PDA

View Full Version : Lionsgate Movies Added To iTunes




MacRumors
Feb 12, 2007, 08:53 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Apple announced in a joint statement with Lionsgate that more than 150 movies from the studio would be added to the iTunes store by the end of the month.

“We’re delighted to offer these incredibly popular Lionsgate films on iTunes, and look forward to adding even more films in the future,” said Steve Beeks, president of Lionsgate. “iTunes lets users download these wonderful films to watch on their computer, TV or iPod, so movie fans can take their favorite Lionsgate films with them anywhere.”

iTunes customers will be able to purchase blockbuster Lionsgate films like “Terminator 2,” “LA Story,” “Basic Instinct,” “The Blair Witch Project” and “Dirty Dancing” and more than 150 titles coming to iTunes this month. Lionsgate joins Paramount (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/01/09/paramount-movies-coming-to-itunes-today/) and Disney, who just recently announced (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/02/02/disney-sold-1-3-million-movies-on-itunes-other-studios-to-follow/) that it had sold over 1.3 million movies since it joined the store.

It appears that the release is limited to a portion of Lionsgate's catalog rather than new releases, similar to the current deal with Paramount.

[ Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Lionsgate_Movies_Added_To_iTunes) ]



Grimace
Feb 12, 2007, 08:55 AM
sweet!! how many of the big studios are left?

JonHimself
Feb 12, 2007, 09:00 AM
It definitely can't hurt right? The more studios, the more money they'll make (hopefully), and in turn the more other studios will jump on-board.

Ha ze
Feb 12, 2007, 09:06 AM
I'd say this is good. Any mention of if its going to just be older films (like paramount is doing) or if it'll be old and new releases (like disney is doing)?
either way this is good.


on a slight side note
Has anyone else noticed that in the movie store, that at the "more in movies" section that the only studio listed is Disney? seems like that should be updated now

calculus
Feb 12, 2007, 09:06 AM
'The iTunes Store'? - I guess you mean the US iTunes store.

Evangelion
Feb 12, 2007, 09:07 AM
sweet!! how many of the big studios are left?

Fox, Universal, Sony/Columbia, Dreamworks, MGM, Warner....

RichP
Feb 12, 2007, 09:09 AM
Fox, Universal, Sony/Columbia, Dreamworks, MGM, Warner....

and Apple would have to grab Columbia out of Sony's dead, cold, hands...

zwida
Feb 12, 2007, 09:11 AM
It definitely can't hurt right? The more studios, the more money they'll make (hopefully), and in turn the more other studios will jump on-board.

Exactly. I think this is a momentum thing. At some point it will just make too much sense to be selling through the iTunes store for a big studio to avoid it. They may hate the level of control that Apple currently has over media distribution, but they're profit minded, and I suspect they will succumb.

scu
Feb 12, 2007, 09:14 AM
Exactly. I think this is a momentum thing. At some point it will just make too much sense to be selling through the iTunes store for a big studio to avoid it. They may hate the level of control that Apple currently has over media distribution, but they're profit minded, and I suspect they will succumb.


It is DeJa Vu of the beginning of iTunes. Intially only a few songs were available. Over time there will be thousands of movies and all the studios will be on board. Give it time.

Sayer
Feb 12, 2007, 09:19 AM
Bill Gates needs to hurry up. A year plus after the 360 launched, and months after the Xbox Live Video Marketplace there are still only a tiny handfull of movies and TV shows available, to rent only, on the system. And you must use the silly Microsoft points system.

To be even more dismal some movies are "hidden" and can only be accessed via advertisements such as CRANK and Jackass II. Adult swim's section in TV is completely empty, despite AS being the exact match to the typical 360 owner demographic.

damien341
Feb 12, 2007, 09:21 AM
good news, this itunes-thing becomes bigger and bigger :D

ClimbingTheLog
Feb 12, 2007, 09:27 AM
and Apple would have to grab Columbia out of Sony's dead, cold, hands...

Nah, not once all the others are online. I think you're right about their resistance - they'll be last. Sony's too big for its own good, but they do allow their business units to avoid suicide.

BornAgainMac
Feb 12, 2007, 09:32 AM
"...download these wonderful films ..."

neverfade
Feb 12, 2007, 09:32 AM
From a marketing standpoint this probably wouldn't work too well, but I think iTunes should be renamed something else.

There's a lot more than just tunes. Music, videos, tv shows, games, movies, podcasts, auidobooks as well as it will bring you to the apple store if you want to buy an iPod.

