PDA

View Full Version : Research Study: iTunes Video Failing To Duplicate Music Success




MacRumors
Dec 7, 2007, 08:32 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Forrester Research, Inc has released a new research study (http://web1.forrester.com/Research/Document/Excerpt/0,7211,43478,00.html) that is critical of Apple's iTunes video attempts, and states there is room for competition in the industry.

The iTunes video experiment of selling TV shows for $1.99 and movies for upwards of $9.99 — although a great service to the 4% of online adults who regularly buy video on iTunes — is not a mainstream model. Importantly, it won’t translate into what Apple really wants: increased demand for sophisticated hardware like the iPod touch and Apple TV.

Forrester conducted an online survey of 5,379 US and Canadian individuals aged 18 to 88. Forrester believes that only 4% of the online population buys iTunes videos, in contrast to a total of 19% iTunes store consumer population. Forrester acknowledges that while those 4% are satisfied with their service, the iTunes video store will remain a curiosity rather than a game-changer.

One of the pitfalls mentioned is that there are currently easier ways to get [free] TV shows, including consumer DVR's and services like NBC Direct. Furthermore, Forrester calls out Apple's lack of a catalogue of hit movies. One result of Apple's video misfortunes is that although awareness of the AppleTV is at 45%, the purchase intent is only at 3%.

In an open letter to Apple, Forrester suggests it's time to change their video game plan, including winning NBC back (background (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/30/nbc-rhetoric-vs-itunes-increases/)), adding a movie rental model (rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/11/10/rentals-evidence-in-itunes-7-5/)), funneling more web content into iTunes, and supporting an advertising model for TV shows.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/07/research-study-itunes-video-failing-to-duplicate-music-success/)



twoodcc
Dec 7, 2007, 08:35 AM
maybe now they'll start offering HD video, so i can start buying :cool: :apple:

Squonk
Dec 7, 2007, 08:39 AM
I want HD content and movie rentals on the music store. And for :apple:TV I want HD or BR and surround sound support. Thank you.

SPQR
Dec 7, 2007, 08:40 AM
The choice of Movies on iTunes is pretty poor. Reminds me of years ago when our local store had a couple of shelves full of VHS video's for hire. The owner didn't think there was much of a market - and then Blockbuster arrived near by.

shoffmueller
Dec 7, 2007, 08:42 AM
and iTunes music is successfull because people buy music, not rent. Opposite consumer preference for each product.

davidtoronto
Dec 7, 2007, 08:45 AM
Last time I saw, we Canadians didn't have access to any feature films on iTunes. Maybe if that changed, the statistics would improve.

SthrnCmfrtr
Dec 7, 2007, 08:45 AM
iTunes won't present a serious alternative to piracy until they can lower the prices and raise the quality. Unfortunately, that's not really up to Apple.

Every sensible person is aware that, regardless of ethics, a black market will appear if pleasant options do not exist. With the black market firmly in place, especially one as efficient and relatively risk-free as BitTorrent, is this news really surprising?

The content providers and creators are still stuck on a concept of preserving their historic profit margins, even though it's clear to most of us that they'll have to compete with the (free) black market just to survive.

Avatar74
Dec 7, 2007, 08:48 AM
Here we go again. The same moron analysts (mind you, not ALL analysts are morons... I'm an analyst :D) who said the iPod would go "nowhere", and then on scant third party data claimed iTunes sales were collapsing, are tooting their horn yet again about iTunes Video.

Well, it certainly didn't die back when I posted this rebuttal (http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=234667&cid=19117379) on Slashdot to their earlier misgivings that they are simply repeating ad nauseum.

While the Forrester article has the appearance of news, it's just more hot air to further discredit the internet as a source of newsworthy information.

The strategy Apple is deploying is going to take some time to seep into the public consciousness, something Forrester doesn't grasp. iPods were not a success overnight... they were around for three years before they really took off... and it was that "doomed" iTunes Music Store that, once it found its footing, contributed to the success of the technological convergence model Apple is building upon. The same model of technological convergence that involves various pieces of the puzzle.

The truth is, video sales have been stellar for Apple more than they have for any other online outlet. If anyone can make it work by sheer will, Apple has that ability. Note that I am not claiming what WILL happen in the future... I just think Forrester has a history of being a harbinger of nonsensical "research" and unsubstantiated conclusions.

SthrnCmfrtr
Dec 7, 2007, 08:48 AM
and iTunes music is successfull because people buy music, not rent. Opposite consumer preference for each product.

A penetrating observation. Amazing to me that multi-billion dollar corporations can't seem to grasp what every young family already knows instinctively.

Orup70
Dec 7, 2007, 08:48 AM
For an interesting comment on the report by Daniel Eran Dilger at RoghlyDrafted Magazine:

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/06/forresters-james-mcquivey-announces-the-death-of-itunes-again/

There seems to be some errors and mistakes in the report...

/ Phl

Luveno
Dec 7, 2007, 08:49 AM
Forrester conducted an online survey of 5,379 US and Canadian individuals aged 18 to 88. Forrester believes that only 4% of the online population buys iTunes videos, in contrast to a total of 19% iTunes store consumer population. Forrester acknowledges that while those 4% are satisfied with their service, the iTunes video store will remain a curiosity rather than a game-changer.

