Apple to Launch Subscription iTunes?

[MacRumors]

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

CNN Money's Media Biz blog (http://mediabiz.blogs.cnnmoney.com/2007/04/11/apple-changes-its-itune/) reports that they have heard that Apple may be interested in joining the subscription service model for their popular iTunes store.

According to the blog, Les Ottolenghi, CEO of INTENT MediaWorks, has had meetings with Apple and believes that they will be launching a subscription service for iTunes in the next six months:

"I think Apple is seriously considering a subscription offering right now even though they will probably tell you otherwise"

INTENT MediaWorks is described as "a digital distribution system that works with peer-to-peer networks".

Apple's official stance has always been against the subscription model for music sales, but with the introduction of movies, TV shows and the Apple TV, they may be revisiting this idea.

[Small White Car]

For music? Yuck. I'll pass and I'm sure Apple will too. It hasn't been successful yet as a business.

For movies? Yeah, I'd pay for that. No question. It would compete with Netflix and Blockbuster. Clearly lots of people DO want to rent movies even though they don't want to rent music.

[oilster]

i seriously doubt that

[Voidness]

But such a subscription service wouldn't work without DRM. Isn't Apple's future strategy is to try to move away from DRM?

[slffl]

Bring it on! I'm willing to pay at least $100/month for a all-inclusive subscription.

[iEric]

even though i highly doubt, i would actually subscribe!
the songs must be burnable though cause i want CDs in my car!

[thegoldenmackid]

ummm... pricing estimates?

[belovedmonster]

I dont see what Apple stand to lose by introducing choice into the equation. People can either opt to pay a monthly fee or buy individual items. Simple. Even my Granny can understand that.

[odedia]

But such a subscription service wouldn't work without DRM. Isn't Apple's future strategy is to try to move away from DRM?

Not for movies.

Steve made it very clear during the announcement of the DRM free music. He said "Music was always DRM-Free (CDs). Movies always had DRM (VHS with macrovision, DVD's, HD-DVD, Blu-Ray)"

[PlaceofDis]

i don't think this is for music, but more for movies, where there already is a huge base of people who basically use subscriptions. and i would certainly download and pay for it on a subscription basis. also, DRM issue wouldn't matter since that only applies to music for now.

[xUKHCx]

even though i highly doubt, i would actually subscribe!
the songs must be burnable though cause i want CDs in my car!

They wouldn't be burnable because you could just a CD and put in a normal CD player forever, negating the subscription DRM.

I don't think they will do it.

[Kingsly]

As others have said, I'd definitely use it for movies. I simply can't justify paying $9.00 for a movie download. A subscription, on the other hand, would be ideal!

As for music? I want to own it!

[grockk]

a subscription like emusic would be ok. 40 downloads for 10 bucks per month.

[calculus]

It depends what you mean by 'subscription'. If it's the same model as emusic - where you pay a monthly fee for a certain number of downloads that you can keep - I might be interested. If it's a rental model then I'm not.

[jwa276]

I sincerely hope this is for movies. I would really consider paying a subscription to see movies on the iTunes store once new releases are closer in quantity to that of NetFlix & Blockbuster.

It could really work, and it would also probably help control the pirating of movies if it was a competetive price. I mean, think of how many people use the iTunes store and how easy it is. With NetFlix & Blockbuster, you have to go through all this mumbo jumbo to deal with a subscription. With iTunes, it's as easy as sign up here and get your movies On-Demand, whenever you want them! No mailing, postage, waiting, blah blah blah.

This could be really cool!

[grpaul349]

I would definitely be interested if the price was right. I still think the 99 cents for a song is too high, especially when I can buy a physical CD and rip an album for about the same price as purchasing it on itunes.

I would love Apple to come up with a music only and then a music/movie monthly subscription. I think if they came up with a reasonably priced hybrid it would go over well.

[Mac Fly (film)]

If this rumor is true I think personally it will be for TV Shows. iTunes iPTV FTW! ;)

[MarcelV]

Steve has said several time, people want to buy music. And want to rent movies. I can see a dual use in iTunes Store for movies. Build a 'Netflix' model as subscription, and buy as DVD replacement. I can see using both. Watch the movies, and for the ones I want to collect, buy them. That combined with the AppleTV, and iPod, very well built eco-system.

By the way, when downloading music from iTunes, I am currently getting around 500k per second. For podcasts between 300 and 450k per second. But for movies, it's around 900k till 1.1MB per second. I have a 10Mbps connection, but it looks like Apple has done a capacity split between music and movies. Wondering if anyone sees a similar difference. Also, downloading movies is now pretty fast, and my last download, this weekend formovies was around 17 minutes. So, even if they would go HD, and my feeling says NAB is involved, it would be very realistic for download times.

[johnee]

Bring it on! I'm willing to pay at least $100/month for a all-inclusive subscription.

that's a bit excessive for me....

[nagromme]

But such a subscription service wouldn't work without DRM. Isn't Apple's future strategy is to try to move away from DRM?

What does DRM matter for rental files you don't even keep?

Nothing Apple says about DRM for purchasing is useful in determining what they can or can't do with subscriptions.

I wouldn't be into monthly subscriptions, but I DO want individual rentals. Not for music (though I don't mind them offering harmless option for other people) but for movies and TV.

We're really talking THREE models:

* Purchase

* Rental

* Subscription (which Netflix has and I'd prefer them to offer rentals--same would go for iTunes)

[ariza910]

I dont see what Apple stand to lose by introducing choice into the equation. People can either opt to pay a monthly fee or buy individual items. Simple. Even my Granny can understand that.

With the current iTunes scheme if you decided to sell/break your iPod you are more likely to buy another iPod because of all the DRM music you have purchased from iTunes.

With a subscription service you loose the 'lock-in' factor, as soon as someone stops their subscription they loose all their music and they are free to move on to the next service and mp3 player.

From a business point of view I dont know why Apple would want DRM free music or a subscription service - since you loose that 'lock-in' factor that keeps people buying new iPods.

[Max Payne]

For music? Yuck. I'll pass and I'm sure Apple will too. It hasn't been successful yet as a business.

For movies? Yeah, I'd pay for that. No question. It would compete with Netflix and Blockbuster. Clearly lots of people DO want to rent movies even though they don't want to rent music.

I agree. It's NO No for music, but slightly acceptable for movies.

[vincebio]

this is defo how apple gets all the big studios side by side on this...

they do the subscription for new movies..kind of like your current rent a dvd system from home..

they will not touch audio for this service, i seriously doubt that jobs would tamper with a successful business model for a so far unproven one.

[nagromme]

From a business point of view I dont know why Apple would want DRM free music or a subscription service - since you loose that 'lock-in' factor that keeps people buying new iPods.

That lock-in may be more myth than reality: by some industry estimates, iTunes DRM music makes up less than 5% of what people have on their iPods. Most of it's already DRM free because most people still buy music on CDs--not to mention their accumulated CD library they already owned.

"Locking people in" is not actually what drives iPod sales.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/04/02/drm_free_itunes_seen_spurring_demand_for_apples_ipods.html

[rockthecasbah]

I would not be interested in subscription service at the least, but if it was a separate choice of service in addition to the current 1 time by platform then i guess it wouldn't harm anything. It would be better as a VIDEO service to be subscription like instead of the season pass thing i guess, but still i like OWNING what i pay for.