When apple first came out with iTunes, before the iPod, I don't think they were planning on it growing with more media than music. It was a jukebox then - now it's a lot more..

Oh well, just a thought!:o

andiwm2003
Feb 12, 2007, 09:32 AM
how can it be that all movies are available at walmart online? are apples conditions worse for the studios?

if itunes want's to stay in the video market then they better convince the studios and get all movies online. maybe the studios fear itunes success and down the road monopol but they have to convince them.

because all people who set up their computers/media centers for the walmart store are lost customers for apple/itunes. and no, i don't think that the fact that walmart movies don't play on ipods is going to save itunes. i don't see a lot of people watching $10 movies on a mini screen. $2 tv shows yes but not movies.

Maccus Aurelius
Feb 12, 2007, 09:37 AM
Finally another studio jumping in. I'd love to see Warner Bros., Universal and Columbia come into the mix. Unfortunately, as another has hinted at, only the US store gets this sort of content. The rest of the world is very much in the dark with regards to iTunes' growing video content. My gf in Montreal can't even download her favorite episodes of Lost. Fortunately, the US is not a little place, so will still be a healthy stream of income for iTunes' video store. I'm pretty sure there's plenty of legalities that I haven't thought of with regards to launching a global video store.

I think that the pricing for some of the movies is atrocious. Some of the Disney flicks that have been around for over a decade now are way overpriced. I could go out right now and get a DVD for nearly half of what some of those videos ask for, and at the same time I'm just as willing to pay more than what iTunes charges for some of them for the unrestricted, rippable DVD, which doesn't have the 5 computer per account rule applied when converted into mpeg-4/H.264 format.

If you ask me, an eventual iTunes video rental service would really boost support for the ATV I believe. It would have the same perceived value as renting a physical DVD and at the same time means a far smaller cost than the likes of Blockbuster and local video rental places, not to mention the convenience for anyone with a high speed connection. I'd rent a lot of movies if iTunes had this service, even though I'd still buy the DVD later on (if I think it's worth purchasing).

As for the whole iTunes infrastructure itself, I'm wondering how this all goes considering the growing animosity the European governments have against the closed iPod+iTunes ecosystem. For people that have Macs, such as myself, this isn't a really big deal since no matter what Macs will have few mp3 players supported, but for the majority that uses iTunes on Windows this is a very big deal. I'm wondering what will happen if and when iTunes opens up to other players, or if the DRM-wrapped media will be set free and allowed on non-Apple hardware. As nice as the ATV concept and iPods are, people want more choices, which they feel Apple may be locking out. While I love my iPod, I sort of agree with them. The more and more content is released in the store, the more people will be looking at other hardware wondering when the hell Apple will let them just buy the music and movies and play it elsewhere.

I'm sure few look at the Zune Marketplace with this sort of critical eye because it's US only. If and when it goes Global, then that's sure to make things interesting.

notjustjay
Feb 12, 2007, 09:38 AM
From a marketing standpoint this probably wouldn't work too well, but I think iTunes should be renamed something else.

There's a lot more than just tunes. Music, videos, tv shows, games, movies, podcasts, auidobooks as well as it will bring you to the apple store if you want to buy an iPod.

Yes, especially now that it is about to become the data clearinghouse for the iPhone.

When Steve was demoing the iPhone in his keynote, and he said that the phone would sync with iTunes to pick up all your contacts, addresses, photos (!), etc., I winced. Whatever happened to iSync?

DavidLeblond
Feb 12, 2007, 09:42 AM
and Apple would have to grab Columbia out of Sony's dead, cold, hands...

You're 100% right... just look at Sony Music, totally nonexistent on iTunes.

:rolleyes:

twoodcc
Feb 12, 2007, 09:48 AM
this is great! keep the studios coming ;)

Maccus Aurelius
Feb 12, 2007, 09:51 AM
Yes, especially now that it is about to become the data clearinghouse for the iPhone.

When Steve was demoing the iPhone in his keynote, and he said that the phone would sync with iTunes to pick up all your contacts, addresses, photos (!), etc., I winced. Whatever happened to iSync?

