Disney: 125,000 iTunes Movies Sold In 1 Week

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Disney CEO Rob Iger today announced that Disney has sold over 125,000 movies (http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/articlehybrid.aspx?storyID=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20060919:MTFH56918_2006-09-19_16-45-09_N19399790&type=comktNews&rpc=44) through the iTunes Movie store in the past week alone, totaling $1 million in revenue. In addition, Iger said the company expects over $50 million in revenue over the first year of the program.

During last week's Showtime event, the long-rumored "iTunes Movie Store" debuted (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060912154141.shtml) (now termed "iTunes Store") with 75 films from Disney-owned subsidaries. A successful launch may increase pressure on other studios still holding out on Apple's buy-to-own terms.

[spicyapple]

Wow. Good news for Apple and the future of the iTS in getting more studios on board. :)

If Apple can just convince studios to release movies in 720p and 1080p formats, it would kill off the blu-ray / HD DVD rivalry once and for all.

[stoid]

So, new movies this week? or do we have to wait until next?

[dizastor]

imagine how good it would be doing if they had more than disney on board.

[berkleeboy210]

Good, Now lets have some more studios come on in, and just maybe i'll buy the 80gb ipod

[puckhead193]

I wonder if these people are buying one to "test it out" or are buying multiple movies.

[dernhelm]

In addition, Iger said the company expects over $50 million in revenue over the first year of the program
Hmm. Lets see $1M in a week, 52 weeks in a year, yup - that's about $50M. Wow - that dude is a genius!

[mkrishnan]

Looking at some financials, I think Disney sells on the order of 100M DVD units per quarter, which comes out to about 7-10M units per week? 125k units through the online channel in one week isn't so bad. :) If they hit their $50M revenue target, that means they will see sales on the order of 1% of total home video sales? That's a fair start.

[supermacdesign]

Studios are scrambling and re-evaluating there offers right now to get on board.

[andiwm2003]

1mio for 125000 movies. so they make an avaerage of $8 per movie. iTS sells them for about $10-$12.

so it seems apple makes about 2-3 bucks per movie (minus the bandwith/server cost).

i wonder if the movie business is profitable for apple or if it's merely to promote iPod's iTV and Mac's.

[RichP]

I wonder if these people are buying one to "test it out" or are buying multiple movies.

I concur. 1 and 3 months out will really tell how this service fares.

So far though, it is a good start.

[aftk2]

This is fairly remarkable, considering that the really only viable place to watch these movies is on an iPod! Yes, you can watch it on your iMac, or on your television hooked to a Mac Mini, but really, the set top box (iTV) can't come soon enough! Furthermore, this is really the kind of content that lends itself to the TV, rather than the iPod (Disney movies that parents put on replay for hours on end.)

Of course, maybe these stats are dominated by those who wanted to watch Coyote Ugly on the train, on their way to work ;-) .

[Macnoviz]

During the meanwhilst, any news from Amazon Unbox ?

How well did they do?

Because it's easy to throw numbers at us, but withouth any comparison, it doesn't really say that much (although it's probably very good)

[guzhogi]

Hmm. Lets see $1M in a week, 52 weeks in a year, yup - that's about $50M. Wow - that dude is a genius!
Just wait. I have a feeling that once people get used to buying movies off of iTS, they'll convince all their friends to buy more movies and those friends would convince their friends and so on. I wouldn't be surprised if they sell 50m w/in 9 months. Hopefully, people will like the movies.

I hope that the iTV would someday get DVR capabilities like saving episodes on TV. Also, I'd like iPods to have radios & Airport built-in too.

[spicyapple]

I have an idea:

Sell Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest in a High Definition format to test the waters. I think a lot of people would buy it in HD since they already have computers capable of decoding it. Why the need to invest in an expensive HD DVD player?

[rikers_mailbox]

I bought a movie (Good Will Hunting) to try out the whole shabang and see the quality for myself. The 1.5Gb download took 6+ hours on my crappy adelphia cable modem (it feels slower every day, what am I paying 50 bucks a month for again?). I was satisfied with the image quality on my 20" Dell widescreen, but sitting at my desk to watch a movie instead of my couch isn't the movie experience I'm going for. Sadly, I probably won't be buying another iTunes movie.

Not that anyone cares.

[dsnort]

So, new movies this week? or do we have to wait until next?

Probably at the same time as the Merom MBP. :eek:

I bought one, just to test. Wasn't bad, would buy more if they add a title I want.

[n-abounds]

That's really good. I was wondering when we'd get the results of the Movie Store.

It'd be interesting if there was a way in which we could see if DVD sales were down for those movies due to the Movie Store. Doubt there's a way, but I still have a feeling that these were impulse buys beause people just say them there, and it's not like they were planning on running out to Target or somewhere to get them.

Personally, I bought Good Will Hunting and Shakespeare In Love. Have yet to watch SIL, but I was very pleased with the clarity of GWH. Too bad my iBook 1.07GHz can't really keep up...and it ran out of juice in the last thirty seconds ;(

My computer is 3.5 feet from the end of my bed, so it'll be perfect to watch from there on my soon-to-be-delivered 17" iMac. My TV is 20" and is higher up but to the left of my bed. I live in an apartment with flatmates, so I have a lot of stuff in my room.

[liketom]

thats good now release the service world wide ! and see how many they get

[x86isslow]

I bought The Sixth Sense. Was a good experience. I'd buy again*.

*Now they just need to get a wider selection.

[ctachme]

Considering that the iTS is like the 5th biggest music vendor, they sure suck at selling movies. 125k is nothing compared to real movie vendors.

Maybe when they get more than 75 movies. Amazon unbox started with like 2000 movies!

[HecubusPro]

During the meanwhilst, any news from Amazon Unbox ?

How well did they do?

Because it's easy to throw numbers at us, but withouth any comparison, it doesn't really say that much (although it's probably very good)

That's what I was going to ask. I'm very curious to see how Unbox has done, particularly since it launched a week earlier.

[mcarnes]

How long would it take to download a two hour 1080p movie?

[luminosity]

just depends on your connection.

some people have extremely fast connections, of course, and others are still on the horse and buggy.

[dsnort]

How long would it take to download a two hour 1080p movie?

It took my Black MB about 70 mins to download "Deuce Bigalow". This was over a decent but not great motel WiFi setup, and I was downloading some other stuff for about half the time.

[macfan881]

the only new movies i saw are Stick it and Preorders now For Dead mans Chest

[mcarnes]

I'd gladly wait overnight for a solid 1080p movie that played in quicktime. Don't need the DVD features (or frickin' ads). Just give me the movie.

[HecubusPro]

I'd gladly wait overnight for a solid 1080p movie that played in quicktime. Don't need the DVD features (or frickin' ads). Just give me the movie.

I would be exstatic to get a 720p movie, and like you, I would certainly have no problem waiting the time it would take to download it. I just want HD downloadable content from iTMS, which is why the iTV has me so excited. I may hold off on getting that HD-DVD player until I learn more about it.

[gugy]

wow! impressive.

I guess people value convenience over quality. That's great for Apple. That confirms it will be a success.
For me I rather buy DVDs or wait for hi definition downloads, but I guess many people out there are satisfy with lower quality.
Can't wait for ITV tough.

[kingtj]

That statement isn't *quite* true. A lot of people bought the DLO Home Docks (sold at Best Buy and other retail outlets) largely because they allow a docked iPod video to send video out to a TV set via s-video or RCA cables, and the user to control it remotely with the dock's included remote.

This is fairly remarkable, considering that the really only viable place to watch these movies is on an iPod! Yes, you can watch it on your iMac, or on your television hooked to a Mac Mini, but really, the set top box (iTV) can't come soon enough! Furthermore, this is really the kind of content that lends itself to the TV, rather than the iPod (Disney movies that parents put on replay for hours on end.)

Of course, maybe these stats are dominated by those who wanted to watch Coyote Ugly on the train, on their way to work ;-) .

[balamw]

It took my Black MB about 70 mins to download "Deuce Bigalow". This was over a decent but not great motel WiFi setup, and I was downloading some other stuff for about half the time.
You were downloading Deuce Bigelow in 1080p, or in 640x480 from iTMS?

Sounds more like 640x480. So by extrapolation 1080p which has 6.75 as many pixels would be somewhere like 2.5-6 times as long to download. i.e. it could take up to 7 hours to download.

B

[simX]

Maybe when they get more than 75 movies. Amazon unbox started with like 2000 movies!

... and yet there is a conspicuous lack of a self-congratulatory press release from Amazon about their sales numbers. I suspect that despite Unbox starting with 2000 movies, they've sold less than 125,000 movies.

[Clive At Five]

As stated by others already, this bodes very well for Apple signing other studios onto the plan. I would not be surprised one bit if we see it by the end of the month, even.

-Clive

[dsnort]

Make it 125,001. My wife has been dying to get "Stick It".

[notjustjay]

Now they just need to work on a little region of the world called... oh... everywhere outside the United States.

I do happen to have an account on the US iTunes store, and I availed myself last night of the free download of "Lost". While it wasn't a movie, it was still almost a gig (1.5 hours of video I suppose) and probably similar in size and quality to a movie.

On my DSL connection, it took about 7 hours. I let it go overnight.

Not quite the 30 minutes that Steve promised. :P

I am, however, starting to see why they allowed a sneak preview of iTV. Look how many of us are saying "I can't wait for iTV!" now that we've had some time to experiment with iTunes movie downloads!

[Ted13]

What I'm really curious about is if there was a huge bump in TV show sales volume with the 4 times increase in resolution.

I know I bought a show I wouldn't have otherwise and plan on buying a couple more.

[Unspeaked]

NI am, however, starting to see why they allowed a sneak preview of iTV. Look how many of us are saying "I can't wait for iTV!" now that we've had some time to experiment with iTunes movie downloads!


Yes, we're all looking forward to a product to come out in 3 or 4 months that will actually make the product they released last week bearable!

Brilliant!!

[luminosity]

it's not just new tv downloads, but also old tv show downloads that were bumped up.

[blueflame]

this model apple is using is fine, but 2 things need to happen, 1, much the same as netflix, they should send you a blank dvd with case for each order, and secondly, like the music, all cover art should be given as well. it should be burnable, I would pay 9.99 for movie with the convinience of download, for this proce, even with the less quality if I could burn my own dvd, put it in any dvd player and watch it. but I want all the artwork as well, so i can FEEL my dvd library growing,
andreas

[Passante]

I bought a movie (Good Will Hunting) to try out the whole shabang and see the quality for myself. The 1.5Gb download took 6+ hours on my crappy adelphia cable modem (it feels slower every day, what am I paying 50 bucks a month for again?). I was satisfied with the image quality on my 20" Dell widescreen, but sitting at my desk to watch a movie instead of my couch isn't the movie experience I'm going for. Sadly, I probably won't be buying another iTunes movie.

Not that anyone cares.

Imagine how long the download would be if the movie was high def instead of 640 x 480.

[evilgEEk]

This is excellent news! Hopefully the other studios will stop being greedy little buggers and get on board with the iTS.

I haven't bought a movie yet, mainly because there just isn't anything that I'm interested in the current selection that I don't already have on DVD. The other reason is that I'm more concerned with audio quality than video quality and I currently have no way of getting digital audio to my receiver, and I have no interest in watching a new movie in stereo.

Those of you that have bought movies, do they have artifacts? If yes, is it bad? I'm more interested in those that have played the movie over their SD TV rather than on your computer monitor.

I can't wait for the iTV! :D

[spicyapple]

this moel apple is using is fine, but 2 things need to happen, 1, much teh same as netflix, they should send you a blank dvd with case for each order, and secondly, like the music, all cover art should be given as well. it should be burnable, I would pay 9.99 for movie with the convinience of download, for this proce, even with the less quality if I could burn my own dvd, put it in any dvd player and watch it. but I want all teh artwork as well, so i can FEEL my dvd library growing,
andreas
Why not just buy the DVD and save yourself the bandwidth and burn time?