[calculus]

With a subscription service you loose the 'lock-in' factor, as soon as someone stops their subscription they loose all their music

This is not the only type of subscription model in the marketplace. There are subscription services where you pay a monthly fee for a set number of downloads - this is completely different from the music rental models. I believe that people want to buy music to keep and that Apple would not go for a music rental model. I do think, however, that they could very well introduce a '25 tracks for a tenner' type of service.

[GFLPraxis]

You know, I always hated the subscription model for music, mostly because I like to put music on CDs.

I'm wary of it for movies, but I'm a lot more receptive. I like to KEEP my movies...but I do rent movies often, and if a movie subscription isn't much more expensive than a couple rentals a month, I would love to be able to pay a subscription fee for unlimited movie downloads that expire if I stop paying. I'd load my iPod up with tons, watch them, and delete them.

In fact, if my TV supported it, I'd buy an Apple TV just for it. Unfortunately, my TVs have no component inputs, so Apple lost a sale.

[GFLPraxis]

That lock-in may be more myth than reality: by some industry estimates, iTunes DRM music makes up less than 5% of what people have on their iPods. Most of it's already DRM free because most people still buy music on CDs--not to mention their accumulated CD library they already owned.

"Locking people in" is not actually what drives iPod sales.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/04/02/drm_free_itunes_seen_spurring_demand_for_apples_ipods.html

It's always been a myth. Anyone with iTunes music DRM can burn their music to a CD and it's a normal CD with no DRM.

[Anonymous Freak]

According to the blog, Les Ottolenghi, CEO of INTENT MediaWorks, has had meetings with Apple and believes that they will be launching a subscription service for iTunes in the next six months:

heh. Even if Apple was considering such a partnership, they won't now. Jobs hates it when partners reveal Apple plans ahead of time. (Just look at the nVidia oops from a couple years ago.) The fact that this CEO made a public comment assures that any phones calls he makes to Apple headquarters will be met with perma-hold.

[boxandrew]

With the current iTunes scheme if you decided to sell/break your iPod you are more likely to buy another iPod because of all the DRM music you have purchased from iTunes.

With a subscription service you loose the 'lock-in' factor, as soon as someone stops their subscription they loose all their music and they are free to move on to the next service and mp3 player.

From a business point of view I dont know why Apple would want DRM free music or a subscription service - since you loose that 'lock-in' factor that keeps people buying new iPods.

Hasn't Steve recently said that this 'lock-in' factor doesn't exist? I seem to remember that the number of people whose music collection consists primarily of DRM iTunes files is very small.

And anyway, at the announcement the other week with EMI, it was pointed out that all you have to do to remove the DRM is burn your music to a CD and import it back into iTunes. That's why Steve had no problem with the idea of getting rid of DRM for purchased music altogether.

[sportsfanMAW]

i want a monthly subscription to rent movie from itunes, then i would buy an :apple: tv so i could watch them! Renting movies from itunes would hugely boost :apple: tv sales

[frank781]

I wonder what kind of subscription they might be thinking about?

There's the Magazine model in which you receive the newest every montyh. This would be ideal for TV shows which are serialized.

There's also the Podcast model, in which you also receive the latest episode, but there's an option in it where you only keep the unplayed episodes. This could be appropriate for movies.

And then there's the Netflix model, which sends you 3 movies for a monthly fee and you keep them as long as you want (and pay the subscription). This should be perfect for all types of video content. just pick the next movie in your queue and itunes can erase one of your previous downloaded movies in it's place.

[sportsfanMAW]

I wonder what kind of subscription they might be thinking about?



And then there's the Netflix model, which sends you 3 movies for a monthly fee and you keep them as long as you want (and pay the subscription). This should be perfect for all types of video content. just pick the next movie in your queue and itunes can erase one of your previous downloaded movies in it's place.

Yeah i think that mode would be great for apple to use. That way you don't have a ton of movies of theres and they don't expire after you watch them once.

[twoodcc]

if they give you a choice between subscription and regular, then this might not be a bad thing

[mashinhead]

About time. The only downside about subscription is if you want to jump ship to another service. So how many of you don't use itunes or want to leave itunes? because i haven't gotten anything from anywhere but itunes. So it sounds perfect.

[hvfsl]

If they did one for TV shows, say $30/month and you can watch as much as you want (and had some 720p stuff too). I would give up cable TV and just use iTunes. Being able to watch all my favourite shows, without adverts, whenever I wanted would be great. :D

But of course I doubt they would do it.

Most likely they will offer a $15/month unlimited music download service where you had to pay an extra $0.50 or so to keep the track permanently. Plus maybe a possible movie rental service (although you will probably have to pay per download).

[brooker]

Hasn't Steve recently said that this 'lock-in' factor doesn't exist? I seem to remember that the number of people whose music collection consists primarily of DRM iTunes files is very small.


Right. The real 'lock-in' factor with the iPod is the ease-of-use and cultural hipness of the device and all the marketing behind it. Once you use it once, why use anything else?

:apple: could have a huge competitive advantage with any kind of movie rental setup -- aside from the ease of downloading through iTunes (which is huge, of course). They could do package deals: 3-at-a-time movies PLUS 5 free song downloads per month. Or offer discounts on soundtracks if you dl the movie. Once they get the studios on board, they will have a lot more than just movies to offer to subscribers. I agree that a music sub won't work, but the huge music collection could supplement and add value to a movie subscription service.

[Avatar74]

It's very interesting how they phrased it... that Apple is considering even though they'd tell you otherwise.

That sounds exactly like Apple, particularly Steve Jobs, to me. His mindset is such that he is pretty stubborn on getting certain concepts to market but if there is a better way to do it, he'll appear to stick to his guns while quietly contemplating the advantages of the other. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to find out they're exploring several avenues... that just makes sense. It doesn't mean this is THE way to go, it just means that they're doing the due diligence in exploring various business models for their potential.

The reality may be that they'll do this alongside purchases which would be ideal particularly for movies. It would capture a larger demographic... I don't entirely rent, and I don't entirely buy... I do a mix of both and I think a lot of consumers are the same way.

If it works like Netflix, i.e. "check out" x number of films and "exchange" for more films, it would be a killer app that could unravel Netflix and Blockbuster.

[bommai]

This could be the movie rental plan. The whole thing could be implemented so that the user gets the videos to watch directly from AppleTV. No need for a computer. That is how it should be.

[TheBobcat]

Apple TV would be much, much, more attractive if you could buy a subscription for unlimited video (TV & Movies), but also still buy the episodes and movies you really want. Unlimited subscription video on iPod, iTunes, and Apple TV, in addition to buying and keeping your music and the shows you really want.

Make that HD, and welcome to the end of discs.

[mlrproducts]

I would gladly pay $35/month for UNLIMITED (as fast as my internet can carry me) movie downloads that I can keep on my computer as long as I pay the sub fee (such as Napster). With a quality selection, and promised HD content on the way (I'd meet them halfway for a 720p h264) I would pay the premium over netflix.

[evansls]

I sent my quick letter below to Apple iTunes Feedback for the inspiration I had with this new topic. I hope Steve is indeed listening...


Dear Steve Jobs,

If you are indeed listening to your "sampling of users" as you indicated at the EMI Press Conference last week about the high demand for superior audio quality, then you should definitely be paying attention to the demand of having a subscription model too for iTunes.

Looking at the last 2 years + 4 months that I have have been using the iTunes Store, I have purchased $105.39 worth of music. If Apple would move towards a subscription option at $10.00 or $12.00 a month then you would pulling about $120 to $144 a YEAR off of me if I were to sign up.