US *and* Canadian individuals? We're still not able to purchase video in canada, beyond pixar short films, and music videos. I ordered an AppleTV at launch, because I thought Apple would finally start selling video in Canada. How wrong I was. Here I am, nearly a year later, and my AppleTV is still under utilized because I can't buy video to play on it. If video were available in Canada, I would easily spend $50-$100 a month on tv/movies.

apollo8fan
Dec 7, 2007, 08:49 AM
Video quality and resolution are important to me. This 640 pixel wide crap is for the birds.

Loge
Dec 7, 2007, 08:50 AM
and supporting an advertising model for TV shows.

yes, that's what people want - more adverts!

Oh, and $279 to read the article, I think I'll pass.

ccunning
Dec 7, 2007, 08:50 AM
If they ever offer HD TV shows at reasonable prices, I will drop my cable subscription.

If they ever offer a "rental" model for movies I will drop Netflix.

If they offer HD movies for purchase, I'll start buying movies again and stop worrying about the high def disc format wars.

Consultant
Dec 7, 2007, 08:50 AM
Um, this "research company" almost never have good Apple related report.

They are just trying to grab headlines with negative news.

Last week they said "iTunes needs NBC back", when in reality iTuns is what made NBC's shows popular.

ifjake
Dec 7, 2007, 08:51 AM
i'd use iTunes for movie rentals, because there's no way to get the movie onto external media for playback, only just as a backup, and i don't have near the space to begin buying movies and actually holding on to them. and at that point if i'm just holding on to movies while the rental is good, they might as well be DVD quality at least. HD would take too long to download.

Iroganai
Dec 7, 2007, 08:52 AM
I hate Ads in TV shows. I once tried to watch The Office on the new NBC website, and the excessive ads sucked. Why do we have to see ads on PCs/Macs ? I'd gladly pay some money instead of forced to watch ads.

reckless_0001
Dec 7, 2007, 08:53 AM
Last time I saw, we Canadians didn't have access to any feature films on iTunes. Maybe if that changed, the statistics would improve.

That's exactly what I thought when I read that. "Why interview Canada? We don't have videos in iTunes. If we did, I'd buy em like cah-razy!". :)

Avatar74
Dec 7, 2007, 08:55 AM
For an interesting comment on the report by Daniel Eran Dilger at RoghlyDrafted Magazine:

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/06/forresters-james-mcquivey-announces-the-death-of-itunes-again/

There seems to be some errors and mistakes in the report...

/ Phl

While I'm not convinced of roughlydrafted's sense of journalistic integrity (they get info wrong too) they do make some very good points about McQuivey which I've made previously on Slashdot... see my above post.

super_kev
Dec 7, 2007, 08:55 AM
The :apple:TV needs to have HD and 5.1 surround support, and then I'll pick it up. Most people have setups like that these days, so there's no reason why the :apple:TV shouldn't have it.

merge
Dec 7, 2007, 08:55 AM
Quite simply...
People want to own music.
People want to rent movies.

Maybe not everyone... but in general. Those 2 rules apply very well.

Make an :apple: TV with DVR, sell it dirt cheap, and sell a subscription based rental services and apple would do to movies what they did to music.

Peace
Dec 7, 2007, 08:56 AM
yes, that's what people want - more adverts!

Oh, and $279 to read the article, I think I'll pass.

That's exactly what the industry wants.

Um, this "research company" almost never have good Apple related report.

They are just trying to grab headlines with negative news.

Last week they said "iTunes needs NBC back", when in reality iTuns is what made NBC's shows popular.

iTunes does need NBC back and Jobs better give in.

I hate Ads in TV shows. I once tried to watch The Office on the new NBC website, and the excessive ads sucked. Why do we have to see ads on PCs/Macs ? I'd gladly pay some money instead of forced to watch ads.

Everybody hates ads except the advertising industry and the studios that pay them money.
I've been testing Hulu.com for a while now and it works rather well utilizing flash,java and the H.264 codec. NBC has actually done a good job.

Dicx
Dec 7, 2007, 08:56 AM
My Apple TV has been gathering dust the past few months, unless something changes it will continue to do that.

emotion
Dec 7, 2007, 09:00 AM
From a UK perspective the price ($ almost equals ?!) is a massive put off.

Most people here have DVRs now anyway. Apple need to get into that. However, they won't because it is contrary to their business model.

Edit: Remember it's people's own CDs that filled iPods and made that device popular (at least initially). If Apple could do the same for DVDs and had DVR functionality in AppleTV then they'd be selling lots of AppleTVs (and maybe even more Mac Minis as home servers for this content). Off the back of that they then have the foothold to sell stuff on the store.

Stella
Dec 7, 2007, 09:00 AM
Its not suprising since Video is only available in two countries - the UK and u.s.

Also, it doesn't help that NBC content has gone...

aLoC
Dec 7, 2007, 09:01 AM
When something is only 99c just getting a "file" is ok, you don't care if you lose it. But when it's $20 you want a hardcopy.

alywa
Dec 7, 2007, 09:02 AM
I buy music, rent video. This isn't that complicated.

If I'm going on a trip, I want to be able to load a movie or two onto my iphone, watch them, and be done with it. I will likely never watch them again, so paying $10 for them isn't worth it to me.