Oh ok... :) you might need sarcasm tags.

[shadowx]

Probably at the same time as the Merom MBP. :eek:

I bought one, just to test. Wasn't bad, would buy more if they add a title I want.

Hmm... your actions are supporting my thoughts... how many of those 125,000 downloads were simply to try it out - probably a lot of them. I'm more interested to see how many downloads have been sold after the first 90 days.

[FreeState]

Looks like Unbox is getting slammed by CNN


Two thumbs down for Unbox
....

Amazon.com's Unbox is a horror show. The Unbox service appears not so much to have been introduced as to have escaped from the laboratory.

Of all the smart and talented people at Amazon, did no one dare say, "Wait, our new service bites! It's slower than a trip to Blockbuster, more expensive than a DVD, absurdly restrictive on how the consumer uses the movie, delivers lower resolution than a DVD, and requires running a cable from the PC to the TV if you want to watch the movie on something larger than a PC monitor"?

http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/18/technology/lewis_unbox.fortune/?postversion=2006091909

[balamw]

Imagine how long the download would be if the movie was high def instead of 640 x 480.
Probably not quite as long as you might think. Less than 3x longer for 720p or 1080i, <6x longer for 1080p.

B

[evilgEEk]

... but I want all teh artwork as well, so i can FEEL my dvd library growing,
andreas
I'm with you to an extent. I love the look of my DVD collection sitting there in the living room, it's nice to have the case with artwork and have it tangible. But at the same time, I have nothing against having all my movies browseable with iTV. If it's set up like the movie trailers are in Front Row, I'll be one happy camper. If it's just the title of the movie then that would be lame, but I'm sure they'll have "cover art" as well.

[archurban]

it's good to hear. somebody compare with TV shows download for first week. but I think it's not the same as movies because TV is always near you to watch anytime. but movie. you should go to buy it at shop or online store like amazon, or rental. however watching movies on HBO or other channels is not the same. so TV shows increase more than movie. 125,000 download is fairly good. of course it will be grown up very fast.

I purchased two movies so far. hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy, Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. they are more than my expectation. near DVD quality. yeah, it is. it's hardly found the difference between ITS movie and DVD. they are just like TV shows which have no commercial. I like it. Special feature? hmm. I don't need. well, someone wants. but it't not a big deal.

I hope that I will see more studios distribution on ITS from next week. then see how many movies will be added before next year.

[aristobrat]

... and yet there is a conspicuous lack of a self-congratulatory press release from Amazon about their sales numbers. I suspect that despite Unbox starting with 2000 movies, they've sold less than 125,000 movies.
If that's true, I wonder if it's because folks didn't want to have to learn new software to make Amazon's solution work, vs. "just clicking" in iTunes?

[howard]

jeez, thats about 10x what i would have expected.

a lot of people I have talked to thought that it was "crazy" to expect people to wait 30+mins to download a movie.

couldn't apple develop something into itunes that lets you watch while it is downloading? is this possible?

[dante@sisna.com]

wow! impressive.

I guess people value convenience over quality. That's great for Apple. That confirms it will be a success.
For me I rather buy DVDs or wait for hi definition downloads, but I guess many people out there are satisfy with lower quality.
Can't wait for ITV tough.

Neither -- My download on my 4MB cable connection (real speed) took about 50 minutes AND the quality was outstanding on my 30" cinema display -- looked the same as DVD to me. No defects, no artifacts. Crisp Color.

I will order again. Way nicer than storing DVD's.

[dante@sisna.com]

couldn't apple develop something into itunes that lets you watch while it is downloading? is this possible?

You can watch while downloading.

I was able to begin about 5 minutes into download -- barely enough time to get the snacks.

[prady16]

This report might be a little misleading.
I am sure that Movie studios planning to invest millions in offering their movies throught iTMS would wait for more than just 1 week to make their decision. It is not a small business move like just some extra cash. It is far bigger than that!

Also, user satisfaction is important in judging the actual success of the store itself since it would rely quite a lot on repeat buyers and regular customers. And so far, the customer satisfaction does not seem to be highly inspiring.

[FreeState]

couldn't apple develop something into itunes that lets you watch while it is downloading? is this possible?

It already works that way:

http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/movies.html


Shop the iTunes Store for hot new releases such as Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, and download them for $12.99 the week they’re released on DVD. Or buy Disney library titles for $9.99 to $14.99. All your favorites are here: The Princess Diaries, The Incredibles, Cinderella, Toy Story, The Rock, The Rookie, and more. Search for movies just as you would for music, and watch a free trailer before you download. Or, if you can’t wait for the next blockbuster to hit shelves, feel free to pre-order upcoming releases. iTunes will let you know the minute they’re ready to download. Can’t wait to start the show? You can even watch your movie as it downloads.

[howard]

You can watch while downloading.

I was able to begin about 5 minutes into download -- barely enough time to get the snacks.

really? thats sweet! I'll have to tell my friends about that.

I havn't downloaded a movie yet, I'm still kinda in limbo about which direction to go... download, or wait for hd... or what?

we need a poll now for how many videos you have bought.

[KilGil27]

This is fairly remarkable, considering that the really only viable place to watch these movies is on an iPod! Yes, you can watch it on your iMac, or on your television hooked to a Mac Mini.
or... any other computer you wanted to...

[caity13cait]

Yeah it already lets you watch while downloading and frankly I think that this is a very important feature that is not often discussed. People bash it saying that it takes 1.5 hours to download a movie. Well if the movie is 1.5 hours long than wait 5 minutes and start watching. It is close to instant. I know that on my computer it only took 70 minutes to download which means I can start watching it right away. With Verizon rolling out their Fios internet with speeds of up to 30mbs even 1080p will soon be no problem. I am not sure just how big a 1080p movie is but I am hoping that within a year it will be do able for more people.

[soosy]

Hmm mixed feelings about this.

I want them to be successful, but I also want:
- DVD extras
- HD resolution
- burnable to disc
- rental system

I hope success won't lull them into thinking the current restrictions are ok. :(

Oh well, I can stick with DVDs.

[balamw]

or... any other computer you wanted to...
Or on any TV that has composite/S-video inputs with the cable or dock and aforementioned iPod....

B

[mattthemutt]

Hmm. Lets see $1M in a week, 52 weeks in a year, yup - that's about $50M. Wow - that dude is a genius!

My thoughts exactly.

[balamw]

My thoughts exactly.
FWIW $50M/year is ~0.2% of Disney's revenue (they made ~$30B/year for the past few years). Definitely not chicken feed, but not earth shattering either.

B

[dongmin]

125,000 is pretty darn good considering they only have 75 movies available. I would've contributed to the total if they had a half-a-decent selection.

What I don't understand is how Amazon was able to get all those studios on board, but not Apple. Prices are pretty similar. And the use terms are pretty similar. It seems as if studios just don't want to play ball with Apple. Hopefully the positive numbers will change things.

[cadillaccactus]

I was satisfied with the image quality on my 20" Dell widescreen, but sitting at my desk to watch a movie instead of my couch isn't the movie experience I'm going for.

This is precisely why other companies' attempts to "bring the PC into the living room" have failed (and will continue to do so). Think of the logistics of this (if you will) from an interior design perspective. Are you going to put your media center PC on a TV stand in your living room across from the couch to watch movies/TV? Are you also going to have a desk chair sitting right in front of it for those times you'd like more PC than TV? People (families) do not use computers in their living room and they do not watch movies/TV sitting at a desk.

This is why iTV is brilliant. Living rooms are for content, not computing. Content is the only aspect of your computer that is necessary in the living room, and it is all iTV delivers.

thoughts?

[amac4me]

It's just a matter of time before other movie studios come aboard and offer their movies for download.

[evilgEEk]

What I don't understand is how Amazon was able to get all those studios on board, but not Apple.
Amazon is letting the studios set the pricing, that's why more jumped on board. But if this article (http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/18/technology/lewis_unbox.fortune/?postversion=2006091909) is any indication they won't be there for long. ;)

[bendejo]

What I'm really curious about is if there was a huge bump in TV show sales volume with the 4 times increase in resolution.

I know I bought a show I wouldn't have otherwise and plan on buying a couple more.

The only downside to the bumped up resolution is the increased download time. Last year, I was able to download Battlestar Galactica eps in about 20 minutes... the other night I downloaded a higher res episode and it took nearly an hour... granted, my DSL isn't the best in the land and the quality was noticably better, although the previous resolution was still fine (I have my iMac hooked via DVI to a 46" Samsung DLP HDTV... front row lets me select and play the shows from my couch) but the extra time caused my wife to say "well, lets just download it overnight and watch it tomorrow"... not a huge deal or anything, but a slight step backwards from the convenience angle. It's too bad you can't choose the resolution you want to download at.

[Clive At Five]

I am, however, starting to see why they allowed a sneak preview of iTV. Look how many of us are saying "I can't wait for iTV!" now that we've had some time to experiment with iTunes movie downloads!

I don't quite agree. I think that the preview was mostly to deter comments such as, "Why the hell would you want to pay full price for and download a full length movie that you can only watch on your computer screen or iPod."

Apple is finally using the iTS for your household, not just your iPod/computer.

Welcome to my living room, Apple. Pull up a chair.

-Clive

[Machead III]

It took my Black MB about 70 mins to download "Deuce Bigalow"

Why would you do that? :O

[HecubusPro]

Why not just buy the DVD and save yourself the bandwidth and burn time?

Oh ok... :) you might need sarcasm tags.

Oddly enough I agree with this. I'm one of those people who prefer to have the physical copy in my hand, complete with pretty box art, etc. With this however, I just see it as another means to eventually get HD content on my HDTV. I love watching content in HD, and at this point, I don't care how I get it, just as long as I get it. :)

[Macnoviz]

Yeah it already lets you watch while downloading and frankly I think that this is a very important feature that is not often discussed. People bash it saying that it takes 1.5 hours to download a movie. Well if the movie is 1.5 hours long than wait 5 minutes and start watching. It is close to instant. I know that on my computer it only took 70 minutes to download which means I can start watching it right away. With Verizon rolling out their Fios internet with speeds of up to 30mbs even 1080p will soon be no problem. I am not sure just how big a 1080p movie is but I am hoping that within a year it will be do able for more people.

Don't forget that Apple servers will be the weakest link here. Amazon servers were overcrowded the first days, leading to downloads of 8+ hours (and you can only rent them for 24 hours (or buy them, of course))
They will have to build/purchase a data center or two

[Macnoviz]

Looks like Unbox is getting slammed by CNN

Those things really make me feel warm inside, I can't wait until Zune is trashed for the same reasons (doesn't work as promised, DRM, and who knows, overpricing?)

[rockthecasbah]

Personally, I'm not interested in buying movies for myself; I don't really like watching on the computer or iPod screen so i may as well buy the disk version of the movie and be happier on a larger screen :) . To those that are using it and enjoy, that's great. I just feel like there are many more people like me that will prefer to have physical movie versus a "digital" counterpart. Songs just seem more petty and i feel more comfortable downloading them, but movies... meh.

[caity13cait]

Did anyone else notice what the guy who wrote that article said.
"My home DSL connection clocks in consistently at around 4.9 gigabits per second - fast by American residential standards - and it still took me five hours to download a movie from Unbox."

[evilgEEk]

This is precisely why other companies' attempts to "bring the PC into the living room" have failed (and will continue to do so). Think of the logistics of this (if you will) from an interior design perspective. Are you going to put your media center PC on a TV stand in your living room across from the couch to watch movies/TV? Are you also going to have a desk chair sitting right in front of it for those times you'd like more PC than TV? People (families) do not use computers in their living room and they do not watch movies/TV sitting at a desk.