The catch for me is I want to play my music on the go by playing my subscription music on my ipod so I can bring it to my car auxiliary input and my apple tv so I can play it on my home stereo/TV. I don't care to burn it to CD, because I don't personally use my car CD player now that I can use my ipod everywhere thanks to the success of iPod + iTunes!

I'm sure many, many itunes users feel the same as I do and those who don't can simply continue to purchase their music individually as the original option.

I hope you're listening Steve, because I personally want to subscribe to as much music as I can rather than search for select tracks by only purchasing what I feel is worthy of my single dollar. iTunes and iPod is the best combination available and I can't wait to sign up when Apple makes iTunes Subscription available for people like me.

Al the best to you and Apple, Inc.

Evan

[TomSmithMacEd]

If this was for music, I'd be interested. I am a rare case though I think.

If this was for movies / tv, then the :apple: tv would finally make sense.

[Eric5h5]

What does DRM matter for rental files you don't even keep?

Because without DRM, there's no such thing as "rental files." What would Apple do when you cancel your rental service..."OK, now please delete all the files you downloaded as part of your subscription"? Don't think so. ;)

--Eric

[tk421]

Just like a lot of others, I am NOT interested in a music subscription, but I am VERY interested in a TV Show subscription.

Steve made it very clear during the announcement of the DRM free music. He said "Music was always DRM-Free (CDs). Movies always had DRM (VHS with macrovision, DVD's, HD-DVD, Blu-Ray)"

I think you're on to something there. This would make subscription viable for movies and not music. And they don't really need subscription with music, they already have a 90% market!

[thejakill]

i want a monthly subscription to rent movie from itunes, then i would buy an :apple: tv so i could watch them! Renting movies from itunes would hugely boost :apple: tv sales

yes, if you could download the movies from the appleTV this would be a winner.

i would gladly cancel my netflix and switch to this service. apple needs to get a better selection of movies, though.

[/dev/toaster]

I would actually pay $20 - $30 a month to get access to *ALL* iTunes content on an unlimited basis.

My music to video (TV shows) purchase ratio is like 1:8 at this point. So, there would be little benefit for me for music. However, if it was $5 a month I might do it for my girlfriend. (For music)

[macintel4me]

Why is the possibility of adding an option for the consumer viewed as being negative?!? I fully understand the subscription for music isn't a great desire, but this is clearly an addition and not a replacement. As stated early, this seems more applicable for TV Shows and movies and not music too.

[nagromme]

Because without DRM, there's no such thing as "rental files." What would Apple do when you cancel your rental service..."OK, now please delete all the files you downloaded as part of your subscription"? Don't think so. ;)

--Eric

I was responding re user objections to DRM.

[ariza910]

That lock-in may be more myth than reality: by some industry estimates, iTunes DRM music makes up less than 5% of what people have on their iPods. Most of it's already DRM free because most people still buy music on CDs--not to mention their accumulated CD library they already owned.

"Locking people in" is not actually what drives iPod sales.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/04/02/drm_free_itunes_seen_spurring_demand_for_apples_ipods.html

Totally agree that 'locking people in' doesn't currently drive iPod sales - great design and ease of use does.

The 'lock-in' will come into play in the future when the iPods hit that slump or when competitors finally catch up to the iPod.

By then iTunes DRM music will be a significant part of many users collections and could be a way for Apple to hold on to their customer base.

The iTunes music store is a major retailer of music I believe they are ranked in the top 5 just behind the likes of WalMart, Target, BestBuy and Amazon. That means there is a whole lot of music out there with FairPlay DRM - a lot of those customers will think twice before abandoning iTunes and their iPod

[bobchambo]

this would give me a reason to buy a 80gb ipod and an :apple: tv

[Project]

Two things are needed for Apple to have a chance of winning the online video war:

1) subscription based service (or rentals)
2) HD content (at least 720p)

It is so blatently obvious that a subscription model is needed for video that I would be amazed if Apple were so stubborn to not seriously consider it. Its what people are used to. We have cable services already and the amount of television we consume using it probably greatly exceeds the amount of stuff we watch on DVDs we have purchased. Whereas with CDs, we purchase them because music is inherently more replayable.

[psychofreak]

Two things are needed for Apple to have a chance of winning the online video war:

1) subscription based service (or rentals)
2) HD content (at least 720p)

Make that 3 things:

3) Films in more countries, e.g. the UK

[Doctor Q]

At first glance, giving consumers more options seems like a win-win situation: some will stay with the current choices, some will go for a new subscription model, if this rumor is true.

The risk to Apple is in turning something that was very simple into something more confusing and complicated for many consumers.

The iTunes (Music) Store used to offer songs and albums for purchase - that's all. With the addition of movies, TV shows, games, "Complete My Album", DRM-free music with a choice of quality (soon), and now possibly a subscription service, they are giving us more choice, but also the increased complexity that comes with more choice.

[asphalt-proof]

While it wouldn't work for me for music, I would definitely pay a monthly fee for TV and movies. Up to $30/month for myself. But I don't have cable, just rabbbit ears.

[k2k koos]

I would personally NOT use this type of service, but for Apple to offer both, is a good idea, it gives people a choice. However, I sincerely hope that we are not ending up in situations with "rental only" titles, and vice versa, I would realy hate that with a passion.
Alternatively, I am not a big TV head, so movie rentals, and music purchases as a combination may work for me. Just let me buy my music, I don't want to rent that! Movies, I rarely watch them more than once or twice, music I listen to a lot, and several songs over and over.

[JackArc]

I'd get it if it like eMusic but def. NO WAY if it is renting

[thequicksilver]

I'd sign up for an iTunes music subscription service as soon as it came out. Not as a replacement for buying music, but to supplement it. To allow me to experiment. I haven't listened to music radio for years and have developed my own little musical taste, explored purely by experimentation.

It's a difficult thing to achieve. But imagine such a thing with a full, freely accessible iTunes Music Store. Fancy hearing more of a band? Download their entire back catalogue. What you like, you buy to get full access and CD burning, what you don't, you trash. Continue to experiment, keeping the stuff you like, trashing what you don't.

I don't believe this story because Jobs seems dead set against it, but if it did, I'd whip my credit card out instantly for a £10-15 monthly iTunes subscription.

[Stella]

Give people the choice. It'll do Apple no harm in offering a subscription service and keeping the existing system.

If you don't like a subscription, don't use it, keep using iTunes as you do now.

Subscription won't work without DRM. Perhaps this a strategy to keep iPod tied to iTMS, since DRM is losing its appeal for music companies.

Some one asked 'why use anything else after using itunes because iTunes is so much easier'.

Answer:
Because other stores offer music that iTunes doesn't.
Just like the reason why I would go to multiple brick and mortor stores.

[p0intblank]

Nooo! I really hope this isn't true and Steve sticks to his "you buy it, you own it" strategy. All these subscription services getting annoying as it is...

[torero]

Now we're talkin! I'm tired of being throttled by Netflix. I'll pick up an apple tv or two the day itunes offers movie rentals.

[coffeecty]

This could work, though. You can have a DRM-coded Subscription service for music and Movies, or you can buy DRM-free MP3s... sounds like a good buisness model to me. :D

[brepublican]

Apple's official stance has always been against the subscription model for music sales, but with the introduction of movies, TV shows and the Apple TV, they may be revisiting this idea.

I dont understand... what does the introduction of those things have to do with anything? Is there a link that I'm missing here?? :confused:

[ElderscrollsV]

Um, the article is about a music subscription service. I think you ought to avoid using words like 'retarded' to describe people who simply disagree with you.