IF, and that's a big IF, I could record them onto DVD for future usage, I would buy kids shows (Thomas, Wonderpets, Pixar Movies, etc) instead of traditional DVDs... but without the ability to record onto DVD its a dealbreaker.

Apple is a smart company... they know how the movie store is doing. I expect something big concerning rentals soon.

MacsAttack
Dec 7, 2007, 09:02 AM
The cost is insane, and the selection is too limited.

Music works because it introduced cherry-picking the tracks you want, and the cost per track is low enough to make impulse buying happen - and downloads are fast enough so that you are only a few minutes away from getting your song (on average).

Video is a different kettle of octopi. Costs are way out of hand, and Amazon (and next day delivery from a much larger selection of a product that cost far less but provides better quality is almost as convenient).

In the UK, iTunes video fails for the same reason that the BBCs ill-fated iPlayer does. It doesn't deliver anything new, and there are no cost/convenience/quality benefits. I've got a FreeView DDT receiver hooked up to my Mac running EyeTV. I get transmission-quality programs (which can be automatically transcribed to my iTunes library - and onto my iPod) with no DRM or time limits - and access to far more channels than just the BBC (who needs iPlayer). There is far more content out there than I could ever watch, and (having paid the license fee and bought the hardware) I can do so at no additional expense. Looking back at my recordings, I find I'm only watching around 3 hours of TV a week anyway (just finished recording Heros Season 1 - which is not even available to me from iTunes (and would have cost me more than buying the season box set if it had been).

justflie
Dec 7, 2007, 09:03 AM
Meh, I don't see myself buying videos from iTunes until they have HD or very high quality movie downloads >= DVD quality. I typically record TV shows/re-encode older seasons of episodes (ie Simpsons) for my iPhone and that gives me plenty of content.

DeaconGraves
Dec 7, 2007, 09:04 AM
Last week they said "iTunes needs NBC back", when in reality iTuns is what made NBC's shows popular.

Seeing that NBC has been wallowing in 4th place for the past several years, iTunes certainly hasn't done that good of a job making them popular then. :D

I think this study makes sense. The only time I have bought TV shows online is for a few show's early seasons that aren't on DVD (Top Chef). Every other need for video I can get more reasonably priced and better quality through TiVo, Netflix, or simply buying a DVD/BluRay disc. And who cares about putting a movie on my iPod when in most situations where I'd have time to sit down and watch it my laptop (if not my TV) is likely sitting right nearby?

Music worked because there was already a substantial "illegal" market for mp3s and iTunes came in and legitimized the process. While there's that same market for movies, its never been as substantial (or as popular in the mainstream), so Apple's had more work cut out from them this time.

But until there's HD content, I see no point in investing a lot of money in video.

Stampyhead
Dec 7, 2007, 09:04 AM
iTunes movie rentals would be amazing. I would spend way too much money there...
If iTunes puts advertisements in their TV shows they would lose me as a customer. The reason I pay $1.99 for shows from them is so I don't have to watch commercials.

soosy
Dec 7, 2007, 09:04 AM
Video quality and resolution are important to me. This 640 pixel wide crap is for the birds.

Agreed. I want a true DVD experience. Resolution, 5.1 sounds, extras, the ability to burn my own copy.

If they could go HD that would really be something.

Beefeater
Dec 7, 2007, 09:07 AM
Doesn't surprise me, most people don't want to watch tv shows on their computer. I know there is Apple tv for that but it does not seem like its worth it...

~Shard~
Dec 7, 2007, 09:08 AM
Agreed. I want a true DVD experience. Resolution, 5.1 sounds, extras, the ability to burn my own copy.

If they could go HD that would really be something.

Didn't Steve Jobs declare 2005 "The Year of HD" back at MWSF 05? Sounds like Mr. Jobs has to catch up to himself in this respect then... :p ;)

Thataboy
Dec 7, 2007, 09:09 AM
Who in their right mind would spend $10 on a low quality, DRM laden movie? It was a lame business model to begin with.

You either need DRM-free HD to own for $10-15 (that ain't gonna happen in the near future), or a subscription rental model. Apple really needs to look to Netflix -- Apple can charge a bit more per month because there is no queue and there is immediate downloading. Unlimited download plans are unreasonable because of bandwidth concerns and unnecessary because even Netflix is throttled by the constraints of time/mailing.

So a rental model that is something like:

$9.99 - up to 2 movies
$14.99 - up to 5 movies
$19.99 - up to 10 movies
$29.99 - up to 20 movies, and then $3.99/movie thereafter.

DVD-quality, DRM that allows iPhone/iPod/AppleTV playback for 7 days, no burning. Netflix would still be cheaper, but for the non-Handbraking types, I think this would be an attractive deal.

juanm
Dec 7, 2007, 09:10 AM
I'd love to see iTunes offering documentaries impossible to find otherwise... and would gladly pay the price to get some kind of subscription to have access to all National Geographic or BBC documentaries.
There's a niche with hard to find/old movies.

Well, that's my opinion, and usually it's not worth much :p

MacSween
Dec 7, 2007, 09:11 AM
Until Apple starts offering HD quality downloads, I'm not buying anything.

The quality of the few videos that I have purchased from iTunes is pathetic. Since any purchase I make is going to be with me for a long time, I am not going to buy something that is going to look terrible in the future.