This is why iTV is brilliant. Living rooms are for content, not computing. Content is the only aspect of your computer that is necessary in the living room, and it is all iTV delivers.

thoughts?
For the average user, I completely agree. Even if you have something like a Mac mini, something that can still look nice next to your home theatre components, you still need an HDTV to be able to use it as a computer. Before Apple jacked the price up $100 on the mini when they switched to Intel, I was going to buy one strictly for the use of Front Row. That would be a rather expensive media streaming box. ;) The iTV is perfect for me, and I think it will be for a lot of other folks as well.

[iGary]

I downloaded Enemy of the State for the heck of it. Sound and video quality were very good, and the $9.99 price is right, too, especially since I do not have to have a DVD box taking up shelf space. Looking forward to the set-top box, whatever it ends up being called.

[MacBoobsPro]

I think we all knew it was gonna work (for Apple). Its just enticing the studios thats the hard part. As good as this news is its not likely to appear outside the US for a LONG time... heck we still dont get TV shows! :rolleyes:

[mkrishnan]

This text from that Unbox review was ace:

You can watch the movie at home or at the office, but the license agreement prohibits you from watching it in "hotel rooms, motel rooms, hospital patient rooms, restaurants, bars, prisons, barracks, drilling rigs" and certain other locations.

:D

Although I do have to say that, based on his areas of concern, at least some of them are also going to apply to Apple. Particularly considering that, while the iTV will probably be really sweet, it doesn't actually exist yet, unlike the XBox / Media Center system.

Actually all of this video hype building up is tempting me to rip all my DVDs into .h264 using Instant Handbrake and to start keeping things I like from my DVR in that format on my iMac in iTunes using iSquint....

[evilgEEk]

I just feel like there are many more people like me that will prefer to have physical movie versus a "digital" counterpart. Songs just seem more petty and i feel more comfortable downloading them, but movies... meh.
I remember a lot of people saying that about music when iTMS first came out. ;)

As good as this news is its not likely to appear outside the US for a LONG time... heck we still dont get TV shows!
Honestly I think movies will come to other countries before TV Shows do. Movies are more universal than TV Shows are, each country has their own TV Shows but everyone wants to watch Lord of the Rings.

[Passante]

Probably not quite as long as you might think. Less than 3x longer for 720p or 1080i, <6x longer for 1080p.

B

but his download time was 6 hours... so 3X would be, well... a long time.

[bokdol]

i wonder how will unbox is doing in comparason. anyone know how will it did first week?

[caity13cait]

Didn't Steve say in his keynote how long it would be until Europe got movies? I could have sworn it was October.

[kresh]

Looks like Unbox is getting slammed by CNN

After reading the whole article, I get the feeling that Apple will be slammed in this Thursday's follow-up article about iTS.

edit: Dang it I can't spell.

[MacBoobsPro]

Didn't Steve say in his keynote how long it would be until Europe got movies? I could have sworn it was October.

I think he just said "we hope to take this international in 2007" meaning tough **** you will have to wait most probably end of 2007. :rolleyes:

[gugy]

Neither -- My download on my 4MB cable connection (real speed) took about 50 minutes AND the quality was outstanding on my 30" cinema display -- looked the same as DVD to me. No defects, no artifacts. Crisp Color.

I will order again. Way nicer than storing DVD's.

Good to know.
I am still skeptical. I rather by a DVD and use handbrake to have it on my itunes. But I think is great to know that the movie store is there if you want it soon without the hassle of ripping from DVDs into itunes.

[ryantheredder]

FWIW, the average size per minute of Apple's 720p trailers are 50MB. So a 120 minute movie would be around 6GB to download or about 2 hours on an 8Mb connection. Almost watchable in real time providing perfect network conditions.

[blackstarliner]

Afte reading the whole article, I get the feeling that Apple will be slammed in this Thursday's follow-up article about iTS.

Maybe, but he seems to mention that it was nicer somehow in one paragraph.

Plus, this review finds shortcomings in both systems:

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/technology/15548570.htm

[ickies]

jeez, thats about 10x what i would have expected.

a lot of people I have talked to thought that it was "crazy" to expect people to wait 30+mins to download a movie.

couldn't apple develop something into itunes that lets you watch while it is downloading? is this possible?

I'm also really surprised by these numbers but that's a really good idea you mentioned!

If it takes a few minutes to buffer before the movie starts, why not have the option of watching lower-res movie trailers while you wait? If the studios are willing to pay for the advertising, it could even subsidize the purchase a little bit and maybe Apple could knock a buck off the price.

[mechamac]

I bought The Ladykillers and got the movie in 40 minutes. I watched it on my iMac (last Intel-model, 17") and the quality was really great. Might be slightly softer than DVD quality, but color, detail, everything is really sharp. Not at all like the TV shows. Chapter skipping is great....no complaints, really. I doubt I'll be buying many movies, but I'll certainly buy again when the selection improves.

My Netflix account stays, though.

[CrackedButter]

Hmm mixed feelings about this.

I want them to be successful, but I also want:
- DVD extras
- HD resolution
- burnable to disc
- rental system

I hope success won't lull them into thinking the current restrictions are ok. :(

Oh well, I can stick with DVDs.

You want HD quality downloads but you can "stick" with DVD's? Do you understand how much information there is for a HD movie? Try one of the new disc formats, but you want to be able to download it? Crazy!

I agree on the rental system however, I wouldn't mind renting but it would have to be cheaper of course.

[Casshan]

I'm not touching it until they offer 5.1 sound. I'm sure its just a matter of time, though.

[aristobrat]

The only downside to the bumped up resolution is the increased download time. Last year, I was able to download Battlestar Galactica eps in about 20 minutes... the other night I downloaded a higher res episode and it took nearly an hour... granted, my DSL isn't the best in the land and the quality was noticably better, although the previous resolution was still fine (I have my iMac hooked via DVI to a 46" Samsung DLP HDTV... front row lets me select and play the shows from my couch) but the extra time caused my wife to say "well, lets just download it overnight and watch it tomorrow"... not a huge deal or anything, but a slight step backwards from the convenience angle. It's too bad you can't choose the resolution you want to download at.
Maybe they could make iTunes let you start playing your TV show download before it's finished, like they let you do with movies?

[aristobrat]

I'm not touching it until they offer 5.1 sound. I'm sure its just a matter of time, though.
I thought they had 5.1 sound already in the movie downloads?

[Diatribe]

I'm not touching it until they offer 5.1 sound. I'm sure its just a matter of time, though.

I thought they did?:confused:

[p0intblank]

WOW! :eek: This is excellent news for Apple! First they did it with TV shows and now movies... I'm proud to be an Apple fan. :D

[milo]

Considering that the iTS is like the 5th biggest music vendor, they sure suck at selling movies. 125k is nothing compared to real movie vendors.

Maybe when they get more than 75 movies. Amazon unbox started with like 2000 movies!

Are you serious? This is their first WEEK of doing it, what do you expect? And how many movies did Amazon sell in their first week? I'd bet it was less than Apple. Good selection won't overcome crappy implemenation.

I guess people value convenience over quality. That's great for Apple. That confirms it will be a success.
For me I rather buy DVDs or wait for hi definition downloads, but I guess many people out there are satisfy with lower quality.

From what I've heard, the quality is pretty close to DVD. Have you compared the two? What is your complaint about quality?

On my DSL connection, it took about 7 hours. I let it go overnight.
Not quite the 30 minutes that Steve promised.

He quoted that number on a 5M connection...is that what you have?

Maybe they could make iTunes let you start playing your TV show download before it's finished, like they let you do with movies?

I'd bet they already do, since the download engine in iTunes is redone. Can anyone confirm?

[Rocketman]

I'll post.

The primary objection of studios to iTS (iTunes Store) is not rental vs. ownership. It is pissing off its physical channel "partners".

Steve Jobs has a history of pissing off physical channel partners. When the online Apple Store was vastly enlarged and promoted, the value added dealers lost premium CPU and software sales to Apple itself, since they have a price fixing contract. Consumers were no worse off ordering direct with free shipping than going down to a dealer if they did not need advise for the product purchase. In addition many asked questions of local dealers then purchased online thereafter.

This was further an issue when Apple added their own dealer network (stores) which were to a large degree competing with the long-standing dedicated dealer network as well as the mass merchandising dealers, who have been really hit and miss over the years. That has resulted in low mindshare as compared to Apple and indy dealers who people at least KNOW have the stuff if they are inclined toward those channels.

Studios rely on physical store dealers for "impulse sales" which has a different character than online. If you are in the online store software or website, it tries to cross-sell you. But retail impulse sales are targeting people who are not shopping for music at all. They just walk by and see it while shopping for something else. The most powerful example of this is Wal-Mart. They sell CD's as a loss leader to generate store traffic of a key range of demographics. So much so, it is Wal-Mart who is pressuring studios to shun iTS, and to a large degree it is actually working.

Not for long.

Rocketman

[thadgarrison]

I think this is a result of people testing out the service. You can't possibly quantify how successful this will be until it's been around long enough for the "newness" to wear off and for real-world usage to begin.

125,000 downloads really isn't that big of a number. Especially considering the mass media coverage of the announcement and the vast number of people using iTunes.

The jury is still way out.

[Diatribe]

Besides, I'd be completely happy with 720p as that's basically the most that affordable displays can show these days anyway. Give me that and I'd only buy my movies on the iTS.

[thadgarrison]

So much so, it is Wal-Mart who is pressuring studios to shun iTS, and to a large degree it is actually working.

Not for long.



Sadly,
Wal-Mart is God in the retail sector. They have far more power over the success of CDs and DVDs than Apple could dream of. I doubt that is going to change anytime soon, especially not as a result of Apple movie sales.

[mazola]

... a final annual download number of 125,550.

[thadgarrison]

You want HD quality downloads but you can "stick" with DVD's? Do you understand how much information there is for a HD movie? Try one of the new disc formats, but you want to be able to download it? Crazy!

It's actually very possible to download HD content if Apple adopts a shared-bandwidth system like BitTorrent. It was rumored that they might do so. I download HD TV shows all the time - and it's fast and they're gorgeous.

[Casshan]

I thought they had 5.1 sound already in the movie downloads?

They are Dolby Surround, not Dolby Digital. Dolby Surround is just matrixed stereo audio.

[Diatribe]

Sadly,
Wal-Mart is God in the retail sector. They have far more power over the success of CDs and DVDs than Apple could dream of. I doubt that is going to change anytime soon, especially not as a result of Apple movie sales.

I think the basic three limiting factors for that are the following:

- no device to connect to the TV to easily reproduce those movies
- not enough standard storage space for HD resolution
- not high enough standard bandwidth for HD resolution

Well at least the first Apple has in it's own hands in January. The other two will take at least 2-3 years more at which time Apple will have missed the head start over physical HD mediums.

[spicyapple]

They are Dolby Surround, not Dolby Digital. Dolby Surround is just matrixed stereo audio.
Aren't you contradicting yourself? iTS movies are in 5.1, so they are in fact Dolby Digital (encoded in the AC3 or MP4 format).

[gugy]

From what I've heard, the quality is pretty close to DVD. Have you compared the two? What is your complaint about quality?


First of all I am not complaining. So don't jump to conclusions.
I am stating the obvious. DVD frame size is better than 640x480 frame size.
I acknowledge that the itunes movies are probably good. I just saying that I rather have the DVD frame size and quality. Plus I can have a physical DVD for back up with bonus, extras etc. It's just a preference.

[brepublican]

This is a great start for Apple and should help sway studios that are still on the fence. Doesnt mean I'm biting though, only thing that'll get me to seriously think of buying a movie would be nothing less than a 720 x 480 reso. I might get impulsive if there are more offerings. Maybe.

I think Apple should seriously consider offering rentals too. Its dumb not to try it out :)

[evilgEEk]

I'm not touching it until they offer 5.1 sound. I'm sure its just a matter of time, though.
Sometimes it helps to do a quick search. ;)

They do have surround sound support. (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=304277#faq26)

[kresh]

I think Apple should seriously consider offering rentals too. Its dumb not to try it out :)

If it destroys their whole business model, then it is not dumb to not "try it out".