I think that's a bad ideal. I can see the iPhone syncing the contacts through iTunes like the iPod does, but really shouldn't have this as your only choice. Bluetooth syncing is much more convenient since iSync is a very small app that quickly zips contacts over, not loading the much larger iTunes all the time. If the phone has bluetooth it should still have the option of iSync, perhaps he just didn't bother to mention it.

bretm
Feb 12, 2007, 10:06 AM
I think that's a bad ideal. I can see the iPhone syncing the contacts through iTunes like the iPod does, but really shouldn't have this as your only choice. Bluetooth syncing is much more convenient since iSync is a very small app that quickly zips contacts over, not loading the much larger iTunes all the time. If the phone has bluetooth it should still have the option of iSync, perhaps he just didn't bother to mention it.

iSync has pretty much been moved to the sync panel in system prefs. The only thing using iSync is 3rd party devices.

That said, syncing across the board should simply be controlled and done through the sync control panel. But now it happens in 3 or 4 places! iPod/phone in iTunes. .Mac in sync panel. 3rd party devices like my Moto phone in iSync. And Palm devices in the palm hotsync. It's pretty ugly.

uNext
Feb 12, 2007, 10:07 AM
iTunes is no longer a perfect name for the application.

Its no longer just about music.

They need to rename it. I mean they renamed their company to apple inc to go hand in hand with their multimedia movement not only computers.

The new name should either follow the "I" trend/monicker or the following.

The apple store online "T.A.S.O"
Apple online etc.

iTunes just sounds like a music player and we all know is beyond that

Mgkwho
Feb 12, 2007, 10:21 AM
The six major studios:

Buenea Vista (Disney), Paramount Motion Pictures Group, Time Warner, NBC Universal, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Fox Entertainment Group

Oh, that's right. Lionsgate isn't part of the US Big Six. It's in Canada. (Although it is like the biggest movie studio outside of the US).

Sorry folks, nothing to see here...still have four more to go like we did a day ago.

-=|Mgkwho

ijimk
Feb 12, 2007, 10:26 AM
good to see more content being added. now for that pesky DRM to go away... :rolleyes:

Porchland
Feb 12, 2007, 10:27 AM
From a marketing standpoint this probably wouldn't work too well, but I think iTunes should be renamed something else.

There's a lot more than just tunes. Music, videos, tv shows, games, movies, podcasts, auidobooks as well as it will bring you to the apple store if you want to buy an iPod.

When apple first came out with iTunes, before the iPod, I don't think they were planning on it growing with more media than music. It was a jukebox then - now it's a lot more..

Oh well, just a thought!:o

Seems like I read something way back when the first TV shows came onto iTMS/iTS that Apple has said it would eventually transition its content brand to something other than iTunes. The shift from iTunes Music Store to iTunes Store, then, was the first step in a gradual shift.

Apple has so much brand equity in iTunes that I wonder whether they'll ever actually do this. (Then again, iPod mini had great brand equity when Apple went with "nano" instead of just calling the nano a mini.)

The most logical time to change the name would be the launch of a device that is marketed primarily as a portable video player.

SoldOutMatinee
Feb 12, 2007, 10:34 AM
The six major studios:

Buenea Vista (Disney), Paramount Motion Pictures Group, Time Warner, NBC Universal, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Fox Entertainment Group

Oh, that's right. Lionsgate isn't part of the US Big Six. It's in Canada. (Although it is like the biggest movie studio outside of the US).

Sorry folks, nothing to see here...still have four more to go like we did a day ago.

-=|Mgkwho

Damn, ever heard of baby steps?

Porchland
Feb 12, 2007, 10:51 AM
if itunes want's to stay in the video market then they better convince the studios and get all movies online. maybe the studios fear itunes success and down the road monopol but they have to convince them.


My guess is that at least one other studio has inked a deal and will be announced the same day Apple announces the widescreen iPod.

I would not be surprised to see at the announcement:

* the widescreen iPod;

* The Beatles full album catalog, videos, clips, TV specials, "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band" (Universal), "A Hard Day's Night" (Disney or UA, hard to tell), and "Help" (UA)(The UA titles are probably controlled by Universal.);

* Universal Pictures joining the movie store with mostly titles that are 2 to 10 years old like "Gladiator," "American Pie" and "The Bourne Supremacy";

* possibly 20th Century Fox joining the movie store.

Conventional wisdom is that Sony/Columbia will be last and come (if at all) kicking and screaming. But they see the writing on the wall, so maybe they've wised up and come to Apple to work out good terms for promoting upcoming titles. Buzzing the new "Spiderman" or whatever makes more sense for Sony than pretending they have a strategy for competing with the iPod.

freddiecable
Feb 12, 2007, 11:02 AM
hm...what resolution are these film in? isn't it 640x480!? the least I need is 720p otherwice it's of no real use...

and still - there are lots of torrent-trackers around to access the latest/most movies.