If Apple had an upgrade policy that would automatically upgrade my purchases to the state of the art resolutions when they occur, I would not have to worry about my library becoming obsolete. That would be a great incentive to buy from Apple iTunes.

Digital Skunk
Dec 7, 2007, 09:11 AM
I want HD content and movie rentals on the music store. And for :apple:TV I want HD or BR and surround sound support. Thank you.

Amen. Give me an avenue to watch this content in the first place, and make it rentals for the movies and we have a deal. After that they can make it HD and give 5.1 surround to sweeten the pot. Right now, there is no way I am paying more than $4 to watch a movie I can get somewhere else. And there is no way I can suffer through a low res version of anything on an HDTV.

When something is only 99c just getting a "file" is ok, you don't care if you lose it. But when it's $20 you want a hardcopy.

I agree, but you can always back things up or burn them to disc.

emotion
Dec 7, 2007, 09:11 AM
Doesn't surprise me, most people don't want to watch tv shows on their computer. I know there is Apple tv for that but it does not seem like its worth it...

The AppleTV need DVR (built in EyeTV). As I say they're unlikely to go that route.

Don't forget that a lot of people travel by train/bus/plane and watch video on iPod/iPhone. This is also a perfect market for Apple that they are just not tapping into.

KingYaba
Dec 7, 2007, 09:11 AM
Never once have I purchased a video from iTunes. Until High Definition is offered I shall refrain from doing so.

kkat69
Dec 7, 2007, 09:22 AM
Unfortunately, that's not really up to Apple.

That's one thing a lot of people do not understand and blame Apple anyway which goes with your next statement...


The content providers and creators are still stuck on a concept of preserving their historic profit margins,

Which is why things are priced the way they are. It also goes as to why there is a lack of content selection. Apple WANTS to add more but most of the movie industry does not want to support it since they make more money in DVD sales. $20 buck (mostly) for a movie when I can buy it digitally for $9-$12/14 bucks or bitTorrent it for free. Apple wants to put all this content (movie,music,tv) in digital format but at a price that's reasonable.

iTunes isn't the real reason this model doesn't work (yes it has a share in the overall issue) but it's the money grubbers that make it not work.

gnasher729
Dec 7, 2007, 09:22 AM
I would be curious to see some numbers how for example iTMS video sales compare to say Napster's revenue, or how AppleTV compares to TiVo.

notjustjay
Dec 7, 2007, 09:25 AM
That's exactly what I thought when I read that. "Why interview Canada? We don't have videos in iTunes. If we did, I'd buy em like cah-razy!". :)

Yeah, seriously. I bet they did that intentionally to skew the statistics to suit whatever agenda they have, because anyone who gave this any thought would realize that surveying Canadians would give the same answer: we don't download TV shows, we don't download movies -- not because we're not interested, but because we CAN'T!

Watch it turn out that the people they interviewed were 75% from Canada and 25% from the States. Statistics can be made to show anything you want...

ShavenYak
Dec 7, 2007, 09:28 AM
What a surprise that people aren't lining up to pay $1.99 to see TV shows they can watch (and TiVo) for free, or buy on DVD at the end of the season for less, or $13 to buy movies that you can get on DVD (with better picture and sound) for the same or less money, or rent cheaper. Combine this with the lame AppleTV (no surround sound? What is this, 1990?) and it should be obvious why iTunes isn't selling videos.

I think folks would consider renting videos, especially if they could do it from FrontRow or an AppleTV and begin watching soon after downloading commences. Making videos available in HD resolutions with real digital surround sound would help. TV shows should be much less expensive - maybe $5-10 per season - or perhaps they should be handled as rentals as well, with an entire season costing about as much as a movie rental.

justflie
Dec 7, 2007, 09:36 AM
I forgot to mention this earlier; along with the increase in video quality needed before I would be a movie, I would also require surround sound. What's the point of having a decent surround system when you're listening to pro logic II from a stereo source? haha, that drives me nuts!

boxlight
Dec 7, 2007, 09:37 AM
> an online survey of 5,379 US and Canadian individuals aged 18 to 88

Canadians can't buy TV shows on iTMS. So their results are totally invalid.

gkarris
Dec 7, 2007, 09:37 AM
I would be curious to see some numbers how for example iTMS video sales compare to say Napster's revenue, or how AppleTV compares to TiVo.

Apple should use Tivo as an example. I use my Tivo for weather and rental through Amazon. Apple needs to start doing the same offering OS X Widgets and iTunes rentals.

I buy some shows, but am hesitant since I end up with the DVD anyways - not into the whole DRM/No Physical Media thing... I like collecting shows on disc (and always have since LaserDisc).

Spades
Dec 7, 2007, 09:52 AM
DVD resolution: 720x480
iTunes video resolution: 640x480

They're not that different. What is different is the terrible encoding on iTunes videos. The current resolution would be OK (not that I'd mind HD resolution) if they could encode it so the video wasn't full of compression artifacts large enough to give children nightmares. MPEG4 is supposed to be the same quality in a smaller size than the MPEG2 used on DVDs. Which means they can be the same quality in smaller size. So why have the dropped down the quality so much that it's worse than a typical DVD?

Consultant
Dec 7, 2007, 09:53 AM
Seeing that NBC has been wallowing in 4th place for the past several years, iTunes certainly hasn't done that good of a job making them popular then. :D


Yup. NBC has been in 4th place overall for a while now, but the shows that were originally promoted on iTunes ARE the best viewed shows on NBC.