Apple is clearly not interested in the subscription or rental business models.

edit: Clarity

[babyj]

Honestly I think movies will come to other countries before TV Shows do. Movies are more universal than TV Shows are, each country has their own TV Shows but everyone wants to watch Lord of the Rings.

I'd of thought movies will come to the rest of the world pretty quickly. There shouldn't be any licensing issues so its probably more due to logistics than anything else.

TV is totally different as most of the main programmes are already licensed to other broadcasters for other markets. Which would make selling episodes online outside of the home market tricky, it'll happen one day but it will take time.

I doubt I'll be buying any movies or tv shows when they come to the UK, I've never bought a single tune before now from iTunes. I run about 6-12 months behind everyone else and buy cds and dvds when they've been reduced, it works out a lot cheaper.

[CrackedButter]

You do know that all this talk of Wal-Mart only applies to the US? They mean nothing out in the rest of the world, which is where Apple is taking this service.

Wal-Mart of big, but they are not that big.

Apple can still make a lot of money with Disney for the moment, they have the hearts of minds of children everywhere and parents are inclined sometimes to do things for their children, including downloading movies.

Then there is art house movies and independent movie companies which probably never see the light of day in a Wal-Mart store. There is to much going on that could be stopped by Wal-Mart.

Sucks to be them but they are not exactly the nicest company around.

[HiRez]

Here's the things I need to see before I even get into this whole dowloading movies thing:

1. A lot more than 75 movies, 1,000 would be a good start.

2. Current quality is probably ok for video-based tv shows such as The Amazing Race or Curb Your Enthusiasm. But, I want at least 720p quality for film-based shows tv shows and movies. Didn't Apple declare last year "The Year of HD"?

3. Faster internet connection into my house to handle all this bandwidth. DSL just doesn't cut it. For video to truly be "on-demand", you can't have to wait overnight for it. It may be slightly more inconvenient, but I can go get a DVD at the store and be back with coffee/beer in under 15 minutes.

4. Ability to start streaming a partial download over iTV, and have the computer know (or give a good estimate) when you can start playing it so it finishes without interruption (as QuickTime streaming movies can).

5. Some sort of buffering in the iTV box so your movie doesn't start stuttering while someone is checking their email on the computer.

6. Multichannel digital surround sound. This should be considered a must for watching movies now, shame on you, Apple. QuickTime already supports it too, and it doesn't take a lot of extra bandwidth compared to the video anyway.

7. EyeTV integration...although this gets a little weird because I'd want my computer in another room, yet the EyeTV would have to be near the tv to accept the input, so it'd have to be connected directly to the iTV box. Is the USB connection going to be adequate to handle that HD bandwidth?

[Qunchuy]

Studios rely on physical store dealers for "impulse sales" which has a different character than online. If you are in the online store software or website, it tries to cross-sell you. But retail impulse sales are targeting people who are not shopping for music at all. They just walk by and see it while shopping for something else. The most powerful example of this is Wal-Mart. They sell CD's as a loss leader to generate store traffic of a key range of demographics.
I don't understand your point. Why would Wal-mart try to sell you a CD as an impulse buy if they lose money on them? I don't think that's what you meant to say.

The iTunes Store is about convenience, which is only slightly removed from impulse. If it takes you less time to click on the "buy" button than it does for you to convince yourself that you really don't need it, it's a sale. :)

[Casshan]

Sometimes it helps to do a quick search. ;)

They do have surround sound support. (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=304277#faq26)

Yes, they have surround sound, but not Dolby Digital. Quicktime can't even decode 5.1 audio (you need a third party plugin (http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/27300) for that.)

[bommai]

Sometimes it helps to do a quick search. ;)

They do have surround sound support. (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=304277#faq26)

It clearly states Dolby Surround and Dolby Pro Logic Systems. This is from the VHS days. DVDs support Dolby Digital 5.1 and DTS. This is plain nuts. Not only are you getting slightly inferior picture, the sound is ancient. Dolby Surround is nowhere as good as Dolby Digital. Here is a simple explanation.

Dolby Surround uses two tracks of audio to encode 4 tracks. The two additional tracks are for the center channel and a single rear channel. The single rear channel is not full spectrum (20Hz - 20kHz), but rather something very narrow.

For comparison, if you have a good surround sound system (I am not talking about the $200 Home Theatre in a box system, but a system that cost at least $1000), play a DVD that has both Dolby Surround and Dolby Digital. Play with the Dolby Surround track first and then play with the Dolby Digital track next. Huge difference. I am disappointed. Surely, there is a way they could embed discrete surround with AAC.

The specs for Dolby Digital is as follows: 5 tracks of discrete digital sound full spectrum 20Hz-20kHz. One channel for LFE (low frequency extension) - topping out at about 120Hz. That is why you have 5.1.

Dolby Digital is lossy compression though but still you have 5.1 channels. DTS is another lossy compression format but has a higher bit rate and sounds better than Dolby Digital. DTS typically have about 760kbps while Dolby Digital is about 448kbps.

HD-DVD and Bluray Disk support Dolby TrueHD that supports 8 channels of lossless sound upto 18Mbps. Cool. Well, we are way off from there.

[spicyapple]

Ah, yes Casshan you are right. :) More reasons to stick with hard-copy DVDs.

[brepublican]

If it destroys their whole business model, then it is not dumb to not "try it out".

Apple is clearly not interested in the subscription or rental business models.

edit: Clarity
How does it destroy 'their whole business model'? I just think there has to be differentiation between movies and songs. Wheras I have no interest whatsoever (and never will) in renting songs (read: subscription model), I do have an interest in renting movies. I can listen to the same song 10 times over in one day. Can I do the same with a movie? Yes. Will I? No.

I can count the number of movies I've watched more than twice on both my hands. So can a lot of people out there. If you're really interested in being a collector and keeping the movie, downloading it off iTMS is a dumb idea.

So is it dumb for Apple to ignore a market of people such as myself? Yes. Does it destroy their business model to offer movie rentals (NOT TV shows or music)? You explain that to me :confused:

[Fukui]

First of all I am not complaining. So don't jump to conclusions.
I am stating the obvious. DVD frame size is better than 640x480 frame size.
I acknowledge that the itunes movies are probably good. I just saying that I rather have the DVD frame size and quality. Plus I can have a physical DVD for back up with bonus, extras etc. It's just a preference.
Frame size is bigger but its also interlaced, so in truth its 720x240 every other frame, once its deinterlaced, the picture can get close to the original, but not as good as pure progressive scan. I think, i might take 640x480p over 720x480i, depends on how widescreen is handled (letterboxing vs true widescreen).

[MacVault]

This is great news, however, I still have a hard time talking myself into paying $10 to $15 for a DRM-"infected" movie file.

1) I cannot sell it or give it away as a gift.
2) I can't share it with a friend.
3) Video quality is not that great.
4) It has no special bonus features as does a DVD.
5) etc.


I think there needs to be a big price drop AND/OR some type of subscription model for this movie download stuff. Why pay that much $$ for something I'll watch only once or twice???!!!

[milo]

So is it dumb for Apple to ignore a market of people such as myself? Yes.

I think the big problem with rentals is that Netflix has it wrapped up right now. You can get a ton of movies for a monthly fee, and I don't see any way an online service can compete with that, at least not without losing money on it.

If you know your best effort won't compare well to Netflix, does it really make sense to try and do it anyway? Or is it smarter just to stay out of such a cutthroat marketplace?

[kresh]

It clearly states Dolby Surround and Dolby Pro Logic Systems. This is from the VHS days. DVDs support Dolby Digital 5.1 and DTS. This is plain nuts. Not only are you getting slightly inferior picture, the sound is ancient. Dolby Surround is nowhere as good as Dolby Digital. Here is a simple explanation.

Dolby Surround uses two tracks of audio to encode 4 tracks. The two additional tracks are for the center channel and a single rear channel. The single rear channel is not full spectrum (20Hz - 20kHz), but rather something very narrow.

For comparison, if you have a good surround sound system (I am not talking about the $200 Home Theatre in a box system, but a system that cost at least $1000), play a DVD that has both Dolby Surround and Dolby Digital. Play with the Dolby Surround track first and then play with the Dolby Digital track next. Huge difference. I am disappointed. Surely, there is a way they could embed discrete surround with AAC.

The specs for Dolby Digital is as follows: 5 tracks of discrete digital sound full spectrum 20Hz-20kHz. One channel for LFE (low frequency extension) - topping out at about 120Hz. That is why you have 5.1.

Dolby Digital is lossy compression though but still you have 5.1 channels. DTS is another lossy compression format but has a higher bit rate and sounds better than Dolby Digital. DTS typically have about 760kbps while Dolby Digital is about 448kbps.

HD-DVD and Bluray Disk support Dolby TrueHD that supports 8 channels of lossless sound upto 18Mbps. Cool. Well, we are way off from there.

I don't think Apple is aiming for the uber-geek with $25k worth of home entertainment equipment. IMHO, they will never be able to compete in that market.

I think they are reaching for the average joe blow that has a servicable $400 TV that he bought at Wal-mart, and maybe, just maybe, has a stereo hooked up to it. The average Joe doesn't care, and can't tell, that it's Dolby Surround and not Dolby Digital.

[milo]

I cannot sell it or give it away as a gift.

You give used DVD's as gifts? :confused: Your friends must love you.

[Casshan]

I don't think Apple is aiming for the uber-geek with $25k worth of home entertainment equipment. IMHO, they will never be able to compete in that market.

I think they are reaching for the average joe blow that has a servicable $400 TV that he bought at Wal-mart, and maybe, just maybe, has a stereo hooked up to it. The average Joe doesn't care, and can't tell, that it's Dolby surround and not Dolby Digital.

I have a ten year old surround system worth about $50 and I can tell the difference between Dolby Surround and Dolby Digital. I think his example was way overkill.

[karthi]

I thought TV shows in iTunes won't be a hit, why would any one need to pay $1.99 for the stuff, that is already available in cable, sat, Tivo, DVD's, Block buster, feely on the air in SDTV/HDTV, etc.. and all viewable on big screen TV.:confused:

I never bought any TV shows on iTunes, as I use DVR. I see myself buying online movie downloads, mainly for convenience and the fact that it is available on the same day as DVD.:) . Even though blockbuster is less than 5 min away, it will be at least 45 min trip. Of course I will still be renting/buying DVD's.

One more thing many forget about iTV ( Apple soon come with a real name), is that , it is not just for movies, I would happily pay third of its price just to have music and photos on my receiver and TV with the front row screen/remote.

[gugy]

Frame size is bigger but its also interlaced, so in truth its 720x240 every other frame, once its deinterlaced, the picture can get close to the original, but not as good as pure progressive scan. I think, i might take 640x480p over 720x480i, depends on how widescreen is handled (letterboxing vs true widescreen).

You might be right, I am not going to discuss specifics. but the truth of the matter is that the quality of a DVD is better than the 640x480. Even Apple stats that on their site.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/movies.html
That's what I was trying to convey.
Cheers

[Sean7512]

I bought National Treasure and was actually thrilled with the quality. I have the Apple Dock with the Apple Remote, and with National Treasure on my 20" tv in my room, you COULD NOT POSSIBLY tell the diff between a DVD and the download. In fact, I had my friend bring over his copy of National Treasure on DVD, and had them both playing as we flipped back and forth on the tv and you could not tell a difference on my tv.....

Well, it is a SDTV, I have not yet played my download on our HDTV...But DVDs look fine on it, so I'm assuming this will as well.....I am very happy and will definately buy again, just need more titles....

[Fukui]

You might be right, I am not going to discuss specifics. but the truth of the matter is that the quality of a DVD is better than the 640x480. Even Apple stats that on their site.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/movies.html
That's what I was trying to convey.
Cheers
Yea, I understand. I too would neverthless have liked 720x480p....