Psychic Shopper
Feb 12, 2007, 11:13 AM
[“The Blair Witch Project”

I had to laugh when I saw this listed. I was at Half price books the other day and saw the Blair Witch boxed set, which had both DVD's for $8.00. Which is of course, still too much money for those movies.

p0intblank
Feb 12, 2007, 11:30 AM
Very nice! The more movies, the better. :D

failsafe1
Feb 12, 2007, 11:32 AM
Don't forget the DGMI deal mentioned a few weeks ago. Bring on the Cisco Kid movies!!!

alec
Feb 12, 2007, 11:38 AM
this will be a slow process but it's good to see studios like lionsgate jumping on... we really just have to wait for all the media distribution software companies to evolve (read: one or two prosper while the rest die). there's too much clutter, inconsistency, and insecurity in the online marketplace outside of apple.

Flowbee
Feb 12, 2007, 11:38 AM
When the Lionsgate CFO leaked this deal (http://podophile.com/2006/08/17/itunes-movie-store-by-the-end-of-the-year/) last August (thereby leaking Apple's plans for a movie store), many people thought Steve would ban them from the store forever. Guess that didn't happen.

MagicWok
Feb 12, 2007, 11:53 AM
hm...what resolution are these film in? isn't it 640x480!? the least I need is 720p otherwice it's of no real use...

I share your sentiment. iTunes movies still seem a little pointless to me until they start to sell HD res movies. Especially with :apple: TV on the horizon. I can't image how awfull the iPod sized movies will look streamed via to a HDTV.

Until Apple start to sell HD movies, I won't be purchasing either movies or the :apple: TV, as I just don't see the point of the whole product release. However once they do - I'm heating up my credit card! lol

I am however, loving bigger catalogues, will no doubt push the release of HD movies - 720p at least.

Porchland
Feb 12, 2007, 12:04 PM
Until Apple start to sell HD movies, I won't be purchasing either movies or the :apple: TV, as I just don't see the point of the whole product release. However once they do - I'm heating up my credit card! lol

Is there any significant IT reason Apple couldn't start doing this immediately? Apple loves a good but-wait-there's-MORE feature, so I wouldn't be too surprised to see an announcement of the first HD title at the next major press event. Plus, downloadable HD should basically be the killer app for this thing.

If the current :apple:TV's processor just can't handle the compression -- which I kind of doubt -- the 2G :apple:TV would probably land in time for Christmas and support HD. I really see this as more of a easter egg, though, than a 2G feature.

SoldOutMatinee
Feb 12, 2007, 12:05 PM
I share your sentiment. iTunes movies still seem a little pointless to me until they start to sell HD res movies. Especially with :apple: TV on the horizon. I can't image how awfull the iPod sized movies will look streamed via to a HDTV.

Until Apple start to sell HD movies, I won't be purchasing either movies or the :apple: TV, as I just don't see the point of the whole product release. However once they do - I'm heating up my credit card! lol

I am however, loving bigger catalogues, will no doubt push the release of HD movies - 720p at least.

Didn't Jobs say that the :apple: TV will up-convert videos to near 720p quality if one is using an HDMI cable?

aranhamo
Feb 12, 2007, 12:09 PM
Anybody notice on foxnews.com there's an interview with the guy that runs Apple Records, in which he says that now that they've worked out a deal with Apple, that the entire Beatles catalog will soon be available online? He also specfically mentions that there will be no exclusive deals with any one store. I haven't seen this on any of the Mac sites.

The Walmart store has all kinds of movies online, but only some of them are available for download. There was an article recently on the Register that mentioned that everytime they looked for a major film, it was not available to download, but only to purchase through the mail. Since Walmart is already the biggest movie retailer and already sells through the mail, that was easy to put in their store.

I went to one of our larger local retailers here last week and looked at TVs. Every single one of them were advertised as HD televisions, but not a single one of them was capable of displaying 1080i or 1080p. The closest they got was upsampling to 1080i. The highest native resolution they had was 720p.

guzhogi
Feb 12, 2007, 12:24 PM
I'm sure online films won't entirely kill off DVD sales. I'm sure some people would want the special features on DVDs. Though online sales MAY kill off DVD sales enough to make DVDs not worth making.

guzhogi
Feb 12, 2007, 12:28 PM
Is there any significant IT reason Apple couldn't start doing this immediately? Apple loves a good but-wait-there's-MORE feature, so I wouldn't be too surprised to see an announcement of the first HD title at the next major press event. Plus, downloadable HD should basically be the killer app for this thing.