Nowhere does it say music...

[iJawn108]

I don't see it happening for the music store, but for movies... that would be pretty cool. :D

[MacFly123]

For music? Yuck. I'll pass and I'm sure Apple will too. It hasn't been successful yet as a business.

For movies? Yeah, I'd pay for that. No question. It would compete with Netflix and Blockbuster. Clearly lots of people DO want to rent movies even though they don't want to rent music.

Sorry, but who said anything about renting??? Why not just pay a fee every month and keep the content you get? That would be awesome for all media types.

[Anonymous Freak]

After some IM brainstorming, a friend and I (he reads MR articles, but, to my knowledge, doesn't read the forums,) have come up with a couple conjectures:

1. This is only for movies. Music will remain as-is. This will become a NetFlix-like on-demand service of full :apple:tv quality (720p) movies. Pay your $20 a month, and download three movies at a time, for watching on computer, iPod, or :apple:tv.

2. The move to DRM-less higher-quality music could be where the PURCHASED music is going, and the lower-quality DRM-laden music will remain for this subscription service. i.e. Rent lower quality, or purchase higher-quality DRM-free.

Obviously, the possibility of both of these options is not dependent on each other, either one, or both, could be true.

[Object-X]

AppleTV and iTunes are crippled without a subscription model. Sure, people buy movies on DVD, but it's expensive but more people rent. So, until Apple provides a rental model they will limit the appeal of AppleTV. I think they will have to offer it, and soon.

They will also need to offer HD. We all want it. So, consider the new inititive with iTunes music and DRM. What is Apple doing here. They are offering higher quality downloads without DRM. I believe they will do something similar with HD media. Soon they offer HD, but it will be accessible with a monthly subscription service. There are several reasons for this.

First, there is demand. Apple has stated that they sell music because people want to buy it not rent it. But the oppisite is true of movies and tv, people want to rent it not buy it. So, if Apple is basing their business model on what people want then offering movie rentals is what they have to do.

Secondly, HD takes up a lot of space; even the lower quality downloads Apple is offering now take up a lot of space. How are you going to back all that data up? How much will it cost you to back it up? How are going to move it around? How long will it take? And how long before your iTunes library wont fit on the hard drive in your computer? Very soon the size of your iTunes library will become unmanageable. Renting will solve this. Apple will have to offer this because we will demand it or we will stop buying downloaded movies and tv shows.

Why is the AppleTV hard drive so small? Think about it.

You download a limited amount of HD data to your hard drive and you don't have to worry about backing it all up or moving it around. You just replace what's in your que and keep going.

This is both convenient and practical, and ultimately I believe inevitable.

And once your consuming all your video media with a rental model, adding music to it will seem like a no-brainer.

[mandoman]

I wouldn't mind a pay per view model like Comcast offers,
we use that all the time. Only problem with Comcast's
offerings is their releases lag WAY behind the dvd release.

If apple goes with a rental/subscription deal for movies/tv,
I want same day as DVD releases, otherwise, I'll stick with
Comcast.

This would definately get me to buy an :apple: tv or mac mini
for the living room...

[Freyqq]

double post

[Freyqq]

if it was for music i'd buy it..assuming i could put the music on the ipod too. Considering I buy roughly 20$ of music a month, if it were subscription i could get the music possibly cheaper and i wouldn't feel compelled to limit my purchases. For instance, instead of buying a single song in a cd, i'd download the whole cd...i mean..why not?

[the vj]

I believe they need that to keep the Apple TV working, other wise it will accumulate dust if you do not feed it with content constantly. Better strategy is to keep the users suscribed for thei favorite show.

The problem will be... where people are going to storage all that content later on? video takes too much room.

[Object-X]

Just to elaborate on my previous post.

Why is Apple not offering HD content? I think there are two reasons for this.

1. The amount of data is huge. My MacBook Pro is filling up fast and I only have a few TV show seasons and no movies. If I keep downloading, soon I will be out of space and will have to manage my iTunes library by removing some files and putting them elsewhere. How am I going to do this? If I delete the files from my iTunes folder and move them to an external hard drive my library will still think they are local. This will become a mess and almost certainly mess up my iTunes library. I will be forced to upgrade my hard drive or stop downloading content. If the movies and TV shows were all in 720p this problem would become a problem sooner than later. At any rate, soon your iTunes library will not fit on the hard drive in your computer. Apple is most likely still prepping a subscription service and smaller file size is buying them time.

2. The movie studios most likely want assurances of copy protection before allowing the downloading of their movies in HD. Apple can have even more control over this content using a subscription service then just using DRM. So, I think downloads are lower quality because the movie studios are demanding tighter control over HD, even if it's only 720p.

[tribulation]

Movies would be nice. TV shows would be very nice. Maybe the iTV would be of some use if this actually happens.

[tribulation]

I dont understand... what does the introduction of those things have to do with anything? Is there a link that I'm missing here?? :confused:

Because currently the Apple TV doesn't really offer anything worth using. If I could subscribe to a netflix type of service and even better, a cable subscription service [all I can watch tv shows], then they really will have a cable/tv replacement. That will change the entire industry hands down.

No subscription = an extremely niche product

[guzhogi]

As many of you have said, subscriptions are good for movies/TV shows, bad for music. How often do you watch the same movie? Probably not very frequently. Music on the other hand, you might want to listen to the same song everyday. Preferably being able to burn CDs, too so you can make mix tapes. Anyways, I wonder how the subscription will work, if Apple does it. Remove the movie after x number of days/plays? Or maybe something like Blockbuster/Netflix where you can keep & watch a movie as long as you want, but you won't be able to get more until you "return" it. Renting a movie, I'm not too sure about.

The only thing I would like is have the special features that come w/ the DVDs. I kinda like listening to the audio commentaries on DVDs & watching the behind-the-scenes stuff. Those are pretty cool. Just out of curiosity, do other countries have US made movies dubbed/subtitled in the local language? I have an uncle who's Turkish and likes US action films, but he speaks Turkish better than English. Having movies dubbed/subtitled might help.

[Xavier]

Napster! YA... not

Apple always made a big deal about 99 cent songs, why throw that all out the window with a LAME subscription theme.



LAME
LAME
LAME

[Stella]

Subscription is an addition, not a replacement.

You know, this thing called "customer choice"...

If the subscription model doesn't work well for iTunes, Apple can always dump it later.

Napster! YA... not

Apple always made a big deal about 99 cent songs, why throw that all out the window with a LAME subscription theme.



LAME
LAME
LAME

[Roads0]

I still use a minidisc player, so if Apple does this, I'll record all the music one month and cancel the next. I would do this with Rhapsody or Napster, but they dont support macs. DRM can kiss my...

[skellener]

Subscription for TV and Movies in iTunes would be awesome if they offered HD. Especially for the AppleTV. Where's the HD content Apple? C'mon already!

[peestandingup]

Yup, they would be crazy not to offer an "On Demand" type video streaming service for movies & TV shows.

One: Downloading videos takes up WAY too much space for many casual users.

Two: What if I wanted to ONLY watch a movie a couple times without downloading & storing the file on my HD?? With iTunes currently, its pay to own the whole thing or nothing.

Three: Have to sit through long download times. If it was streaming, it would be instant.

Four: AppleTV is perfect for this service. Hopefully, they will make it where you can do this directly through the AppleTV without your computer.

Five: They could offer HD movies that would look awesome + not take up gobs of your HD space.