[bommai]

I don't think Apple is aiming for the uber-geek with $25k worth of home entertainment equipment. IMHO, they will never be able to compete in that market.

I think they are reaching for the average joe blow that has a servicable $400 TV that he bought at Wal-mart, and maybe, just maybe, has a stereo hooked up to it. The average Joe doesn't care, and can't tell, that it's Dolby Surround and not Dolby Digital.

I disagree. The average Joe is not the customer for iTV. Average Joe might buy a $40 DVD player from Walmart to hook up to a $200 TV. Remember, the iTV is meant for a HDTV. In fact you cannot even easily hook it up to a non-HDTV. It has only HDMI and component video outputs. These outputs are found only on HDTVs. Granted the price of HDTV is coming down pretty fast. You can buy a CRT based HDTV for under $500 now. However, I still standby my assertion that iTV will be bought by people that have computers with a large enough hard drive and a home network. This is a little bit more complicated than just owning an iPod and buying tunes off of iTS. For iPod, you need one computer connected to internet and an iPod. For iTV, you need a computer with a large HD, a home network, a TV with HDMI or component video input and an iTV.

Dolby Digital / 5.1 discrete tracks need to be worked out soon!!

[HiRez]

I don't think Apple is aiming for the uber-geek with $25k worth of home entertainment equipment. IMHO, they will never be able to compete in that market.

I think they are reaching for the average joe blow that has a servicable $400 TV that he bought at Wal-mart, and maybe, just maybe, has a stereo hooked up to it. The average Joe doesn't care, and can't tell, that it's Dolby Surround and not Dolby Digital.I disagree. Dolby Digital is no longer reserved for rich über-geeks. Many "regular Joes" have a Dolby Digital setup now, and you can get a Dolby Digital receiver (all 5 normal channels powered) for under $100.

[spicyapple]

Frame size is bigger but its also interlaced, so in truth its 720x240 every other frame, once its deinterlaced, the picture can get close to the original, but not as good as pure progressive scan.
Erm... that is wrong. All major Hollywood DVDs are encoded as progressive full frames at 23.976fps. The interlacing you are seeing is the result of adding pulldown frames to pad it out to 29.97 interlaced for NTSC. And since they are encoded anamorphically, it uses the full 720x480 and depending on your output display, either gets letterboxed or stretched wide on a real 16:9 HDTV.

Are iTS movies letterboxed? If so, then the quality of iTS movies is closer to 640x360.

[MacVault]

As I stated in a few posts up I'm not that happy with the pricing of the iTunes Movies, but, if I were to buy any I would quickly run into a huge problem - STORAGE! I have an iBook with 60 GB drive and it's almost full from other stuff.

Apple should come out with a home storage network server with RAID, etc.

[Fukui]

Erm... that is wrong. All major Hollywood DVDs are encoded as progressive full frames at 23.976fps. The interlacing you are seeing is the result of adding pulldown frames to pad it out to 29.97 interlaced for NTSC. And since they are encoded anamorphically, it uses the full 720x480 and depending on your output display, either gets letterboxed or stretched wide on a real 16:9 HDTV.

Are iTS movies letterboxed? If so, then the quality of iTS movies is closer to 640x360.
Yea, I see. I wouldn't be surprised if they were letterboxed... I would rather wait till a tv show comes out "widescreen" and see for myself for 1.99 then 9.99 and be dissapointed...

Hopefully, over time, the quality will get better. It seems to me, apple is matching video quality of the downloads exactly to what the iPod can handle... so maybe it all depends on the iPod getting a better screen and processor...

[mkrishnan]

I disagree. Dolby Digital is no longer reserved for rich über-geeks. Many "regular Joes" have a Dolby Digital setup now, and you can get a Dolby Digital receiver (all 5 normal channels powered) for under $100.

I think you have to draw a distinction between uber-geeks, also, and people who know what they like but who are not necessarily technophiles. The latter market has always been a core market to Apple. What I mean by that is that I don't think that the cost of the collateral equipment would stop Apple -- say only offering support for nicer TVs -- but I do think complexity could potentially stop them.

Even in this thread, it's clear that the switch from the relatively contained hardware world of Apple Macs and iPods to the TV world is going to be very complicated and confusing to a lot of people. While we're at our Macs, we have the luxury of "It Just Works." With all the different audio and video standards and so on in the TV world, it's not so simple at all.

[nemaslov]

I too would love the collection/library to increase, but for me, the cost of a DVD is virtually the same. It is not like music where you can buy one track off an album.I have a fairly high end system with a 50" HD Plasma, and just got the 80GB iPod which for me is only for music. I love to take a whole collection on the road with me. 20,000 songs!!!.

I also have a pretty good size DVD collection and the quality and lack of limitations for me to play that DVD ....ANYWHERE is worth a few more bucks. The music I already play at home from my iMac and backup hard drives and even though not the same quality as a CD. it is great for background music or parties.

I also live in a fairly big City (San Francisco) with one of the best record stores in the World: Amobea Music, where I can trade or sell the CDs or DVDs that I don't want. They have the most extensive collection of new and used DVDs of anywhere I know.

So say I buy a turkey or simply tired of a film, I can sell it for maybe 3 or 4 bucks or better yet TRADE it for store credit of about 4-6 bucks. That ends up being cheaper than I would pay via any online source abut then I would end up getting a new film for a net cost of under ten bucks. Sometimes even less. If I tire of a download...there is no way I can trade up..

[HecubusPro]

This is a great start for Apple and should help sway studios that are still on the fence. Doesnt mean I'm biting though, only thing that'll get me to seriously think of buying a movie would be nothing less than a 720 x 480 reso. I might get impulsive if there are more offerings. Maybe.

I think Apple should seriously consider offering rentals too. Its dumb not to try it out :)

While I think rentals would probably create a lot of headache for apple, I am in complete agreement with HD movies on iTMS. I have yet to even buy a single song from the itunes store, but you can be assured that as soon as HD movies and TV shows are available, coupled with the iTV device, I will be buying those right away. Offering at least 720p would make me very happy, and I would be a definite repeat customer.

[karthi]

It seems to me, apple is matching video quality of the downloads exactly to what the iPod can handle...

This seems logical now, so can we expect better movies after ture video iPods.

[HiRez]

Are iTS movies letterboxed? If so, then the quality of iTS movies is closer to 640x360.As I understand, yes, this is the case. They maintain the width at 640 and crop vertically for the aspect.

[iMikeT]

I think that this is a good thing. Hopefully, it will convince other studios to join the iTS for distribution. And on top of that, Apple can sell high(er) definition movies.

[HecubusPro]

The average Joe is not the customer for iTV. Average Joe might buy a $40 DVD player from Walmart to hook up to a $200 TV. Remember, the iTV is meant for a HDTV. In fact you cannot even easily hook it up to a non-HDTV. It has only HDMI and component video outputs. These outputs are found only on HDTVs.

Actually, my old sony 27" CRT was a standard def TV and it had component inputs, and that was 5 years ago. Coupled with my sony progressive scan DVD player with component outputs, and was able to watch proper anamorphic video on my standard def TV. At that time that was the main selling point for me getting that TV. Searching around just now, I found quite a few standard def TV's that have component inputs.

Of course, I have an HDTV now, but for what it was, that 27" was a great tv with component inputs.

[notjustjay]

He quoted that number on a 5M connection...is that what you have?


Pfff, who knows. The quality of our local DSL service has gone to crap lately. I would have thought in theory I should be getting 3M, but in reality, it's been pretty slow lately. It doesn't help that the DSL company I'm with now is one that I was dumped with because the one I had originally subscribed to went out of business. I would switch, but I'm not hearing very good things from neighbors with other companies...

But my point is that Steve talked about 30-minute downloads as if to say that this is what your average user can expect. Sure, some of you can do that. But those of us with crappy DSL/cable (or even.. gasp! dialup!) are not in a place yet where large movie downloads are convenient.

[CrackedButter]

As I stated in a few posts up I'm not that happy with the pricing of the iTunes Movies, but, if I were to buy any I would quickly run into a huge problem - STORAGE! I have an iBook with 60 GB drive and it's almost full from other stuff.

Apple should come out with a home storage network server with RAID, etc.

Err, buy an external HD or upgrade your iBook HD!

I have a 1Ghz iBook with a 80GB HD (upgraded it myself) and 2 160GB firewire HD's so what was your point?

[MacVault]

Err, buy an external HD or upgrade your iBook HD!

I have a 1Ghz iBook with a 80GB HD (upgraded it myself) and 2 160GB firewire HD's so what was your point?

My point is...

1) The Movies take up huge amounts of storage space.
2) I hate having to always plug external drives into my iBook.
3) We need redundancy for storing these movies we buy. An "external HD" just won't cut it.
4) If I want to take my iBook on the road with me, then how are the other people in my house going to access the Movies and other media via iTV if it's stored on my iBook or some "external HD" which requires a host computer to be of any use.

[erikistired]

nevermind, it's been explained already.

[Bibulous]

Don't forget that Apple servers will be the weakest link here. Amazon servers were overcrowded the first days, leading to downloads of 8+ hours (and you can only rent them for 24 hours (or buy them, of course))
They will have to build/purchase a data center or two

They did last February - http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2006/02/27/story5.html
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/02/20060227183355.shtml

Wonder if they are using it for iTunes?

[erikistired]

I don't think Apple is aiming for the uber-geek with $25k worth of home entertainment equipment. IMHO, they will never be able to compete in that market.

I think they are reaching for the average joe blow that has a servicable $400 TV that he bought at Wal-mart, and maybe, just maybe, has a stereo hooked up to it. The average Joe doesn't care, and can't tell, that it's Dolby Surround and not Dolby Digital.

you don't need 25k of equipment to notice the difference between dolby surround and dolby digital. contrary to what was posted before, you CAN hear the difference on a $200 htib system. even my half deaf dad has noticed the difference, especially if the soundtrack uses a lot of directional audio. the first time i had my family to my house (at the time my home audio system wasn't that great, but still good) to watch a movie with 5.1 surround they were jumping all over at bullets whizzing over their shoulder from behind. it was neat to watch people who would be considered "joe sixpack" enjoying good A/V. it's amazing how many people underestimate what the average joe has or cares about these days when it comes to home entertainment.

[DeSnousa]

My point is...

1) The Movies take up huge amounts of storage space.
2) I hate having to always plug external drives into my iBook.
3) We need redundancy for storing these movies we buy. An "external HD" just won't cut it.
4) If I want to take my iBook on the road with me, then how are the other people in my house going to access the Movies and other media via iTV if it's stored on my iBook or some "external HD" which requires a host computer to be of any use.

I think the major problem with external hardrives, is that iTunes will organises all your content into the Music folder. I just bought a 300GB drive and would love to place all my movies in their, but at the same time I want my music on my Mac (not the external). Apple really needs to address the storage features in iTunes, as movies are large files.

[jwhitnah]

Studios are scrambling and re-evaluating there offers right now to get on board.

I would like to see the break down. Who is buying, how many are the buying each, what are they buying? Seems to good to be true. I am skeptical. May just be a one shot thing, due to curiosity or hype. Let's see how the do their 2nd week.

[erikistired]

As I stated in a few posts up I'm not that happy with the pricing of the iTunes Movies, but, if I were to buy any I would quickly run into a huge problem - STORAGE! I have an iBook with 60 GB drive and it's almost full from other stuff.

Apple should come out with a home storage network server with RAID, etc.

that's my hold back right now. i just don't have space for movies on my powerbook, and putting them on external media wouldn't make sense, at that point i could just toss a dvd or two in my backpack.

[Porchland]

Looking at some financials, I think Disney sells on the order of 100M DVD units per quarter, which comes out to about 7-10M units per week? 125k units through the online channel in one week isn't so bad. :) If they hit their $50M revenue target, that means they will see sales on the order of 1% of total home video sales? That's a fair start.

