently is for audio?
Well, unless I'm not following the discussion properly, there is currently no fairplay DRM for movies.
the bandwidth costs for distributing long-form video are much greater than a 3Mb aac music file. the profit potential is much harder to find for video than music since i don't think people are going to pay a lot of money to get shows they can get on tv.
I'll just go on record saying it's a video enabled iPod. I think we're over-thinking the bandwidth, distribution, HD, and other stuff. One of the major public complaints about the iPod is that it doesn't handle video. Nobody's talking about the practicality of loading video on to it... people just want video capabilities.
I think that in a savvy marketing move, Apple will give the people what they want. It'll cost $600, it'll be the latest and greatest thing for Christmas, and they'll generate good buzz for the company. All the rest of the stuff can come later.
And you better believe it won't support HD. Come on people, they couldn't even get Bluetooth into the Might Mouse for its release. HD will be a 3rd generation iPod Video addition.
the bandwidth costs for distributing long-form video are much greater than a 3Mb aac music file. the profit potential is much harder to find for video than music since i don't think people are going to pay a lot of money to get shows they can get on tv.
Bandwidth is pretty cheap. Prices for large users (like Apple) are <$1/GB. So an H.264 SD 1 hour TV show should cost less than $0.40. I think that for a 30 minute show Apple could swing $1/episode. For an hour, up it to $2 or $1.50. For a movie, you have to come in line with DVDs to cover the royalties so you're probably looking at closer to $10. But I think $2 for a 1hr show is comfortable for consumers.
Keep in mind that Apple has been springing for bandwidth for trailers for a long-ass time and getting no money outside of derivative sales from QT Pro, etc. I don't think it's insurmountable.
For royalties on TV, season DVDs appear to average $1.25 to $1.75 per 1 hour episode. Taking out packaging, distribution, retail cut, etc. you are probably looking at $.75 or less per episode in royalties, which is close to what the music labels get. I doubt that episode downloads would significantly cut into DVD sales and I think consumers would pay MORE for TV download than the DVD bundle due to the timing convenience.
Comments
Originally posted by onlooker
Is anybody actually going to buy movies for the PSP for a continued duration? Are sales of PSP movies even big enough to make this a lasting format? Is it just me or are these movies going to go away because of lack of a future in sales of the tiny movies? It's a ridiculous idea if you ask me. I wouldn't get one, and I am not planning on watching movies on a screen 2 inches squared anywhere. Not even if Apple makes one. I think I'd rather spend the extra coin and buy a iBook, or a PowerBook, and watch that on a Plane. iTab (tablet) would be great announcement. iHome media center would be even better. iTunes on demand straight from your living room. They could incorporate some of that AirTunes technology into an iHome, and have your stereo be a receiver.
One more thing. = It's probably a new product, but not a tiny video one, and/or some long awaited upgrades to existing product, or products.
I've bought a few PSP movies, and I was suppressed how enjoyable they were, but i cannot imagine seeing movies on a screen smaller than the PSPs. Of course, since there are over a dozen hand held TVs with screens ranging from 1.8" to 2.5" currently being sold, I cannot say that there would not be a market for a micro screen device if Apple made one.
If they made a video iPod with a screen at least as good as the PSPs, it would sell. If they add in a iTunes like video service that lets you download TV shows for a dollar an episode they would sell millions of them. Unfortunately, I think that they bandwidth costs would make the price per episode higher, and I don't think people are willing to pay much more then a buck for a TV episode.
Humm, now that I think about it, an integrated tivo like devise to which you could dock your video iPod so you could easily transfer recorded shows would be something worth getting. I don't know if Apple is going to go there, but I would certainty get one if they did .
Originally posted by Harald
The UK Apple event is at BBC Television Centre.
Well that seems very significant. The beeb wouldn't be involved if it wasn't video related.
Originally posted by Res
I've bought a few PSP movies, and I was suppressed how enjoyable they were, but i cannot imagine seeing movies on a screen smaller than the PSPs. Of course, since there are over a dozen hand held TVs with screens ranging from 1.8" to 2.5" currently being sold, I cannot say that there would not be a market for a micro screen device if Apple made one.
If they made a video iPod with a screen at least as good as the PSPs, it would sell. If they add in a iTunes like video service that lets you download TV shows for a dollar an episode they would sell millions of them. Unfortunately, I think that they bandwidth costs would make the price per episode higher, and I don't think people are willing to pay much more then a buck for a TV episode.