If the current :apple:TV's processor just can't handle the compression -- which I kind of doubt -- the 2G :apple:TV would probably land in time for Christmas and support HD. I really see this as more of a easter egg, though, than a 2G feature.

I'm sure one reason Apple doesn't sell HD movies is just size. I downloaded a few movies, each being about 2 hours long. Each one was over a gigabyte. Even on a cable/dsl modem, that takes a while to download, not to mention what it's like for dial-up.

MacRy
Feb 12, 2007, 12:52 PM
Well - rah rah. Good for you guys in the US. Still no movie content for us here in the UK :(

Old Smuggler
Feb 12, 2007, 12:53 PM
This is the deal breaker for me

ive never wanted to download any of their movies but now that they have lionsgate on their side i can cancel mydigital cable (since they havent rolled out on demand yet) and just watch the 40+ bluray's i own and have itunes movies (on demand) and save some money

lionsgate is by far my absolute favorite film company
all there films are twisted weird adult mind set titles

they are the ones who make saw, ju-on, total recall, stargate, terminator 2, crank, rambo first blood, american psycho, young guns, resivoir dogs
just to name a few
you are almost guranteed to never get a teen flick from lions gate
which is great

if it says lionsgate on the back its bound to be a classic
but thats purley my opinion and may differ from the views of others

two thumbs up Apple ;)

jettredmont
Feb 12, 2007, 01:05 PM
how can it be that all movies are available at walmart online? are apples conditions worse for the studios?


Yes, although some might disagree.

Walmart has handed the keys to the studio and let the studio dictate all terms (pricing, distribution, and title availability).

On the down side, Walmart is clearly in this as a spoiler, not as a true market competitor, aiming instead to keep their in-store DVD empire vital instead of fostering a whole new market. Thus, you see that prices are essentially equal to the real, tangible DVD prices (not sure if WalMart or the studio gets the extra profit from not having to manufacture and distribute physical media). Thus, you see that many/most titles you search for lead you to a link to order the DVD only, not a download link.

Some (many) might argue that signing with Walmart in this manner is, long term, quite detrimental to the studios. Then again, both the record and motion picture industries have been known to favor short-term profit or even stagnation over investing for long-term success.


if itunes want's to stay in the video market then they better convince the studios and get all movies online. maybe the studios fear itunes success and down the road monopol but they have to convince them.

because all people who set up their computers/media centers for the walmart store are lost customers for apple/itunes. and no, i don't think that the fact that walmart movies don't play on ipods is going to save itunes. i don't see a lot of people watching $10 movies on a mini screen. $2 tv shows yes but not movies.

I don't think the iPod will drive iTumes movie sales either. :apple:TV, quite possibly. People want to watch movies in their home theater setup, period.

Fundamentally, though, I'm not so hot on Apple's current movie offerings either. They still cost too much (even if $9.99 were an across-the-board price) for what you get (down-resolution, compressed video; stereo sound instead of 5.1 or greater; no extras; no dvd insert even) and are too difficult to pipe to the living room (having to spend multiple hundreds of dollars for a new set top box with only this functionality doesn't seem like it will take off). Spicing up the :apple:TV might help in the latter regard, but I think really we'll need another round of industry concessions before downloads really become mainstream. And we have barely even started this first round!

bigpics
Feb 12, 2007, 01:26 PM
iSync has pretty much been moved to the sync panel in system prefs. The only thing using iSync is 3rd party devices.

That said, syncing across the board should simply be controlled and done through the sync control panel. But now it happens in 3 or 4 places! iPod/phone in iTunes. .Mac in sync panel. 3rd party devices like my Moto phone in iSync. And Palm devices in the palm hotsync. It's pretty ugly.

What you and the poster you quoted are kind-of, maybe missing is that the iPhone is designed to be mostly platform agnostic -- i.e., that the majority of owners may be Windows users. As I recall it's already been revealed that (initially at least) only Mac users will be able to sync contacts stored on their computers leaving Outlook users out in the cold.