And undoubtedly a better margin. I have not seen any concrete numbers, but I had read an article months ago speculating that a studio's margin on digitally distributed movies would be about twice the margin it receives on DVDs.

Plus, for catalog sales, the is almost NO marginal cost; the films just sit on a server until someone buys them.

[Eraserhead]

FWIW $50M/year is ~0.2% of Disney's revenue (they made ~$30B/year for the past few years). Definitely not chicken feed, but not earth shattering either.

B

That's revenue not profit, their profit was $5 billion in 2005 so $50M is about 1% of that, remember that the money from iTunes is practically all profit as their are no real costs for Disney (other than giving Apple a few video files which probably costs $100 000 a year maximum.)

[milo]

But my point is that Steve talked about 30-minute downloads as if to say that this is what your average user can expect.

Absolutely not. He said 30 minutes on a fast connection, pointing out SPECIFICALLY what speed connection is needed for that. If you interpreted it as "average users" will get that speed, you just weren't listening.

If I want to take my iBook on the road with me, then how are the other people in my house going to access the Movies and other media via iTV if it's stored on my iBook or some "external HD" which requires a host computer to be of any use.

How do they check their email when you take the notebook on the road?

I think the major problem with external hardrives, is that iTunes will organises all your content into the Music folder. I just bought a 300GB drive and would love to place all my movies in their, but at the same time I want my music on my Mac (not the external). Apple really needs to address the storage features in iTunes, as movies are large files.

iTunes places content into that folder when you download or rip. But you can put content anywhere, just drag it into iTunes from the new location. I'd like to see them support multiple folders in the future, but you can certainly use content without having it in the folder already.

[balamw]

That's revenue not profit, their profit was $5 billion in 2005 so $50M is about 1% of that, remember that the money from iTunes is practically all profit as their are no real costs for Disney (other than giving Apple a few video files which probably costs $100 000 a year maximum.)
Yes, but from the original Article.

In addition, Iger said the company expects over $50 million in revenue over the first year of the program.

You're right that they probably make better margins on this revenue, but it ain't pure profit.

B

[CrackedButter]

My point is...

1) The Movies take up huge amounts of storage space.
2) I hate having to always plug external drives into my iBook.
3) We need redundancy for storing these movies we buy. An "external HD" just won't cut it.
4) If I want to take my iBook on the road with me, then how are the other people in my house going to access the Movies and other media via iTV if it's stored on my iBook or some "external HD" which requires a host computer to be of any use.

1) Thanks for reminding me, i forgot that fact.
2) But you'll happily have a RAID array and plug THAT into your iBook?
3) Yeah you said, a RAID array... a sort of external HD, but in an array.
4) If you take your iBook on the road with you, then how are the other people in your house going to access the movies and other media via iTV if its stored on your "RAID array" which requires a host computer to be of any use?

You have high expectations for Apple then? Its going to be some RAID array!

[bommai]

1) Thanks for reminding me, i forgot that fact.
2) But you'll happily have a RAID array and plug THAT into your iBook?
3) Yeah you said, a RAID array... a sort of external HD, but in an array.
4) If you take your iBook on the road with you, then how are the other people in your house going to access the movies and other media via iTV if its stored on your "RAID array" which requires a host computer to be of any use?

You have high expectations for Apple then? Its going to be some RAID array!

Rather than a RAID, what they need is a foolproof NAS (Network-attached storage). A NAS is basically a special purpose computer that has a network port (wired/wireless) as well as internal/external storage through USB/SATA/eSATA. For example D-Link makes a NAS that is compatible with uPnP as well as Bonjour. This box has space for an internal hard drive (ATA) as well as USB2 for external HDs. It has 802.11g wireless as well as ethernet port. You just connect is as another network device in your home and then you can dump your media into it from your PC/Mac. So, for people with laptops, you can buy your media or RIP them into the NAS and then iTV can use it. This can work well for people with laptops. iTV should be able to work off of a NAS rather than a PC/Mac.

The current versions of NAS may not be foolproof (Apple quality standards) and therefore this is a companion product that Apple could produce for home media storage. Another advantage of the NAS is that it can be near where iTV is rather than the computer since the bandwidth requirements for iTV are more important than for the computer. You don't want glitches while playing back media. So, you could live with downloading the media from online into NAS directly (through a slower wireless connection). Then have the NAS connected through wired ethernet to iTV.

Hope this makes sense!!

[KennyMN]

Is everyone forgetting about the "special" dock kit Apple sells with "yellow" and S-video as well as audio out jacks on it, and a nice little remote AND another charger and sync cable? With the old 320x240 shows, it was barely watchable, lots of artifacts and about like fair quality VCR tape. With the new 640 x 480, the output is VERY watchable, not quite as good as DVD but better than my DirecTV digital signal. And, this little bundle of usefulness costs $99 and is available NOW. I have used one since about Christmas of last year, and it works pretty well. You DON'T have to wait for the iTV or confine your viewing to the computer screen or an ipod.

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/2.RSLID?mco=E868E117&nplm=MA242LL%2FA

[MacVault]

...How do they check their email when you take the notebook on the road?

iTunes places content into that folder when you download or rip. But you can put content anywhere, just drag it into iTunes from the new location. I'd like to see them support multiple folders in the future, but you can certainly use content without having it in the folder already.

They don't care about email. They just want to watch the movies I buy from iTunes, etc.

As for where iTunes puts it's content... the original poster had a good point - how to have the content synched between the external/networked storage device and the local machine, for example an laptop, so when one is on the road they can have access to the content on their storage server at home, although limited by the laptops available hard drive space, etc.

[CrackedButter]

Rather than a RAID, what they need is a foolproof NAS (Network-attached storage). A NAS is basically a special purpose computer that has a network port (wired/wireless) as well as internal/external storage through USB/SATA/eSATA. For example D-Link makes a NAS that is compatible with uPnP as well as Bonjour. This box has space for an internal hard drive (ATA) as well as USB2 for external HDs. It has 802.11g wireless as well as ethernet port. You just connect is as another network device in your home and then you can dump your media into it from your PC/Mac. So, for people with laptops, you can buy your media or RIP them into the NAS and then iTV can use it. This can work well for people with laptops. iTV should be able to work off of a NAS rather than a PC/Mac.

The current versions of NAS may not be foolproof (Apple quality standards) and therefore this is a companion product that Apple could produce for home media storage. Another advantage of the NAS is that it can be near where iTV is rather than the computer since the bandwidth requirements for iTV are more important than for the computer. You don't want glitches while playing back media. So, you could live with downloading the media from online into NAS directly (through a slower wireless connection). Then have the NAS connected through wired ethernet to iTV.

Hope this makes sense!!

Makes sense to me but you should be informing the other guy. :)

[Ugg]

You do know that all this talk of Wal-Mart only applies to the US? They mean nothing out in the rest of the world, which is where Apple is taking this service.

Wal-Mart of big, but they are not that big.

Apple can still make a lot of money with Disney for the moment, they have the hearts of minds of children everywhere and parents are inclined sometimes to do things for their children, including downloading movies.

Then there is art house movies and independent movie companies which probably never see the light of day in a Wal-Mart store. There is to much going on that could be stopped by Wal-Mart.

Sucks to be them but they are not exactly the nicest company around.

Have you heard of ASDA in the UK? They're also big in Canada and huge in Mexico. walmart's impact on global shopping habits is much greater than what happens in the USA. Its vendors, in this case the movie studios will be influenced by its largest customer, no matter what country they want to sell in. Also, if you'll remember, the mishmash of laws regulating music sales in the UK, Canada, Australia, Japan and the EU meant that it took forever for Apple to work out a deal.

Since I could mostly care less about American movies and prefer to rent as opposed to buying, I doubt the iTMoS will get much business from me now. But just as Apple encouraged the independent labels to sell via iTMS, I'm sure the independent studios will also be selling there too. They will be the true benefactors of online sales. Netflix is very picky about what movies it stocks due to the bricks and mortar expense associated with their business. For Apple to stock a movie costs them virtually nothing. I can't wait until I can get access to movies from around the world instead of just insipid Hollywood crap.

[dsnort]

I can't wait until I can get access to movies from around the world instead of just insipid Hollywood crap.

And a hearty Amen and hell yeah for that!

[Ugg]

I think the big problem with rentals is that Netflix has it wrapped up right now. You can get a ton of movies for a monthly fee, and I don't see any way an online service can compete with that, at least not without losing money on it.

If you know your best effort won't compare well to Netflix, does it really make sense to try and do it anyway? Or is it smarter just to stay out of such a cutthroat marketplace?


Netflix is great, but it's not ideal. They offer too few foreign movies. The wait times for new releases can be phenomenal and some movies that they should be stocking, they aren't.

The only real future for online movies is by renting them. I'd pay up to $3 per rental but have no desire to keep a movie. If I want to watch it again, I'll rent it again.

[Ugg]

I thought TV shows in iTunes won't be a hit, why would any one need to pay $1.99 for the stuff, that is already available in cable, sat, Tivo, DVD's, Block buster, feely on the air in SDTV/HDTV, etc.. and all viewable on big screen TV.:confused:


I don't have cable and have no desire to get it. But for the roughly $50 a month that cable costs, I can buy 20 televsion shows on the iTMS, to me that's a good deal. Why spend money every month for something I'd rarely if ever use?

[kasei]

This is great news. I guess the more we buy the faster we will see other studios with better movies. I guess I will take the plung and buy a movie today.

[BornAgainMac]

I was disappointed that only Disney signed up so I bought a ton of movies in the last week. Hopefully that got the attention of the other studios and sign up too. I really like the idea of downloading musics and I think HD movies will be a killer next year. Hopefully hard drives will continue to go down in price.

Most of the movies I purchased I didn't plan to purchase in DVD format. I looked at the trailer and liked it so I bought it. It is the convenience that sold me. This is revenue the studio would never receive before now.

[JGowan]

this moel apple is using is fine, but 2 things need to happen, 1, much teh same as netflix, they should send you a blank dvd with case for each order, and secondly, like the music, all cover art should be given as well. it should be burnable, I would pay 9.99 for movie with the convinience of download, for this proce, even with the less quality if I could burn my own dvd, put it in any dvd player and watch it. but I want all teh artwork as well, so i can FEEL my dvd library growing,
andreasIt's a simple equation, really,...

Netflix account + $5.99 Used DVDs = comes with Plastic Box, Free Shipping and Original Artwork!

[dongmin]

I think this is a result of people testing out the service. You can't possibly quantify how successful this will be until it's been around long enough for the "newness" to wear off and for real-world usage to begin.

125,000 downloads really isn't that big of a number. Especially considering the mass media coverage of the announcement and the vast number of people using iTunes.

The jury is still way out.Ah, but you forget that Apple, so far, only has one of the three pieces in places. The software is there but the hardware and content (sorry 75 does not a 'store' make) is still in development. Once the "true video iPod" and iTV becomes available, I'm betting that you'll see a spike in movie sales.

[JGowan]

FWIW $50M/year is ~0.2% of Disney's revenue (they made ~$30B/year for the past few years). Definitely not chicken feed, but not earth shattering either.BConsidering that they sold "010101010's", I think an extra $50M is extraordinary. Apple ripped 75 DVDs, made a few web pages and boom... $1M in 7 days! I don't know what you're talking about... you're thinking small... $50M/YR is JUST THE BEGINNING.

[minnesotamacman]

I bought a movie (Good Will Hunting) to try out the whole shabang and see the quality for myself. The 1.5Gb download took 6+ hours on my crappy adelphia cable modem (it feels slower every day, what am I paying 50 bucks a month for again?). I was satisfied with the image quality on my 20" Dell widescreen, but sitting at my desk to watch a movie instead of my couch isn't the movie experience I'm going for. Sadly, I probably won't be buying another iTunes movie.

Not that anyone cares.