LemonsofDeath
Dec 7, 2007, 10:00 AM
I think one market that is often overlooked is people that don't have cable or satellite television. I don't mind paying the 1.99 price tag for television shows because the twenty or so dollars I spend a month on iTunes (I don't really watch that much) is far cheaper then the 100 dollars a month it costs to get all these shows for 'free' (and without the hassle of remembering when the are on ect. ect. ect.)

jaw04005
Dec 7, 2007, 10:01 AM
There are several problems with video in general.

Most people don't watch TV Shows more than once. Therefore, the only person you're really going to get purchasing TV Shows is someone without cable, wants to live a "digital lifestyle" (discs are an inconvenience, instant gratification, etc) or missed an episode of their favorite show.

If you're a TV lover, you're much better off purchasing season DVD sets at full quality at a lower price. Not to mention, once you get done with the box set—you can sell it, trade it or give it to a friend.

And don't forget—every major network (in the United States) offers free episode streaming.

With regards to movies, Apple's prices are ridiculous. I know of no one that purchases iTunes movies on a general basis (or at all). $12.99 or $9.99 for a sub-par portable version of a film is too expensive. I will be eager to see the sales figures once that gets bumped up to $14.99 because of Fox

Also movies lack surround sound, multiple languages, bonus content or extra features.

The value for your dollar (or euro, etc) is just not there for online video.

xenotaku
Dec 7, 2007, 10:01 AM
Um, this "research company" almost never have good Apple related report.

They are just trying to grab headlines with negative news.

Last week they said "iTunes needs NBC back", when in reality iTuns is what made NBC's shows popular.

hahahah, how old are you? 12? NBC shows have been and will continue to be popular with or without Apple. Apple needs NBC MUCH more than NBC needs apple.


As for the lack of video interest, I don't agree with the need for advertising, but I do agree, they NEED to create a rental system that works with Apple TV. If and when that happens, I will finally use iTunes for video, and I might actually buy an AppleTV. Netflix is all I need as it is, I still don't understand why people buy movies.

nbs2
Dec 7, 2007, 10:02 AM
Everybody hates ads except the advertising industry and the studios that pay them money.

Except during the Super Bowl ;)

I don't see what the uproar about a couple of ads is all about. As some have mentioned, video is more a rental system than purchase system. Sure a lot of people buy movies and keep them to watch over and over again, but I would venture that more money gets dropped into the rental system for movies that might get watched once or twice - or just to check it out before committing to the purchase (I wonder if sales would go up or down if "no return" policies weren't in place for movies - the number of people too lazy to bring the movie back or just liking the movie would surely far exceed the number if pirates, right? I suppose not).

I'd imagine that TV shows are even more prone to single watching, for whatever reason. Maybe it's production values, or perceived star power, or whatever. Point is, if end user costs can be lowered/eliminated by installing ads - customer value is increased significantly. Put all the ads at the beginning (or even better - the end), and value is enhanced even further.

mgauss
Dec 7, 2007, 10:08 AM
Here is why:

While listening to music, one can work, drive, play, etc.

Video monopolizes attention, so really one only watches once!

Quite simply...
People want to own music.
People want to rent movies.

Maybe not everyone... but in general. Those 2 rules apply very well.

Make an :apple: TV with DVR, sell it dirt cheap, and sell a subscription based rental services and apple would do to movies what they did to music.

lazyrighteye
Dec 7, 2007, 10:13 AM
I'd drop Netflix in a heartbeat if Apple offered a similar service.
As has been mentioned over & over: people RENT movies - not buy. As a solid movie goer/fan I still only own a handful of DVDs. But I watch probably 5 movies per week via Netflix.

Side note: is any other Mac/Netflix user annoyed at the lack of Mac compatibility with regards to Netflix's instant viewing service? Windows only - BAH!

Back on topic: Apple/Steve must change their/his stance on movie distribution. What they have now is not working. And I say "not working" not based on this report but on the fact that I'm not using it. And if I'm not using it, millions aren't using it.

I want to be able to access the iTS on my TV via my :apple:TV and select movies to watch on an unlimited subscription basis. Sure, maintain the option to buy - that's smart. But also let me watch what I want when I want. And while not a big movie purchaser, odds increase I'll buy a movie from iTS if I can view it 1st. Maybe when the movie viewing is complete, an on-screen "option to buy" message pops up that I can initiate or cancel. Maybe I could rate the film afterwards and a few other options. Maybe (?).

But with regards to the :apple:TV concept - I really do want to want one. But frankly, just don't see the value, yet. Lots of potential. But right now, a real dud. I'm guessing Apple rushed that product to production in order to sway studios that they (Apple) were serious about movies. If they can get their distribution model fixed, I'm very much interested in a way to get my media onto my TV. But for now, I wait.

C'mon Apple. Let's turn this aspect of your business around in '08.

slu
Dec 7, 2007, 10:14 AM
There is simply not enough content and the content that is there is priced too high. As everyone else has said, rental for video is the way to go. There is no way I am going to pay $1.99 for a TV show to watch once. And the movie selection stinks, but the same thing applies. Why should I pay $9.99 for a movie I will watch once when I can rent it from Blockbuster for less than $5.00?