Six: People could FINALLY say goodbye to their cable/satellite provider & only pay for the stuff they actually watch.

Bottom line, people wanna OWN their music, but NOT every piece of video they watch. Bring it on!

[SiliconAddict]

If so...we're going to need a bigger iPod.

Yah know I would like it if Apple had a limited subscription setup. One where you spend something like $5 a month. With that $5 you get an hour a week of music hand picked by Apple. New and original stuff. You keep the tracks for 30 days then links to that music stays in a bookmarks folder so you can always by it for a 10 cent discount off of iTMS. I'm not interested in a feeding feast for a subscription setup since I like owning my music but sampling at a discount? Sure. Why not.

[SiliconAddict]

I still use a minidisc player, so if Apple does this, I'll record all the music one month and cancel the next. I would do this with Rhapsody or Napster, but they dont support macs. DRM can kiss my...

Do you also go to blockbuster rent movies, rip them, and call it a "deal". Its amazing how people justify theft. I was in Microcenter this past weekend waiting in line, listening to a couple guys talk about renting movies from the library, ripping them and having their printers make perfect copies of the disk labels. It amazes me how blasé people have gotten towards theft. Heck even I BT but I'm not going to make an excuse for it. I'm ripping off the scifi channel ever time I download BSG. Yes I'm mainly doing it when I miss it on TV, and because iTMS's quality sucks. But its still ripping them off. *shrugs* Whatever. Carry on.

[aristotle]

Subscriptions require DRM, extremely restrictive DRM. It would be very un-Apple of them to go that route.

[dontmatter]

I will join the chorus for subscription movies (netflix) or possibly subscription music like emusic where you own it, although I find it odd to force people into set numbers of songs and agree to pay beforehand -- it just means they know they can extract more dollars because you'll think you're getting a good deal.

But here's what I'd like to see:

I'd like to pay by the hour, like netfilx's streaming feature, but with two modifications: first, each time you watch something, it counts towards ownership, until you've either paid as much (say, three watchings) as it would cost to buy in the first place, or you've just paid the difference. Second, to free you from the internet connection and those devices, you can download it, WITHOUT paying, and itunes/ipod/appletv/iphone will keep track of how many times you watch it, and charge when you reconnect.

This would be great, because it would take the stress out of buying/renting. Instead of guessing that you will watch something enough to make it worth buying, you just rent it until you've watched it enough, and then you own it. Instead of committing to the whole movie, you can "channel flip" to other things on your device or streaming at any time, and not pay for what you don't watch. And you could download things to put on your ipod that you might want to watch, and if you don't watch it, it's no problem. You're only charged for what you use, but you have instant access to anything you think you might use.

I could even see this model with music, too. If you read a good review, you can listen once, paying significantly less for that one listen, and once you've listened three or four times (and paid), it's yours forever.

The DRM could have a time limit on it so you can't just download, watch, and never reconnect, although I don't think this would even be needed, because iphone and appletv both have internet access, and your ipod, particularly when watching TV shows, is seriously disabled if you can't connect it to your computer, and the computer is definately nearly useless without the internet, so you'd have to end up paying somehow.

Anyway, it's not gonna happen, but I an dream, can't I?

[koobcamuk]

Bring it on! I'm willing to pay at least $100/month for a all-inclusive subscription.

errr what?

That's quite a lot of money - especially if I do the typical American - English conversion we usually see.

I am not sure how I could see a subscription working.

Second, to free you from the internet connection and those devices, you can download it, WITHOUT paying, and itunes/ipod/appletv/iphone will keep track of how many times you watch it, and charge when you reconnect.

How on Earth can you see this working? Just like on Ebay, people will create bogus accounts or something, go online, download a load of stuff, come offline burn it to DVD/never go online with same itunes account info.

[calculus]

Nowhere does it say music...

Since Apple (AAPL) launched its wildly successful iTunes music store... If you want to buy music from iTunes...

Rival online music stores... prefer iTunes to subscription-based music stores.

...even though music subscription services ...that’s why music fans haven’t embraced the model.

At this point I got bored counting...

So sorry I missed your personal attack.:rolleyes:

[SLiM620]

I think this would be a cool idea if they made a version of itunes, in which u subscribe and download media, that was compatible with appletv and the iphone...if this did happen movie subscription would make perfect sence for the appletv (and the iphone for that matter) and a music subsription would make sence to me at least for the iphone although downloading movies directly to the phone might not be appealing because of edge, people download songs from there phone all the time and although its only .99 a song which is the starndard for music on phones with music download capabilities this would help to justify the iphones 4 and 8GB with no apparent way to expand...

itunes users (ipod owners for the most part) are used to haveing large libraries on there ipods and the iphone is the best ipod yet and 8GB is the largest offering which is not much at all as this 8Gb also has to hadle all the phones features and extras (im assuming :o ) so a subscription might be an atractive offer

us spoiled ipod users dont want to constatly take songs off they paid .99 a peice for or 14.00 for the cd (9.99 on itunes) whenever something new comes out because theres not enough room which explains 30 and 80GB ipods (most people, at least that i know who have nanos or minis have libraries that reflect the size they chose and those of us with large libraries want 30 or 80 GB because we paid for them so we want to have them available all the time, at least thats how i feel) i would be much more willing to take a song off if i had a subscrition rather then buying them one by one, ... i could see apple makeing a music subscription part of the iphone plan rather then a universal option, this would make the iphone much more appealing to the 80GB ipod owners without replacing the ipod itself, (until they see how well it does possibly expanding availability in the future to appletv users and mac users) and include a version of the itunes store on the iphone, this would also open up the possibility to stream music to your phone from the store, when they move to 3g or as a wifi feature, as part of the plan which would also be a huge space saver (i.e. the appletv)

as far as movies go a universal subscription makes more sence because of the sheer size of movies...again the iphone is one of the coolest portable movie players and with a subscription you could have 1 or 2 new movies every couple of days on your iphone without paying an arm and a leg and you wouldn't fill you phone with movies...in terms the apple tv and ipod most dont watch movies over and over like they listen to music and everyone already knows that an itunes version of netflix would be awsome so no need to kill the subject....

looking into the future...i ran across an article that compares the new sandisk/yahoo sansa player against ipod and suggest that it is in fact better then the ipod and it proves many very good points http://playlistmag.com/news/2007/04/11/sansa/index.php and if customers had the OPTION to use itunes in the same manner as its yahoo opponent it would be perfect for some future wifi enable ipods, with smaller flash memory which would help apple to retain the ipods sleek design and include wifi at the same time.... and if wifi ipod/iphone/:apple: tv/mac users were all able to share and suggest downloads to other users like this sansa player does, you could further injure four birds with one stone, zune/smartphones/WMC/PCs, which is always good, and further promote the convergence of apple products...a subscription sounds like a good way to tie these together....it may happen it may not, .. i really don't even know if all this is even possible.... and yea jobbs is trying introduce DRM free music to itunes...but hes not getting rid of DRM altogether either :rolleyes:...the key is customer choice

[Darkroom]

i think it would be a fine idea if Apple offered both subscription and non subscription to everything on iTunes...

[210]

If there is any truth in this, I'm sure it's mainly for movies and TV shows. I guess there is nothing wrong for music to be included in this. I think Apple is still trying to push for DRM-free music to buy and then there'll be a DRM subscription.

Ideally, there should be option of what you would like to rent: movies or TV shows or music or a combination of any of the above. Again, this will push AppleTV sales just because of the movies and TV shows.