Your right, we might not care... But, get an iPod, then hook the iPod to the
TV using the dock with S-Video connection. Looks awesome, and most cannot
tell the difference between it and a DVD.

[lord patton]

As for where iTunes puts it's content... the original poster had a good point - how to have the content synched between the external/networked storage device and the local machine, for example a laptop

Oh God yes this is what I want.

I've read where iTunes 7 supports multiple libraries, but it's not the solution we're waiting for.

I want to rip a CD onto my powerbook and have iTunes sync it with a master library on a partition of my external drive next time I hook it up. Right now, I'd have to remember to copy the new files onto the external... no good—I want it to be automatic and just work (Apple has spoiled me).

[twoff]

For iTV, you need a computer with a large HD, a home network, a TV with HDMI or component video input and an iTV.

Not so fast!!!!!

Are you sure you will need all of that?

Home network? Perhaps, but iTV may connect directly to your cable/DSL modem.
TV with HDMI/Component inputs? Probably.
A computer with a large HD? Assuming the intent is to stream purchased movies from your computer, sure.

But what if that isn't the real purpose? Imagine an iTV directly connected to the internet, offering access via your TV to:

Internet radio
Internet television
Audio/Video Podcasts
Internet games
Pay per view

... and if you do happen to have that home network, access to your own media content.

No 'productivity' applications, pure entertainment. No worries about backups. No worries about anti-virus.

An entertainment appliance.

Better yet, an entertainment appliance that plays well in a world where more and more people, not just the professionals, are providing content.

The internet today is full of wonderful, bizarre, informative, dull, sick, funny, sad and entertaining things, that require some effort to find. It's a constant battle to stay on top of the latest sites, find the coolest links, etc.

What if iTV is really about taking the work out of that?

Not about making it easier to bring Hollywood into your home, but the world?

[Anonymous Freak]

I wonder if these people are buying one to "test it out" or are buying multiple movies.

Well, I bought one "to test it out" (as I've done with each iT[nee M]S intro.)

But I also bought a couple TV shows that I had wanted before, but didn't want at 320x240. The 640x480 version of the Babylon 5 Pilot looks just as good as my DVD copy. (And it's nice, because it's the as-originally-aired version, not the TNT give-plot-away-early edit.) The CG looks a little worse, but that's because it was worse. (They re-did some of the CG for the TNT version.)

[Anonymous Freak]

Oh God yes this is what I want.

I've read where iTunes 7 supports multiple libraries, but it's not the solution we're waiting for.

I want to rip a CD onto my powerbook and have iTunes sync it with a master library on a partition of my external drive next time I hook it up. Right now, I'd have to remember to copy the new files onto the external... no good—I want it to be automatic and just work (Apple has spoiled me).

It's called 'rsync', and it's one of the BSD utilities built into OS X.

If you either have a really small library, or money to burn (on .Mac and the storage upgrade; but even then, only up to 4 GB,) you could use .Mac as your library storage, and just have Automatic iDisk sync turned on.

edit: I know I saw something about how to trick your computer into thinking another computer on your network is the .Mac server, which would let you use all of the current .Mac functions hosted locally; this would work great for an 'iDisk-hosted' library. As long as you don't ever connect to a different internet connection, and it tries to sync with the real iDisk.

[HiRez]

Considering that they sold "010101010's", I think an extra $50M is extraordinary. Apple ripped 75 DVDs, made a few web pages and boom... $1M in 7 days! I don't know what you're talking about... you're thinking small... $50M/YR is JUST THE BEGINNING.I agree, consider that the Disney's cut of the $50 million is almost pure profit for them (very little overhead). They don't even have to pay bandwidth and infrastructure costs out of that, Apple does. More available movies and more people using the service can only mean bigger numbers. I've got some major issues with Apple's movie download service, and for now I won't be using it, but nonetheless I think the numbers will be even larger than Disney is projecting.

If somebody tells you "I'm going to start sending you some extra cash every month, you don't need to do anything to get it, just cash the checks", are you going to complain whether the amount is $50 million or $500 million?

[twoodcc]

well i must say that i'm very impressed with the success so far. maybe we'll start seeing more movies

[EricNau]

I downloaded 1 movie (FlightPlan) to test the system out, but I won't be buying anymore until it is at least DVD quality (640 x 272 isn't close enough).

It's bad enough buying a movie without a case, hardcopy, or any bonus features, but to top it off, it isn't even DVD quality... and for that I pay $10?

Why is Apple always cutting corners? They get so close to great things, but not close enough.

[HiRez]

Why is Apple always cutting corners? They get so close to great things, but not close enough.I sadly kind of agree with this sentiment, and I love your avatar icon! :)

[outlier]

... between you, the uber-eager-Apple-poster -- and -- the guy-who-represents-the-other-90%-of-Apple's-revenue.

Yes, while *every* *single* *one* of Apple's bread-and-butter customers aspires to be like you, the truth is, (s)he's not -- instead you'll find her/him getting by on her/his basic broadband + CRT TV + non-Home-Theatre System +local Best Buy and Blockbuster.

Apple relies on the pioneers (that would be you) to take the arrows, but on the 90%+ of follow-on homesteaders to get the land (and generate the revenue).

But, speaking as I am as one of "you," that's the way it should be in any Cult! :)




I too would love the collection/library to increase, but for me, the cost of a DVD is virtually the same. It is not like music where you can buy one track off an album.I have a fairly high end system with a 50" HD Plasma, and just got the 80GB iPod which for me is only for music. I love to take a whole collection on the road with me. 20,000 songs!!!.

I also have a pretty good size DVD collection and the quality and lack of limitations for me to play that DVD ....ANYWHERE is worth a few more bucks. The music I already play at home from my iMac and backup hard drives and even though not the same quality as a CD. it is great for background music or parties.

I also live in a fairly big City (San Francisco) with one of the best record stores in the World: Amobea Music, where I can trade or sell the CDs or DVDs that I don't want. They have the most extensive collection of new and used DVDs of anywhere I know.

So say I buy a turkey or simply tired of a film, I can sell it for maybe 3 or 4 bucks or better yet TRADE it for store credit of about 4-6 bucks. That ends up being cheaper than I would pay via any online source abut then I would end up getting a new film for a net cost of under ten bucks. Sometimes even less. If I tire of a download...there is no way I can trade up..

[stagi]

Is everyone forgetting about the "special" dock kit Apple sells with "yellow" and S-video as well as audio out jacks on it, and a nice little remote AND another charger and sync cable? With the old 320x240 shows, it was barely watchable, lots of artifacts and about like fair quality VCR tape. With the new 640 x 480, the output is VERY watchable, not quite as good as DVD but better than my DirecTV digital signal. And, this little bundle of usefulness costs $99 and is available NOW. I have used one since about Christmas of last year, and it works pretty well. You DON'T have to wait for the iTV or confine your viewing to the computer screen or an ipod.

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/2.RSLID?mco=E868E117&nplm=MA242LL%2FA

Or I have been using my regular dock with a seperate monster cable I bought.
With the new Res. I think it looks awesome. The only bummer is the battery life on my 30GB video ipod.

[Machead III]

And a hearty Amen and hell yeah for that!

Maybe someone shoudl get to work on adding subtitles to Itunes 7 and FrontRow then. Missing that feature was so ****ing dense of Apple.

[sushi]

I would be exstatic to get a 720p movie, and like you, I would certainly have no problem waiting the time it would take to download it. I just want HD downloadable content from iTMS, which is why the iTV has me so excited. I may hold off on getting that HD-DVD player until I learn more about it.
And the download, would be platform independent with regards to BluRay or HD-DVD. Cool.

[macnews]

... and yet there is a conspicuous lack of a self-congratulatory press release from Amazon about their sales numbers. I suspect that despite Unbox starting with 2000 movies, they've sold less than 125,000 movies.

Unibox may not have SOLD that many but how many did they rent? Dollar figure and units.

I keep saying Apple is making a mistake by not offering rentals.

[Lightivity]

Sorry if the question has been answered before, but here goes:

Is any of the film content in iTunes Store in 16x9 encoded? In other words, is it enhanced for widescreen displays (commonly known as anamorphically encoded)?

[Lightivity]

Erm... that is wrong. All major Hollywood DVDs are encoded as progressive full frames at 23.976fps. The interlacing you are seeing is the result of adding pulldown frames to pad it out to 29.97 interlaced for NTSC.

Not correct. Most Hollywood movies are encoded as interlaced and then pressed to dvd, just to be sure that all tv-sets (old and new) are able to display the content. If all film dvd:s were to be encoded as progressive, we wouldn't need all these more or less expensive deinterlacers in digital display systems (progressive in nature) and video sources. And also, we would need interlacers in all analogue displays (interlaced in nature)...not realistic.

Reference:
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/officialfaq.html#3.8 and
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/officialfaq.html#1.40 (esp. second paragraph)

[Willis]

You do know that all this talk of Wal-Mart only applies to the US? They mean nothing out in the rest of the world, which is where Apple is taking this service.

Wal-Mart of big, but they are not that big.

Apple can still make a lot of money with Disney for the moment, they have the hearts of minds of children everywhere and parents are inclined sometimes to do things for their children, including downloading movies.

Then there is art house movies and independent movie companies which probably never see the light of day in a Wal-Mart store. There is to much going on that could be stopped by Wal-Mart.

Sucks to be them but they are not exactly the nicest company around.

Actually. Wal-Mart has a big stand in the UK. It owns ASDA which offers ALOT of crap for cheap prices. However, the cost of Cd's there are about the same as everywhere else even though it was cheaper at ASDA first.

[Macnoviz]

I think he just said "we hope to take this international in 2007" meaning tough **** you will have to wait most probably end of 2007. :rolleyes:

In Belgium they promised us TV shows for 2006, still no word if that will be the case.

It has only HDMI and component video outputs. These outputs are found only on HDTVs.

Not true, al least not here in Belgium, and probably not in the US, too.

All TV sets here have Component or SCART, which is basically your component pushed together in one block. When iTV is released here it will also include component to SCART as a standard accesory.

They did last February - http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2006/02/27/story5.html
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/02/20060227183355.shtml

Wonder if they are using it for iTunes?

I know, otherwise I wouldn't have known anything about data centers in the first place. They probably use it for iTS, since ,Mac hasn't really grown much

[jessica.]

Wow. Good news for Apple and the future of the iTS in getting more studios on board. :)

If Apple can just convince studios to release movies in 720p and 1080p formats, it would kill off the blu-ray / HD DVD rivalry once and for all.
GOOD! I think the HD DVD is out of control already. The future isn't in DVDs in my opinion, it's in digital formats. The iTV is just the first to prove it.

I am glad this movie thing is successful. I like the lower prices on new releases but I wish I could burn one copy to dvd so I can watch it anywhere.

[sushi]

I think the HD DVD is out of control already.
Interesting that you say that.

For those of us who have enjoyed videos over the years, we've had the following formats:

- Beta
- VHS
- Super VHS
- CED
- LD, and it variants
- DVD

and now HD-DVD / Bluray

Maybe the key for the format change is to line the companies pockets!

[liketom]

Interesting that you say that.

For those of us who have enjoyed videos over the years, we've had the following formats:

- Beta
- VHS
- Super VHS
- CED
- LD, and it variants
- DVD

and now HD-DVD / Bluray

Maybe the key for the format change is to line the companies pockets!


i used to love them laser discs :D wow they are still selling on ebay as well :cool:

[johnmcboston]

i used to love them laser discs :D wow they are still selling on ebay as well :cool:

Hey, now that I bought an A/D converter, I could finally get my LDs to DVD and and selling off the LDs. Of allthe garbage on DVD surprising how much on LD still hasn't made it to DVD (and may never...:) )

[spaz]

Well after 8 pages I'm not sure my 2 cents counts for much, but after buying MY "test movie" last night (the brilliant Romy and Michele's High School Reunion), I have a few observations.