Were Apple to try to expose the iPhone contacts syncing function to Windows (and Linux) users (assuming accessing Outlook data would not instigate a massive lawsuit from MS), they'll have to add software to non-Mac computers. They could possibly do this in several ways.

1. Add a separate syncing program which would probably be bundled with the iTunes/QuickTime amalgam that already angers some Win users (there is a way to download iTunes without Q.Time, but newbies and luddites are unlikely to figure it out).

2. Add the same functionality WITHIN iTunes as an applet that could be activated (with user approval) when iTunes detects that an iPhone has been docked to the computer. This could be something like what Apple has in mind.

3. Apple might use the same approach to serve its base of Mac corporate users who depend on Entourage (also not supported in any iPhone announcement I've seen).

4. However for some of us, this is all "sound and fury signifying nothing." (Shakespeare)

Mac Users like me with multiple computers who use online systems like gMail and Yahoo to manage our mail and contacts won't have to bother with sync at all. I found having multiple copies of mail -- some on one computer and some on others -- was a logistics nightmare, and after getting my first Mac I soon abandoned BOTH Outlook and Apple Mail and have never looked back, being quite satisfied with my combo of GMail and Yahoo Calendar (which nicely sends multiple text message reminders at user specified times before scheduled appointments).

Finally we dedicated FireFox users -- both cross-platformers like me and Mac only users who love the rich load of add-ons and extensions available on FF can only hope Apple will someday allow us to use our browser of choice on our Apple Mobiles, errr, iPhones...... ....that's what I would call "opening the iTunes/iPod/Apple Mobile ecosystem."

TheBobcat
Feb 12, 2007, 01:28 PM
I can't believe the studios embraced UMD like they did, but are being so timid about iTunes.

Of course then again, they got to sell a product that was more expensive than the comparable DVD's had didn't have bonus features. I guess I can see why they liked it.

Digitalclips
Feb 12, 2007, 02:35 PM
Well - rah rah. Good for you guys in the US. Still no movie content for us here in the UK :(

Move here, I did :D

Some_Big_Spoon
Feb 12, 2007, 03:35 PM
Good for them... Now where's my software?

cbud
Feb 12, 2007, 03:37 PM
hm...what resolution are these film in? isn't it 640x480!? the least I need is 720p otherwice it's of no real use...

But if it is 720p how is it going fit on my iPod? Will I have to download twice? Re-encode? Buy twice?

cbud
Feb 12, 2007, 03:41 PM
I'm sure online films won't entirely kill off DVD sales. I'm sure some people would want the special features on DVDs. Though online sales MAY kill off DVD sales enough to make DVDs not worth making.

Exactly, enter Blu-Ray.

supremedesigner
Feb 12, 2007, 04:08 PM
This sucks. Everything sucks so bad right now. They still hadn't support subtitles or closed caption yet. I am very disappointed in this.

Boo on Apple and iTunes. :mad:

notjustjay
Feb 12, 2007, 04:38 PM
What you and the poster you quoted are kind-of, maybe missing is that the iPhone is designed to be mostly platform agnostic -- i.e., that the majority of owners may be Windows users. As

That was me. Yeah, I understand why Apple did what they did. And it does make sense, from that perspective. When they announced the first iPod with photo features, it felt weird to me that you use iTunes to sync your photos from iPhoto. From a "correctness" point of view, you should either use iPhoto to do that, or use another app totally external to both (e.g. iSync). Of course, that's pretty inconvenient from a usability point of view.

It's the same thing now, just even more so. From a semantics point of view, it seems silly that a program called iTunes is the one that is syncing your calendars, contacts, photos, etc. to your phone. With the iPod you could argue that the majority of what you're doing is transferring music, so using iTunes makes sense. But with the phone, "tunes" is a secondary feature. But since iTunes is on everyone's desktop already, it makes sense for usability.

What would maybe make sense is to borrow the concept of the media browser (like how all iLife and iWork apps can access your photos and movies in similar-looking windows). iTunes would use one to help you sync your stuff to the iPod or iPhone, but you'd also have access to it in iPhoto, iCal, etc.

I would hope that the functionality of iSync is just built into the background services of Leopard. It would just work. :)

zap2
Feb 12, 2007, 04:55 PM
Woot Woot...good new, making iTunes more of a possible one stop shop place for more!

Ugg
Feb 12, 2007, 06:00 PM
I'm sure one reason Apple doesn't sell HD movies is just size. I downloaded a few movies, each being about 2 hours long. Each one was over a gigabyte. Even on a cable/dsl modem, that takes a while to download, not to mention what it's like for dial-up.