I don't need better quality, though I'd take it. I need better selection and either a rental option or cheaper prices. I don't even mind ads if it lowers the prices. Hell, I'd put a lot of video on my iPod for my train ride to work if it was free and ad-supported.

baleensavage
Dec 7, 2007, 10:22 AM
I've bought a lot of music from iTunes, but I can count the movies and TV shows that I have bought from there on my hands.

For me it's the DRM. I'm not going to pay money for something I can only watch in iTunes especially if the video isnt DVD-quality. Let me burn a DVD from the movie and make it DVD quality, then I will be all over it. And no, I would not rent movies from iTunes. If I rent a movie, I want to watch it on my TV. I'll stick to Netflix thank you.

Not surprisingly, it's not Apple that has killed online video, it's the movie companies. They put all these dumb restrictions thinking it will have anything to do with stopping piracy. It's been proven time and again that DRM doesn't work. All it does is turn customers away.

blindzero
Dec 7, 2007, 10:22 AM
It's not surprising when you can watch most of the big shows in the same quality online for free, or buy it cheaper on DVD in higher quality, or just TIVO it. Season Passes need to be way cheaper than the DVD box set of a season.

They really have to move to the HD model. I won't pay 10 bucks for a movie if it'll only look great on my IPhone. And Xbox 360's model of charging 6 Bucks for an HD movie rental or 5 Bucks for a HD TV show is not gonna work either.

Price and Quality.

Popeye206
Dec 7, 2007, 10:34 AM
Quite simply...
People want to own music.
People want to rent movies.

Maybe not everyone... but in general. Those 2 rules apply very well.

Make an :apple: TV with DVR, sell it dirt cheap, and sell a subscription based rental services and apple would do to movies what they did to music.

I couldn't agree more! I think most people these days want movies when they want them... not own. I know I don't buy very many DVDs anymore... why? Most just sit there and collect dust. Most of the time when I want to see a movie, I go rent it. Give us an easy way to rent via iTunes and Apple TV and I'll buy one! Oh... but like others, I want HD and 5.1 sound too! :-)

Popeye206
Dec 7, 2007, 10:39 AM
In contrast to movies... I think too many companies are trying to get in the Music biz and will fail. Why do I need music through Verizon or Tivo/Rapsody? This is insane!!!! I buy the music I want and turn on internet radio or satellite radio for when I just want to listen to whatever comes on. Everyone is trying to jump on the band wagon and it's going to be a blood bath of failures soon I'm sure. I know I don't want to manage 2, 3 or more music accounts!

crees!
Dec 7, 2007, 10:41 AM
A good read on the topic:

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2007/12/06/forresters-james-mcquivey-announces-the-death-of-itunes-again/

ClassicBean
Dec 7, 2007, 10:46 AM
Including Canadians in this study is highly flawed. We don't have access to the same video content as Americans. While the U.S. gets TV shows and movies, the Canadian store has a few music videos and some Pixar shorts.

The strategy of this survey is tantamount to conducting a political poll for the 2008 U.S. elections, including Canadians in it, and saying that the results reflect the opinions of the entire U.S. population.

We Canadians are outsiders. We may be smarter, funnier and better looking - and therefore it's understandable why you'd want our opinion since we're clearly the best - but we are still outsiders.

AgingGeek
Dec 7, 2007, 10:57 AM
One word, Steve:

pr0n

You want to make a mint from video? Add this in the parental preferences screens: "Require age verification access to iTunes adult sections".....

nemaslov
Dec 7, 2007, 11:07 AM
This does not surprise me at all. I have not read all of these posts but in my opinion, music is the on the go entertianment. Video is for home or maybe tarvel but watching on an iPod? Sorry but a laptop yes but NOT on an iPod. Once in awhile it could be great but I can't really see waching Heroes over and over and over on an iPod. I can't imagine even watchin Heroes on a TV :D

I got my iPod classic 160GB with 35,ooo songs to take along. That's fine by me!

hh83917
Dec 7, 2007, 11:08 AM
DRM DRM DRM... and price is close to a DVD (higher quality BTW)

Maccus Aurelius
Dec 7, 2007, 11:11 AM
Wisdom is completely lost on the content-doling dinosaurs anyway, because the DRM extends further than the crappy restrictions on iTunes movies. Lots of newer DVD's, particularly Disney and Sony stuff, are harder to rip, so you may have paid almost $30 for a special edition set and be limited to only your DVD player. The last few movies I've purchased were completely closed off, and it's pretty annoying that I can't take it with me on my iPod. Seriously, rentals should be the only model that utilizes DRM. I'm just gonna have to say that locking down legal purchases so tightly is evil, because I can't do what I wish with my purchase what I see fit.

ryanw
Dec 7, 2007, 11:11 AM
IF AppleTV could act as a DVR along with what it currently does, I would totally buy one. And if I happened to have an Apple TV, I would probably buy shows and an occasional movie off iTunes.

Maccus Aurelius
Dec 7, 2007, 11:13 AM
One word, Steve:

pr0n

You want to make a mint from video? Add this in the parental preferences screens: "Require age verification access to iTunes adult sections".....