Humm, now that I think about it, an integrated tivo like devise to which you could dock your video iPod so you could easily transfer recorded shows would be something worth getting. I don't know if Apple is going to go there, but I would certainty get one if they did .
There was a market for sony of course because these things were niche products when they came out. The 1.8" Watchman TV was a sony niche, and sales of those devices are very small now, but sony can afford to gamble, and have these small devices lying around because they are a huge electronics company that makes everything under the sun, They are practically made from spare parts of theirs, but for Apple to be a success with it they would need like 50% of iPod users to get one, and continue buying them in the future with upgrades. I don't see it happening. The Market is way too small. Regular people like so see quality movies on Large screens.
Originally posted by onlooker
There was a market for sony of course because these things were niche products when they came out. The 1.8" Watchman TV was a sony niche, and sales of those devices are very small now, but sony can afford to gamble, and have these small devices lying around because they are a huge electronics company that makes everything under the sun, They are practically made from spare parts of theirs, but for Apple to be a success with it they would need like 50% of iPod users to get one, and continue buying them in the future with upgrades. I don't see it happening. The Market is way too small. Regular people like so see quality movies on Large screens.
I don't see how a vPod doesn't fit in to the larger video download market.
I agree most people will want to see movies on large screens, which is why it needs dock/video out/airport express companions. But if video downloads takes off, and you want to visit friends/relatives and bring some movies along to watch, how will you do that once the DVD is taken out of the picture? This is the same reason why the iPod Photo works. I don't want to view my pics on the iPod, but I need a transport device.
The vPod solves this. Buy your tv/movies through iTMS and store them on your computer. Sync them to your vPod when you want to go. Plug into TV at the destination and play back.
The point of the setup is that you aren't carrying around little matchbook sized movies but full-size ones that the vPod scales down on screen but provides full playback through the video out. Toss in a .11g link, a TV onscreen menu, and a remote control and you have a damn fine setup.
Because resolution takes up GHZ. HD resolution movies are going to be in the neighborhood of 30GB. Transportation of movies is not that simple. Apple would would have to #1 make deals with every distributor, and #2 have a more bandwidth than individual T1 lines to every user that has iTunes to deliver.
Argue all day. My opinion is that I don't need a vPod neither does 90% of the world we live in. I'll bet Mac Zealots buy the first 20.000 units if they do make one though.
Originally posted by onlooker
Because resolution takes up GHZ. HD resolution movies are going to be in the neighborhood of 30GB.
Not quite.
At 12 mbps using H.264 or VC-1, a feature length film (lets say 2 hours), only uses up about 10.8 GBs. Still a lot, but about a third of what you are talking about. Why only 12 mbps, because that is the point of diminishing returns with H.264 and VC-1, any higher doesn't get better looking video, just bigger file sizes. Hell, you might even be able to get away with less of a bitrate. DVDs can be up to 9mbps, most are only 3-4...
But why would we be downloading HD res material? I don't think we are ready for that just yet (bandwidth and playback devices supporting HD res material). Perhaps HD content shrunk down to SD res, and then transmitted? Good enough for TVs, and vPods alike. I am guessing (don't know the math here) that SD resolution 2 hour movie would be in the 1GB range (again using H.264 or VC-1 codecs). A 30 minute TV show (or should I say 22 minute TV show), would be even less.
Here, take this HD movie on your iPod over to Joey's house and let him watch it on his big screen. And if he likes it, download it to his computer? You'll fit all of one movie on the iPod, or maybe two small ones and then forget about your mp3s, you won't have any more room left!
Prediction 1: Apple won't release a video iPod.
According to a little bird I know whose employment contract was recently dropped by Apple, the company's initial ideas are fleshed out in the Product Development building, and if they're promising, they progress to the Industrial Design building. I know that Steve Jobs has someone in the Apple labs working on a video iPod. I take this to mean that engineers at the Industrial Design site are concocting and testing Apple-centric approaches to the PVP.
So, why don't I think that the video iPod will see the light of day in 2004? First of all, as Jobs himself has said, portable video has nothing equivalent to headphones. Sure, there are those virtual reality-style goggles, but you can't use them while doing anything else. Second, video is more complicated formatwise than audio, and consumers won't covet something that frustrates them with compatibility hassles.