[biturbomunkie]

i don't mind as long as they keep the $0.99 model.

[gnasher729]

Whether a music subscription is for you or not definitely depends on your life situation. If you are young and have no music collection on your own, a subscription is worth more than for someone having 10,000 songs in iTunes already.

That said, what would be a great offer would be a mixture between subscription and purchase. Lets say a subscription for $15 a month, and with that subscription you can also purchase songs up to $30 a month for half price. So you can spend $15 in a month and own nothing, or you can spend $30 in a month and own $30 worth of music, or anything in between. For pure subscribers and for people who buy a lot of music this would be a win-win situation. The music industry would also benefit because people would tend to purchase more music, and the more they spend, the more money the music industry gets.

[DaveTheGrey]

when you get 80gb of music through subscribtion, how can you organize this amount of files on an ipod without having folders available?

Is anyone out there who solved this problem?

[biturbomunkie]

when you get 80gb of music through subscribtion, how can you organize this amount of files on an ipod without having folders available?

Is anyone out there who solved this problem?

playlists

[DaveTheGrey]

playlists

have you tried to organize 80gb of music with playlists?

[biturbomunkie]

have you tried to organize 80gb of music with playlists?

playlists, yes

playlist, nope

[DaveTheGrey]

playlists, yes

playlist, nope

do you have one playlist per album? and if so how do you name them? Artist - Album?
if you do so how long is you list of playlists?
80gb / 3mb a song / 16 songs per album =1666 playlists

or do you use one playlist per artist, but if you do so how can you find the third track on a specific album when an artist got 9 albums?

in itunes I'm using folders -> genre/artist/album = folder/folder/playlist
perfect for finding music, if I don't know exactly what i want to listen to.

front row? perfect. it uses my folders.

ipod? gnark... that's why I can't buy a bigger ipod. I wouldn't find anything on it.

and with subscription it would become even worse.

Dave

P.S. I'm a music lover with a really big library

[Bonte]

that's a bit excessive for me....

$100/month is maybe to much but how much are you willing to pay for unlimited access to movies, series, music, books and games?

iTunes can become a full replacement for a cable-network (and more) but with pick and choose content when and where we want, a revolutionary new way of working with media. I can't see the servers or network keeping up with this, iTunes accounts for 17% of US website traffic and this model would multiply the traffic.

[biturbomunkie]

do you have one playlist per album? and if so how do you name them? Artist - Album?

if you do so how long is you list of playlists?
80gb / 3mb a song / 16 songs per album =1666 playlists

or do you use one playlist per artist, but if you do so how can you find the third track on a specific album when an artist got 9 albums?

i use playlists for my own fav songs. 8-20 songs per playlist.

in itunes I'm using folders -> genre/artist/album = folder/folder/playlist
perfect for finding music, if I don't know exactly what i want to listen to.

front row? perfect. it uses my folders.

ipod? gnark... that's why I can't buy a bigger ipod. I wouldn't find anything on it.

and with subscription it would become even worse.

Dave

P.S. I'm a music lover whith a really big library

i don't know if i'm missing something... but, can't you do the same on ipod? i.e. music > genres > artists > albums

[GregA]

What can I say that hasn't already been said?

I don't want to buy every movie I watch - many I only watch once. Nor do I have the space to save them all on my network. I hope Apple addresses this in some way.

There are many existing models for watching movies.
1) DVD purchase model - pay $15 for a DVD
2) DVD rental model - pay $6 for an overnight rental,
or pay $3 for 3 nights (older release) and $2/week for oldest.
3) PayTV channels (eg: $10/mth for HBO) - a subset of movies from a group of studios. Any single movie shown over a 4 month period, subset of movies updates continually.
4) VoD/PPV on cable - $6 per film (similar to DVD)
5) Subscription model rental (fixed cost for a number of rentals/month)
6) Ad supported on TV
etc

Apple uses model #1, and could create other models I guess.
I'd like to see them match the DVD rental model - without me having to go to the video store.

Why is Apple not offering HD content? <snip> The amount of data is huge. My MacBook Pro is filling up fast and I only have a few TV show seasons and no movies. If I keep downloading, soon I will be out of space

This is hugely important. People don't have the space. A subscription model or rental helps here because it's not stored long term. Who wants to buy a movie that they have to throw away (ie. delete) a month later?

Another alternative is for Apple to allow us to buy a movie and store it in our "virtual library". We could then delete it from our local disk, but re-download when we want it.

Apples final problem is bandwidth. A free-for-all subscription service would affect Apple's connections and possibly the whole internet. We need some interesting innovation here.

If I could subscribe to a netflix type of service and even better, a cable subscription service [all I can watch tv shows], then they really will have a cable/tv replacement. That will change the entire industry hands down.Even cable TV doesn't provide all-you-can-watch systems. They are ad supported, and PVR recordings don't count towards ratings which would make the entire AppleTV service uncounted.

[RRK]

I think I am just repeating what has been said many times already, but add another vote for me.
1. This is not for music because it does not fit with the drm free announcement.
2. Netflicks competitor would be a good idea if it works for your computer/appletv/ipod/iphone.
3. Subscription television is the big deal here. A-la-cart tv has been requested for years and you could even imagine a netflix style pricing for movies and tv. $25 a month for 3 tv shows at a time? Or maybe $50 for 3 shows and 3 movies? Or maybe even something like 3 shows or movies for $25 a month.

edit
Could the apple tv's HD hold three full length movies in 780p?

[DaveTheGrey]

i don't know if i'm missing something... but, can't you do the same on ipod? i.e. music > genres > artists > albums

no you are not. if you just have artists which have an complete album this is a good way. but for the artists from which you just have one track this is not a good way.

example:

jazz/misc
folder/playlist

and in there 150 tracks by different artists

that means in your music > genres > artists > view on your ipod 150 more artists to scroll through.

know what i mean?

I see it on my 20gb ipod photo.
I can't use no other option than playlists because in the other view options there are so many names to scroll through becaus of the one song artists.

if only ipods would support folders like iTunes does... :(

[MattG]

I'd say this is unlikely, but if it's true...man, Steve-o really put his foot in his mouth. Wasn't it him that said "people don't want to rent their music?"

[BenRoethig]

Not much of subscription fan when it comes to music, but when it comes to movies, I prefer the "rental" model. As big as they are, It's better to have just a couple movies you actually want to hatch than a bunch you don't taking up most of your hard drive.

[princealfie]

I would think that it would be cool to have a sub option but I happen to buy everything so I wouldn't be using it. :cool:

[GregA]

Could the apple tv's HD hold three full length movies in 780p?

Yes. A movie will be about 4GB for 720p (assuming 5Mbps and 106mins).

So you could hold 8 full length movies (plus no music and no photos!)

[MACaBAMA]

I wouldn't mind seeing a Rental/Subscription hybrid.

- I want to own my music DRM Free first.
- I want to be able to rent movies I would never buy or watch a second time.
- For movies I would watch over and over I want to be able to save them and watch them over and over.

The kicker for me is that I'm not interested unless I get at the minimum 720p HD with true Dolby Digital 5.1. My TV is a native 720p set so it would down convert anything in 1080p back to it's native resolution.

When I buy a movie, I buy it either because it is a great movie or it sounds amazing. Without DD 5.1 or higher I'm out. I'll buy the dvd.

[RRK]

Yes. A movie will be about 4GB for 720p (assuming 5Mbps and 106mins).

So you could hold 8 full length movies (plus no music and no photos!)