LOL XXXTunes! The problem I see with this, other than the whiny parents whose kids found a way to access their private accounts, are the big studios that may not want to associate themselves with "smut peddlers", even if the one producing the smut is a subsidiary of theirs :p

madmaxmedia
Dec 7, 2007, 11:32 AM
A penetrating observation. Amazing to me that multi-billion dollar corporations can't seem to grasp what every young family already knows instinctively.

The only thing I will add to that (because in general it is true), is that the movie companies have gradually increased sales of movies by pricing for sale vs. rental (remember the old days when VHS movies cost $100?) That being said, rentals are still more popular and desired for the most part. It would help Apple a lot here to offer both sales and rentals.

With Blockbuster I have to drive to the store and wait in line (if the movie isn't all rented out!) With NetFlix I have to wait 2-3 days for a specific title, which doesn't work for those 'impulse' rentals on Friday or Saturday night. iTunes rentals would potentially erase both those deficits (but requires that you have an ATV if you want to watch a movie with your family in the living room.)

It would also be interesting if they could somehow package ATV with say 30 free rentals or something like that, or even offer some sort of Netflix type plan (10 movies a month for $30 bucks or whatever, etc.)

paquetja
Dec 7, 2007, 11:49 AM
Last time I saw, we Canadians didn't have access to any feature films on iTunes. Maybe if that changed, the statistics would improve.

That's the first thing I thought of when I read that post as well. Asking Canadians about their iTunes video purchasing habits is pretty dumb - we can't buy any video!

That's like asking someone in China if they watch HBO ;)

rockosmodurnlif
Dec 7, 2007, 12:04 PM
In an open letter to Apple, Forrester suggests its time to change their video game plan, including winning NBC back (background (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/30/nbc-rhetoric-vs-itunes-increases/)), adding a movie rental model (rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/11/10/rentals-evidence-in-itunes-7-5/)), funneling more web content into iTunes, and supporting an advertising model for TV shows.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/07/research-study-itunes-video-failing-to-duplicate-music-success/)

Of all the things I saw in this thread, from actual users, that Forrester recommends, according to the original MacRumors post, to Apple in their open letter only a movie rental model is echoed. It can only lead one to question what information they actually gathered in their research since there seams to be a disconnect between wants and recommendations.

Oh wait. Forrester is telling Apple how to make more money right? Not necessarily satisfying customers. Oh, okay, I got it now. Nevermind.

Claytoniss
Dec 7, 2007, 12:05 PM
I just want :apple: everything! I don't have cable, or dvr, or hd dvd, dts 7.1 If :apple:TV gave me all these things. It would be a big fu to cable companies. A true play all media device. Itunes would sooo kick off! They could so improve on Netflix! and save on gas for the mailman!

But there is probably too much politics that are involved, so I am forced to watch TV on their time. I hate that.

sterno74
Dec 7, 2007, 12:12 PM
The reality is that iTunes and iPod filled serious gaps in the market. When the iPod first came out, it was really the only hard drive based music player that was a good size and was easy to work with. iTunes provided a way to get instant gratification of having music now, but without the hassle and moral quandry of P2P.

With video, there's not a similar gap to be filled. Most people watch video, at home, on their TV. The need for instant gratification is solved through various on demand video services and, to a lesser extent, video rental stores, and Netflix. I've personally purchased a few videos through iTunes, but they've always been with the intent of having something to watch on my iPod for an airline flight.

Having said all this, what would really get me on board with Apple's offerings is if they provided an easy way for me to download high definition versions of my favorite shows as they were released. So I could buy a season of Lost, then find it sitting on my computer the day after it's aired, ready to be played. Basically replace my Tivo and my higher priced cable service with being able to just pick the shows I want and buy them.

If I could have that, then I could cut back on my cable service to just the basic channels so I can get news, sports, etc. Then I could get all the episodic programming through iTunes as I wanted it. It would probably save me money in the long run and given enough storage space, I could just maintain all these shows forever if I wanted to go back and watch them later.

Timothy
Dec 7, 2007, 12:20 PM
I should be in the prime target audience for Apple iTunes Video activity. I've been a long-time mac fanatic, I've owned several ipods. I watch video on my ipods. I own an iPhone, and watch video content on my iPhone. I travel a lot.

I have not purchased an Apple TV, even though I keep hoping it makes sense to do so.

I own an EyeTV unit and a Tivo. I dvr most TV shows. EyeTV allows me to get those shows into my iPod/iPhone for free, and automatically. I just began renting movies on the Amazon video rental service on my Tivo.

Any apologetics for Apple on this issue are misguided, imo. They have not provided very compelling reasons to support their business model relative to video. I've purchased maybe 3 tv shows from iTunes when I missed an important episode.

Apple needs to change course on this thing.

kingtj
Dec 7, 2007, 12:23 PM
This pretty well sums it up. If you actually *do* like a particular movie enough to buy it and watch it repeatedly, you'd probably rather buy the physical DVD anyway. (Aren't most people still watching their movies on big-screen TV sets instead of on their computers? If so, a DVD will work in any set-top DVD player out there - many of which sell for as little as $30 or so. Streaming to your TV from iTunes is going to be more like a $200 and up investment for an AppleTV box or something similar.....


and iTunes music is successfull because people buy music, not rent. Opposite consumer preference for each product.