The lack of HD is due to the US' lack of high speed broadband rollout. If we were like, Japan, England, Norway, Estonia, South Korea, etc, downloading movies would be a breeze. Due to download speed throttling by the telcos and breaking their contracts, it could be years before HD is a viable download for most Americans.

The Toon Master
Feb 12, 2007, 06:01 PM
I'm Betting MGM next, since it won't hurt them

I'd like to see one of the studios sell a movie for free and learn how that goes.

EagerDragon
Feb 12, 2007, 06:01 PM
I don't buy movies, quality is too low and price is too high. Besides I rather rent.

Ha ze
Feb 12, 2007, 09:43 PM
so i was thinking about what people were saying about iTunes not being music only anymore, and how the iPhone will be using iTunes to sync and i think iTunes should be the new iLife because it's doing your media life and your contacts/email life...



but it'll probably never happen or work

Project
Feb 13, 2007, 07:57 AM
To the people worrying about iTunes, stop. iTunes doesnt manage your content, it just syncs it. Be it a Photo folder/iPhoto, Address Book or whatever. Those are the apps that manage that data. iTunes just puts it all onto the iPod./

Its a better solution than loading up iPhoto, Address Book, iCal, iTunes etc individually to get everything onto the iPod.

bendejo
Feb 13, 2007, 08:01 AM
I share your sentiment. iTunes movies still seem a little pointless to me until they start to sell HD res movies. Especially with :apple: TV on the horizon. I can't image how awfull the iPod sized movies will look streamed via to a HDTV.

Until Apple start to sell HD movies, I won't be purchasing either movies or the :apple: TV, as I just don't see the point of the whole product release. However once they do - I'm heating up my credit card! lol

I am however, loving bigger catalogues, will no doubt push the release of HD movies - 720p at least.

I currently have my iMac Core Duo with the DVI Out hooked to my 46" Samsung DLP HDTV and I have the season pass for Battlestar Galactica. The resolution when it gets sent to the TV is excellent... very crisp and clear. It may not be HD quality, but it is at least as good as DVD quality. So the quality of the picture is not really a big deal in my mind. Especially given the length of time it would take to download 720p movies.

The bigger problem is that the movies (a) can't be rented; (b) don't include extras/commentary tracks; and (c) at $9.99 are no cheaper than what you can find in discount bins at pretty much any Walmart/KMart type store.

Porchland
Feb 13, 2007, 08:26 AM
lionsgate is by far my absolute favorite film company
all there films are twisted weird adult mind set titles

they are the ones who make saw, ju-on, total recall, stargate, terminator 2, crank, rambo first blood, american psycho, young guns, resivoir dogs
just to name a few
you are almost guranteed to never get a teen flick from lions gate
which is great


"Reservoir Dogs" was independently produced and premiered at Sundance, where Miramax picked it up for North American distribution. Lionsgate distributed the DVD, but I don't know whether Miramax or Lionsgate has online distribution rights. (For iTS purposes, it probably doesn't matter, since Miramax and Lionsgate are both in the store.)

daferrisda
Feb 13, 2007, 08:46 AM
All very well but when is the UK going to get movies and TV, getting fedup with hearing about who great it is being able to dowload TV. Come on My Jobs get it sorted !!

daferrisda
Feb 13, 2007, 08:50 AM
Thought first post didn't go through :-)

phytonix
Feb 13, 2007, 12:45 PM
I have bought maybe 100 songs, almost 10 TV shows but not a single movie. Because they are totally overpriced. Even TV shows, $1.99 is too much. For the restriction, resolution, movies at that price is totally ripoff. No matter how many studioes are in, I'll never buy any.

Maccus Aurelius
Feb 13, 2007, 02:39 PM
I find more value in the TV content than the movie content on iTunes. I much prefer renting the movie, ripping it in handbrake for my ipod then using MactheRipper and Roxio Toast to um..archive the media :p

mazurka
Feb 14, 2007, 06:32 PM
'The iTunes Store'? - I guess you mean the US iTunes store.

Too right. Over here in Ireland, (and indeed the rest of Europe, as far as I know), all we get on iTunes is music, music videos, and a few short films from Pixar. No tv, no proper movies. We know there must be copyright or licensing problems, but why is it taking so long, and why would you buy a video iPod if there's virtually nothing to play on it?