Yes well my iphoto and itunes library would already fill the Apple TV. But... Could anyone see this incorporating that movie in a movie patent to have a dvd quality video rental service complete with special features. Or could they even add special features to tv shows if they are sold in the same way?

[calculus]

I'd say this is unlikely, but if it's true...man, Steve-o really put his foot in his mouth. Wasn't it him that said "people don't want to rent their music?"

'Subscription' and 'rental' are not the same thing.

[sishaw]

But such a subscription service wouldn't work without DRM. Isn't Apple's future strategy is to try to move away from DRM?

Not necessarily. eMusic is a fine subscription service that works without DRM. They give you 192 kbps MP3 files for a flat monthly rate, and you can keep them by the way, even if you end your subscription.

I haven't read the whole thread, apologize if this has already been mentioned.

[R303blue]

For Movies and TV Shows! I wouldn't bother with Music, as I still buy my majority of music on CD, but I never use the TV and Movies option because I haven't seen enough value in it. Netflix rocks in that way, but they also rock cuz of their HUGE selection. iTunes needs that selection before it can compete. Hopefully they will reach that, because not waiting for new DVDs to come in the mail would be great.

[kerryn]

Let me first say that I am not a Mac fan boy, but a frustrated PC user who would be interested in trying the Mac once leopard and the new macs come out.

Most people here seem to think that this may be for TV or movies and not music and that they would not use a subscription service for music. Well all I can say is that they have never used a music subscription service. I think it is wonderful!

I used to have a Rio Karma (fantastic sound quality!) and onced vowed never to own an iPod. Once subscription music became available though, I jumped to Yahoo! and bought a Creative Zen Micro to play the subscription music on. For $50 per year (at the time) for all the music you can download, why not? After all its a mere three albums cost. Now I have to say that the combination of the Creative Zen and early PlaysForSure Subscription music was a bit of a disaster. Buggy would be an understatement. As a result of this I learned how to strip the DRM out of the subscription music so that it played like a normal MP3. Because I am no longer shackled by WMA DRM I was able to explore all music players out there especially after the Zen died on me.

So I got an 8GB Nano for Christmas along with the Drive+Play for the car and I am converted. I still subscribe to Yahoo! although the cost is more now, but it is a whole lot better than those early days. My process to remove the DRM is now very slick, but I keep all my "subscription converted" music away from the stuff I actually own. If I stop paying my subscription I can easily delete the converted subscription music I have.

Will I stop my subscriptions? No, but in the few years the service has been available I have spent about $250 on subscriptions and I have accumulated around 14,000 songs - many of which I still have not listened too. Thats a lot of music. In the same time, I have not purchased a single song from iTunes, also I have never downloaded pirated music from a P2P service.

I would now rather not subscribe to Yahoo!, not go though the hassle of removing the DRM so that I can play the music on the Nano. I would be happy to switch to iTunes and pay up to $15 per month for subscription music and have a seamless easy connection between subscribed iTunes music, the iPod and my car.

If I wanted to own music I would be interested in purchasing from iTunes but only when they offer the music on DRM free Apple Lossless. Subscription for compressed AAC is fine, and I am fine with subscription music being DRM'd, after all you are renting it, but for purchases it has to be lossess and DRM free.

So perhaps I am in a minority here, but if Apple was to start subscription music of their full catalog (or at least 80&#37; of it) then I would definitely switch if it was $15/month or less. Otherwise Apple will not get a cent out of me for music.

[Uragon]

For music? Yuck. I'll pass and I'm sure Apple will too. It hasn't been successful yet as a business.

For movies? Yeah, I'd pay for that. No question. It would compete with Netflix and Blockbuster. Clearly lots of people DO want to rent movies even though they don't want to rent music.

perhaps you are right, good point.

[Diatribe]

Movie rentals would be awesome. I think a lot of people would do that. And it would definitely boost appleTV sales.

[tribulation]

Movie rentals would be awesome. I think a lot of people would do that. And it would definitely boost appleTV sales.

Netflix has been beta testing their download service for a while now. Though, it's NOT available on for the Mac thus I haven't tested it. Being Netflix, they will have a huge leg up on Apple if they get a major rollout of the service working well, quickly. If Apple is going to do it, they need to do it now. And yes they should MOST DEFINITELY do it. Without the iTV it would have been nice. With the iTV, it's a perfect fit --- because as so many of us have already stated, the iTV is basically useless as it is now (without hacks, which will obviously never catch on with the major public). But an iTV with subscription TV/Movies, they'd have a billion dollar revenue stream in their pocket.

I will never buy a movie or TV show from the iTMS, it's a total ripoff. Subscription is the only way they'll ever get money out of me and I'd assume most others.

[a456]

in the few years the service has been available I have spent about $250 on subscriptions and I have accumulated around 14,000 songs - many of which I still have not listened too. Thats a lot of music. In the same time, I have not purchased a single song from iTunes, also I have never downloaded pirated music from a P2P service.

I think that there are two types of people. Those that listen to the latest music and those that slowly accumulate album by album music that they find to be of a certain quality and enjoyable to listen to across many many years. No type of person is better than the other, just as with books - some read the latest smashes and some read the classics. There clearly is a market for both model types, but I think that the subscription service sounds like DRM hell, and not everyone is as tech minded as you - what happens to the man in the street if his MP3 player is "buggy"? If Apple can get a subscription service that serves the needs of people like Kerryn (minus the tech skills) then why not - but it would be a huge mistake to migrate completely over to this model. I personally would only download music that I then own.

[Diatribe]

Netflix has been beta testing their download service for a while now. Though, it's NOT available on for the Mac thus I haven't tested it. Being Netflix, they will have a huge leg up on Apple if they get a major rollout of the service working well, quickly. If Apple is going to do it, they need to do it now. And yes they should MOST DEFINITELY do it. Without the iTV it would have been nice. With the iTV, it's a perfect fit --- because as so many of us have already stated, the iTV is basically useless as it is now (without hacks, which will obviously never catch on with the major public). But an iTV with subscription TV/Movies, they'd have a billion dollar revenue stream in their pocket.

I will never buy a movie or TV show from the iTMS, it's a total ripoff. Subscription is the only way they'll ever get money out of me and I'd assume most others.

I'd love a 4 / 6 / 8 movie rentals per month subscription or for example a 3 / 4 / 5 TV show subscription.

There are a lot of things they could do that would make many people drop their cable.

Edit: And Apple has the huge advantage of its customer base that Netflix doesn't. So Netflix would need a big head-start.

[Yvan256]

For music? No. Music is cheap and we can listen to it everywhere, many times. That's what music is for. Even if there's subscriptions for music I won't use it.

But buying movies and TV shows? Especially at the current prices and resolutions/bitrates? Absolutely not. I don't care how many they've sold so far either.

Besides, people are already used to the fact of paying a monthly fee to have lots of TV shows sent to them directly. Do the same thing for the TV shows on the iTunes Store at a decent price and I'm dropping my cable immediately. Even if it ends up costing me the same thing, at least I won't be missing the shows I follow, unlike cable where I have to be at home at the right time at the right channel. And hope nobody calls me or something in that hour. PVR is out since it costs too much.