Instead of a video iPod, 2004 will see the first Apple digital audio receiver (DAR), which will connect via the AirPort 802.11b solution. The device will make it easier for you to play songs from the iTunes Music Store on your home stereo. I think the product name will be iPod Home, but that's pure speculation.
Of course, I don't mean the Apple PVP is coming, but the airport idea is.
Originally posted by onlooker
First off. What Larger video Download market are you talking about?
The one the MPAA is going after.
Because resolution takes up GHZ. HD resolution movies are going to be in the neighborhood of 30GB. Transportation of movies is not that simple. Apple would would have to #1 make deals with every distributor, and #2 have a more bandwidth than individual T1 lines to every user that has iTunes to deliver.
Argue all day. My opinion is that I don't need a vPod neither does 90% of the world we live in. I'll bet Mac Zealots buy the first 20.000 units if they do make one though.
I don't know why you all are fixated on movies. My sense is that people download television shows, too. Much smaller. More reasonable number of producers of content.
Imagine it. $2 for last week's Alias in HD. Stick it on the gadget. Plug gadget into TV. Maybe couple with some kind of airport express with an h.264 decoder built in.
Originally posted by KidRed
Some people mention the iPod would store movies that you take around to mom's house and play back. Apple would have to deal with the MPAA about copying, dubbing, transferring etc.
How is this ANY DIFFERENT than for music on the iPod? C'mon people, the lessons learned from the iPod are still there. It's not a problem for music, it won't be a problem for video.
Quote:
Here, take this HD movie on your iPod over to Joey's house and let him watch it on his big screen. And if he likes it, download it to his computer? You'll fit all of one movie on the iPod, or maybe two small ones and then forget about your mp3s, you won't have any more room left!
All of one movie? What kind of crack are you on? I rip full res DVDs to H.264 and they average 600MB. A 40GB device will hold 50 movies.
So long as iTunes is managing your collection, won't the download on/off work exactly the same way as it does now with music? How again is this different for video than it currently is for audio?
Originally posted by johnsonwax
How is this ANY DIFFERENT than for music on the iPod? C'mon people, the lessons learned from the iPod are still there. It's not a problem for music, it won't be a problem for video.
All of one movie? What kind of crack are you on? I rip full res DVDs to H.264 and they average 600MB. A 40GB device will hold 50 movies.
So long as iTunes is managing your collection, won't the download on/off work exactly the same way as it does now with music? How again is this different for video than it currently is for audio?
Well, unless I'm not following the discussion properly, there is currently no fairplay DRM for movies.
Originally posted by the cool gut
Well, unless I'm not following the discussion properly, there is currently no fairplay DRM for movies.
Fairplay is a DRM wrapper. It'll work on any file format.
I think that in a savvy marketing move, Apple will give the people what they want. It'll cost $600, it'll be the latest and greatest thing for Christmas, and they'll generate good buzz for the company. All the rest of the stuff can come later.
And you better believe it won't support HD. Come on people, they couldn't even get Bluetooth into the Might Mouse for its release. HD will be a 3rd generation iPod Video addition.
(iPodeo? VidiPod?)
Originally posted by admactanium
the bandwidth costs for distributing long-form video are much greater than a 3Mb aac music file. the profit potential is much harder to find for video than music since i don't think people are going to pay a lot of money to get shows they can get on tv.
Bandwidth is pretty cheap. Prices for large users (like Apple) are <$1/GB. So an H.264 SD 1 hour TV show should cost less than $0.40. I think that for a 30 minute show Apple could swing $1/episode. For an hour, up it to $2 or $1.50. For a movie, you have to come in line with DVDs to cover the royalties so you're probably looking at closer to $10. But I think $2 for a 1hr show is comfortable for consumers.
Keep in mind that Apple has been springing for bandwidth for trailers for a long-ass time and getting no money outside of derivative sales from QT Pro, etc. I don't think it's insurmountable.
For royalties on TV, season DVDs appear to average $1.25 to $1.75 per 1 hour episode. Taking out packaging, distribution, retail cut, etc. you are probably looking at $.75 or less per episode in royalties, which is close to what the music labels get. I doubt that episode downloads would significantly cut into DVD sales and I think consumers would pay MORE for TV download than the DVD bundle due to the timing convenience.