Video Quality: Definitely looks a little soft on my widescreen 34" Sony HDTV, but not really bothersome. I'd argue with those who say you can't tell the difference from a DVD, but then again if you just threw the digital file on, I doubt anyone would complain.

Download speed: I must be lucky, because I got the entire movie in 20 minutes flat on my Cable modem. I don't expect that to be the standard, though.

Audio quality: Granted, this was not Revenge of the Sith, but the audio was totally satisfactory. I listened on headphones to get a better sense and the sound was perfectly fine.

My initial reaction was similar to many, in that I couldnt' imagine why people would want a digital file with no physical media, no artwork, and digital rights management, but I've begun to feel this will gain the same appeal as digital audio has. When iTunes started selling music, I was the first to poo-pooh the concept. I am a rabid music collector and couldn't imagine paying for a product without the jewel case, liner notes, etc... now I buy most of my music from iTunes (most, not all) and I don't regret it. I realized i really didn't WANT to cart around cases and discs when I could just have it all digitally, ready to watch, on my device. It's too early to say the same will happen with movies (which, admittedly, are a different animal) but I can definitely see the possibility of lightning striking twice.

[projectle]

Right off the bat, I have two final generation Powerbook G4s (one is mine, one is my son's) so I figured that it would be a good side by side test for the new video formats.

I went to iTunes and grabbed a copy of Grosse Pointe Blank and popped the DVD version in for a side by side test.

I have to say that the quality on the iTunes version was very great. There are portions of the video where the quality definitely look better than the DVD version played back through the Apple DVD Player and portions that without a doubt look significantly worse.

When it comes to Title Sequences (Credits and some text overlays in the begining), the DVD wins hands down as the edges get a very choppy on the iTunes version.

When it comes to your normal scenes where people are talking and not much is going on, the iTunes version seems to have the edge (less pixelized backgrounds, appears to have greater detail around edges of fairly stationary objects, etc.).

When it comes to high action sequences, it really is a toss up between the two as neither really look that great (substantial bluring around moving objects).

For the parts of the show that matter, I would say that h264 (iTunes) scales better on larger high resolution screens than MPEG2 (DVD).

I plan on grabbing some stills and editing them together at the seams to see if there really is a noticable difference or if my eyes are playing tricks on me, but that will have to wait for a couple days.

[bretm]

Well after 8 pages I'm not sure my 2 cents counts for much, but after buying MY "test movie" last night (the brilliant Romy and Michele's High School Reunion), I have a few observations.

Video Quality: Definitely looks a little soft on my widescreen 34" Sony HDTV, but not really bothersome. I'd argue with those who say you can't tell the difference from a DVD, but then again if you just threw the digital file on, I doubt anyone would complain.

Download speed: I must be lucky, because I got the entire movie in 20 minutes flat on my Cable modem. I don't expect that to be the standard, though.

Audio quality: Granted, this was not Revenge of the Sith, but the audio was totally satisfactory. I listened on headphones to get a better sense and the sound was perfectly fine.

My initial reaction was similar to many, in that I couldnt' imagine why people would want a digital file with no physical media, no artwork, and digital rights management, but I've begun to feel this will gain the same appeal as digital audio has. When iTunes started selling music, I was the first to poo-pooh the concept. I am a rabid music collector and couldn't imagine paying for a product without the jewel case, liner notes, etc... now I buy most of my music from iTunes (most, not all) and I don't regret it. I realized i really didn't WANT to cart around cases and discs when I could just have it all digitally, ready to watch, on my device. It's too early to say the same will happen with movies (which, admittedly, are a different animal) but I can definitely see the possibility of lightning striking twice.

I'd have to say most people care almost nothing about a case or liner notes for DVDs since there really isn't anything of substance. Usually a synopsis and a chapter listing. With DVDs the good stuff is actually on the DVD, and hopefully the download is the same, with menus and different audio tracks, etc. If not, there is no point to downloading movies.

But geez, ditch the jewel cases and liner notes and grow up already. Unless you're not grown up, in which case I envy you. Enjoy!

[HecubusPro]

I'd have to say most people care almost nothing about a case or liner notes for DVDs since there really isn't anything of substance. Usually a synopsis and a chapter listing. With DVDs the good stuff is actually on the DVD, and hopefully the download is the same, with menus and different audio tracks, etc. If not, there is no point to downloading movies.

But geez, ditch the jewel cases and liner notes and grow up already. Unless you're not grown up, in which case I envy you. Enjoy!

I don't think being "grown up" has anything to do with it, which is a bit of a patronizing way to put it. For those who do enjoy having the physical disc plus case, instert, etc. in their hands, great. There's absolutely nothing wrong what-so-ever in wanting that. Why would it? It's a matter of personal preference.

I would wager easily that most people do want and enjoy having that tactile experience of holding the case, reading the insert (if it comes with one), and placing the disc in the DVD player. The people who generally don't care about that sort of thing are the few who are ready for a service like this, or people who have been downloading TV shows and movies already, whether legal or otherwise.

I'm looking forward to downloading HD content for my iTV, but I'm going to miss having that case, and I'm an old man--again, being "grown up" has nothing to do with it.

[Sheradon]

Considering that the iTS is like the 5th biggest music vendor, they sure suck at selling movies. 125k is nothing compared to real movie vendors.

Maybe when they get more than 75 movies. Amazon unbox started with like 2000 movies!

I have tried Amazon once and really did not like my experience with all the complex download it forced on my PC and the load of bugs it has....

will stick to ITS for now

[spydr]

I have an idea:

Sell Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest in a High Definition format to test the waters. I think a lot of people would buy it in HD since they already have computers capable of decoding it. Why the need to invest in an expensive HD DVD player?
Already I hear people grumbling that downloading these sub-DVD quality movies taking couple of hours even with high speed cable connections. HD quality would be about 6-8 times larger in file size and could take a day to download. Not sure if we are there yet...in terms of bandwidth.

[balamw]

Already I hear people grumbling that downloading these sub-DVD quality movies taking couple of hours even with high speed cable connections. HD quality would be about 6-8 times larger in file size and could take a day to download. Not sure if we are there yet...in terms of bandwidth.
Where do you get 6-8x 720p has only 3x the resolution and 1080i is just slightly higher than that. Only 1080p is 6-8x the raw resolution, but compression tends to work better if you give it more data to work with so birtates do not scale linearly with the number of pixels, and it can often be closer to a square root, so 720p might only be 2x as long as current movies with 1080p 3-4x.

B

[valiar]

Not sure if anyone will read my post after 8 pages...
But, sheesh!
Why all the excitement at all? I would never ever even considering paying any money for something like that (and I consider myself to be insanely rich).
$10. Or more.
For the privilege of downloading a DRMed-through-the nose file.
Which you don't get to "own" in the same sense as you would own a disk (and you also get nice cover art with the disk!).
For all this money, you don't even get the benefit of being able to redownload the said DRMed file in case your har drive crashes... No sir! Even though iTMS keeps record of everuthing you buy, to download your stuff again, you will need to pay again.
Basically, the content providers try to milk you twice. They want that DRMed download to be treated as a physical object for certain purposes, and a licensed piece of intellectual property for the other purposes.
And everyone's favorite company, Apple, is complicit in this big scam. :mad:
Yes, I do think iTMS is a big scam - and I will not ever spend a cent there.
You can flame my post all you want, but this is the hard truth.
All of those DRMed services suck because they do not provide the extra value for me to even consider to buy into all this locked in crap.
And, yes, I do have a video iPod.
I prefer to fill it up on AllOfMP3.com, or by ripping DVDs.

[spicyapple]

You do realize DVD itself is heavily DRMed, although its CSS is easily cracked. Its Macrovision protection is flawed, and regional coding can be circumvented.

If iTS movie DRM can be cracked, would it make it a better value for you? Why are we even comparing it to DVDs? If you wish to have the convenience of portable digital downloads, then it is a great service.

[valiar]

You do realize DVD itself is heavily DRMed, although its CSS is easily cracked. Its Macrovision protection is flawed, and regional coding can be circumvented.

If iTS movie DRM can be cracked, would it make it a better value for you? Why are we even comparing it to DVDs? If you wish to have the convenience of portable digital downloads, then it is a great service.

I am comparing this iTMS stuff to DVDs because, duh, it costs the same.
And media companies think that I should pay the same money for less stuff in return.

The answer to your second question is YES. iTMS WILL be a better value for me if DRM was cracked, and Apple was not releasing iTunes nerfs to kill the DRM holes.

DVDs are DRMed, but this DRM is hard-coded, cannot be updated, and has already been cracked. Apple, on the other hand, plays cat-and-mouse games with crackers and does update their DRM periodically (of course, to avoid troubles with RIAA/MPAA).

Thus, no matter what they do, I am not buying their stuff. Until the price goes significantly down (read: cheaper than AllOfMP3.com).

[Counter]

...My initial reaction was similar to many, in that I couldnt' imagine why people would want a digital file with no physical media, no artwork, and digital rights management, but I've begun to feel this will gain the same appeal as digital audio has...

Right. All that and the picture isn't as good, the audio isn't as good, there's no cost benefit.

If they were half price I wouldn't by any. Max I would pay is a third of the fee to rent.

However, I will never use the iTunes store for music either. I like hard copies, album artwork, printed cd's, how they look on a shelf. But this is being real clinical about it, hard copies mean so much more than that.

I don't want to have to turn my computer on to see my music collection.

I'm not against the purely digital medium, it will just never be for me. I remember somebody saying on here when some sales statistics got posted 'it seems people are still buying music the traditional way'. LOL Factor Ten. CD's are going nowhere. Vinyl is coming back for christs sake, let alone CD's dying. Few real bands today release a record and don't have it on vinyl.

The current movie offering will only sell on ease of purchase.

I will always want shelves full of cool stuff to flick through. It doubles as one of the, if not thee, coolest features of a room.

[Anonymous Freak]

Sorry if the question has been answered before, but here goes:

Is any of the film content in iTunes Store in 16x9 encoded? In other words, is it enhanced for widescreen displays (commonly known as anamorphically encoded)?

Being 16x9 encoded is not the same thing as being anaporphically encoded.

Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.

Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.

My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)

If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.

[nummy1]

What is the Resolution of these movie files?... and what kind of sound is outputted?... If i spend as much money as I would on a DVD i want the same quality...

[Lightivity]

Being 16x9 encoded is not the same thing as being anaporphically encoded.

Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.

Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.

My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)

If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.

I know exactly what 'anamorphic' means, and it was precisely what I meant when saying "16x9-encoded", with the exception that 'anamorphic' is a totally confusing and natively incorrect term.

Why? Because nothing is ever stretched or squashed in digital video. The anamorphic concept has unfortunately been transfered from the celluloid world where light truly is pressed together on a 35-mm film frame only to be expanded in the theater. Now, maybe I should have added the word "enhanced for widescreen" after "16x9-encoded" but it doesn't matter: All 16x9-videomaterial is encoded so that all 720x480 pixels carry the approximate dimension of 16x9 with the aim of fitting a television that holds a display with 1.78:1 proportions. That is the very definition of 16x9. It is not anamorphical. It is not sqeezed. It is just 16x9 pixels spread across a compatible display.

Ehurtley, what I think you thought I meant, was aspect ratio. But that is something completely else. The aspect ratio is the proportions of the frame the director intended the action to be shown in, and there are several. One is 2.35:1, but the most common is 1.85:1, which most closely resembles the 1.78:1 frame that 16x9-encoded video fits right into. The only ones using the 1:78:1 aspect ratio is tv-productions. Film productions rarely use it (they stick to conventional 2.35:1 and 1.85:1).

Don't confuse the 1.78:1 aspect ratio which -- together with 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 -- is the artistic concept of framing action, with 16x9-encoding which is the technical solution of using a standard pixel resolution in a widescreen setup.

So, my question remains: is there any 16x9-encoded film content on iTunes Store?