If we can rent movies at about the same price as renting DVDs, I'm in too. I already have this with my digital cable, but the movies are dubbed in french (which is normal since I'm Quebec) and are only available in 4:3, no widescreen (which is dumb). :rolleyes:

[kerryn]

I think that there are two types of people. Those that listen to the latest music and those that slowly accumulate album by album music that they find to be of a certain quality and enjoyable to listen to across many many years. No type of person is better than the other, just as with books - some read the latest smashes and some read the classics. There clearly is a market for both model types, but I think that the subscription service sounds like DRM hell, and not everyone is as tech minded as you - what happens to the man in the street if his MP3 player is "buggy"? If Apple can get a subscription service that serves the needs of people like Kerryn (minus the tech skills) then why not - but it would be a huge mistake to migrate completely over to this model. I personally would only download music that I then own.

I agree with this statement. I believe Apple could do well to supply both markets.

I only listen to music in the car on my long commute. I like variety and radio in our area is appalling :( . So I use subscription (rental) music to explore new music that I would never be exposed too otherwise. I fill up my Nano with a mixture of favorites (about 10%), general music that is rated okay (2 stars or more - about 30%) and unrated music not played in the prior 2 weeks (about 60%). I then listen randomly to the music. Gradually over time though rating I weed out the music I do not like and find the music I do. This way I have discovered artists I would have never heard off before. :)

With the rental option you can risk free explore new music. If you do not like it you can delete it off your system, if its average you leave the track on your system and it may play every few months - with 14000+ songs it takes a long time to repeat tracks, and if you really like it, you can support the artist and buy the CD or purchase the track on iTunes (lossless DRM free of course! :p)

If Apple was to offer all three models of music service:

1) Per track purchase as they do now -m but perhaps in 3 tiers a cheaper .79c 128 DRM AAC, .99c DRM free 256 AAC or, $1.39 DRM free Apple lossless
2) Subscription Purchase - x amount of tracks per month for $? per month
3) Rental - all you can download with DRM time out (which is resync'd with iTunes synchronization)

then I think Apple would cover all corners of the market and have a big win on its hand. Perhaps they would finally convince some of the 95% of people out there that do not use iTunes for music purchasing/obtaining.

[kerryn]

Do the same thing for the TV shows on the iTunes Store at a decent price and I'm dropping my cable immediately. Even if it ends up costing me the same thing, at least I won't be missing the shows I follow, unlike cable where I have to be at home at the right time at the right channel. And hope nobody calls me or something in that hour. PVR is out since it costs too much.

I doubt very much that iTunes will be cheaper than cable plus a DVR for a similar amount of content.

[skellener]

I can guarantee you that if Apple offers a subscription service, whether for movies, TV or music, it won't be cheap.

[failsafe1]

I would be glad to use a sub model for movies. I am considering going with netflicks because they will offer streaming movies at some time in the future. If I could get all I need in a one stop shop music to own, movies to watch on demand then I am in.

[richard4339]

Apple... PLEASE... I really support this. I spend, at most, $3 a month for songs via individual downloads. I have no problem paying you $10 a month for a subscription!

[mrgreen4242]

I'd drop my cable service for an iTMS TV/movie subscription service. Well, I'd do it in a year when my TiVo service is up, or as soon as I found someone who would assume that contract in exchange for getting the box... Figure a CHEAP cable plan is $35 and TiVo adds $13 more making $30 for an unlimited TV show package a good deal. Throw in an option to get some free movie rentals via iTunes for an extra $10 a month and I can drop the $18 a month Netflix account. Give me a $10 per month add on for music as well, and I'd take that too.

Even better would be adding an Apple TV lease program... subscribe to a plan and pay $5 per month for your Apple TV which Apple would own if you cancel the service, etc.

[redfirebird08]

if they give you a choice between subscription and regular, then this might not be a bad thing

And a discount for subscribers too. I'm a Rhapsody subscriber and they charge 89 cents (with NO sales tax unlike iTunes...one of the big reasons I avoid iTunes purchases as often as possible) for songs and $8.99 for albums. I have recording software so I typically record stuff that I consider worth owning. :D

[redfirebird08]

but it would be a huge mistake to migrate completely over to this model. I personally would only download music that I then own.

Subscription users have the same exact rights as everyone else on Napster and Rhapsody, etc. Like I mentioned in a previous post, Rhapsody actually gives you a discount for downloading the tracks (10 cents off or $1 off for albums) and unlike iTunes, they don't charge sales tax. I have a huge problem with such small items on the Internet requiring sales tax. If we can buy a physical product from Amazon.com without sales tax, then iTunes should have the same policy. Don't let the states decide this issue. It's not fair to consumers. $9.99 is really $10.81 for me on iTunes. And $.99 is really $1.08. That's pretty ridiculous when you compare it with something like Rhapsody. Rhapsody doesn't even charge tax for users who AREN'T subscribers. Non-subscribers pay $.99 per track or $9.99 for albums but there's no tax!

Anyone who makes the mistake of thinking that subscription services DON'T offer regular downloads is ignorant. End of story. Oh, and I've got news for Mac fanboys out there. Rhapsody gives you 192 kbps downloads for $.99 or $.89 if you are a subscriber. The STREAMS are 128 kbps just like iTunes' full downloads, and then you've got DRMed subscription downloads which are 160 kbps. The quality on iTunes is pathetic for what they charge you. With the subscription, you have the option of having your library with streams or DRMed downloads. The streams help save hard drive space for those with such an issue. I honestly think if iTunes could implement a similar plan to Rhapsody's, they would put everyone else out of business. This is what they would need to offer:

128 kbps streams, 192 kbps DRM downloads, and 256 kbps full downloads. I currently pay $100 per year for Rhapsody so around $8.33 per month. A plan like this could work really well if you include movies and TV shows. Have a $20-30 per month fee for all you can eat subscriptions to movies, TV shows, and music. I agree with others that an option must exist for a combination. You should be able to choose just TV shows, just movies, or just music for your subscription.

[kerryn]

The Yahoo! subscription service is 192kbps WMA which is even better than Rhapsody.

I used to use Rhapsody and it was a pretty good service, a lot better than Yahoo! when it was first established. Now I think the Yahoo! service is almost the equivalent of Rhapsody but it is cheaper and has higher quality music (192 versus 160 for subscription).

[redfirebird08]

The Yahoo! subscription service is 192kbps WMA which is even better than Rhapsody.

I used to use Rhapsody and it was a pretty good service, a lot better than Yahoo! when it was first established. Now I think the Yahoo! service is almost the equivalent of Rhapsody but it is cheaper and has higher quality music (192 versus 160 for subscription).

I've tried Yahoo but don't like the interface of their software, and more importantly, they stole about $60 from me. I did their "free trial" about a year and a half ago, then got an email right before Christmas telling me that they were about to charge my account for another year of service. I had not even been using the service since I thought it was cancelled within the trial period, but they had horrible help on their website and no phone number to talk to someone in person. Needless to say, I'm never trying them again because I had to email them over and over just to make them cancel the subscription even though I had thought it was cancelled almost a year before hand (within their free trial which was 2 weeks or something). It might have been a glitch in the system, but they still ripped me off.

The biggest reason I want an iTunes subscription is that I think people deserve the option. I have a big problem buying music online and paying taxes on it. If I can buy the physical product from online stores like Amazon.com without taxes, then I shouldn't be taxed on iTunes downloads. Having said this, if there was a subscription model I'd actually consider switching to it if the quality was high enough and they had just as many songs if not more than Rhapsody. I would not mind paying tax on a subscription, but on regular downloads it's a ripoff. But they would have to make their price competitive of course including the tax. I pay $100 per year for Rhapsody. iTunes for just a music subscription would have to make it somewhere in the range of $95 + tax.