GSMiller
Dec 7, 2007, 12:24 PM
I would just like to be able to burn the movies you buy on iTunes. Until then I'm not paying $10+ for a movie locked in my computer.

pjarvi
Dec 7, 2007, 12:28 PM
I must be in the 4% as I have been buying more TV shows and Movies than I have been buying Music, lately. I do wish they had more content and offered rentals, but would never waste my time with ad supported streams. I got rid of my TV over 5 years ago and haven't looked back since. There is absolutely nothing on any channel, broadcast or network, worth paying for cable or satellite service. It's all mindless teen-pop-fear mongering garbage. At present there is only 1 show I actually like to watch (Little People, Big World), and I get it via season pass through iTunes. For less than the cost of a TV+DVR service, I get to download and watch the episodes whenever I want to, wherever I want to.

I have no respect for anyone that likes any of the television shows currently airing on any of the major broadcast stations. It's all crap.

Good riddance to NBC, as well.

Xeem
Dec 7, 2007, 12:29 PM
yes, that's what people want - more adverts!

Oh, and $279 to read the article, I think I'll pass.

Actually, I'd love it if Apple were to release free, ad-supported content on iTunes. Currently there is no real reason for me to use iTunes for video, as one can either find free ad-supported shows on their repective company websites or find ad-free true high-def TIVO rips on torrents for free.

My other complaint with iTunes video is that my iBook G4 struggles with h.264 videos within iTunes, yet I can run a much higher resolution DIVX movie (with higher bitrate audio) without a hiccup in VLC. iTunes video playback leaves much to be desired.

kornyboy
Dec 7, 2007, 12:42 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/3B48b Safari/419.3)

I want HD content and movie rentals on the music store. And for :apple:TV I want HD or BR and surround sound support. Thank you.

Agreed. I think that HD content would help tremendously and the AppleTV is already able to play it. There just needs to be content available to purchase. If Apple released HD movies on the iTunes store for say $11.99US (less than the average DVD and half the cost of a Bluray or HDdvd) I think things would improve.

diamond.g
Dec 7, 2007, 12:43 PM
I must be in the 4% as I have been buying more TV shows and Movies than I have been buying Music, lately. I do wish they had more content and offered rentals, but would never waste my time with ad supported streams. I got rid of my TV over 5 years ago and haven't looked back since. There is absolutely nothing on any channel, broadcast or network, worth paying for cable or satellite service. It's all mindless teen-pop-fear mongering garbage. At present there is only 1 show I actually like to watch (Little People, Big World), and I get it via season pass through iTunes. For less than the cost of a TV+DVR service, I get to download and watch the episodes whenever I want to, wherever I want to.

I have no respect for anyone that likes any of the television shows currently airing on any of the major broadcast stations. It's all crap.

Good riddance to NBC, as well.
Planet Earth (in HD) says Hi...

lofight
Dec 7, 2007, 12:46 PM
I think it's too early for the video industry on computers... if we wait some years, this will get more populair..

robbyx
Dec 7, 2007, 01:03 PM
I'd love to drop my satellite TV subscription in favor of buying shows from iTunes. Given that I don't watch much TV, it would be much cheaper for me to go this route, plus it would be commercial free. Love that. However, iTunes doesn't offer all of the shows I want and the NBC fiasco proves that content availability is not stable.

I don't have any interest in buying movies via iTunes, but I'd do rentals in a heartbeat. As many others have pointed out, I don't think the fault lies with Apple. They are trying. It's the dinosaur media companies that can't see to figure it out. They are so insanely greedy that they'd rather fight their customers, sue them, etc. than give them what they want.

Of course, there's another option altogether. A new Seagate Terabyte drive is $320, give or take. Add MacTheRipper or HandBreak and you're in business. Rent, Rip, Return. Watch the movie or show when you want to and throw it away when you're done. In essence, a delayed rental. Of course I'd prefer a more legit route, but I think that's up to the studios. I'm not about to watch shows on my computer. I want them on my TV, so the content the studios post online is useless to me.

The studios should be more worried about producing quality programming and films than forcing their customers to consume media by their rules. Let there be advertising-supported free content for those who don't want to pay and let those of us who would *gladly* pay do so for advertising-free content. There's room for different models. The studios need to stop being so greedy.

Oh well, until then, Netflix + MacTheRipper = No Hassle.

MacTheSpoon
Dec 7, 2007, 01:07 PM
Apple can add free TV episodes with embedded commercials, that's cool with me, as long as they keep the commercial-free versions available, too. It's probably a good idea and would increase the popularity of TV downloads a lot.

I think there's only so much Apple can do as far as movie purchases, though, a lot of the problem is with the studios. If I buy a movie I want to purchase something that I can watch at the very highest quality on my TV when I feel like it, with the option to buy DVD or HD formats (720x480 and 10 Mbps with surround sound, or 720p/1080p with full bitrate and surround sound), yet also be able to convert to an iPod size/bitrate if I want a portable version. And I'd want it cheaper than a DVD/HD-DVD/Blu-ray version if it didn't include the "bonus" features, and also because I wasn't paying for media and shipping costs.

The movie studios wouldn't want it to be cheaper, and wouldn't want it convertible to an iPod format, they'd want you to buy it twice, and Apple can't do anything about that, unless they want to start making their own films. So studios need to shoulder a lot of the blame for movie purchases not being more popular.

For rentals... I'd again want full DVD or HD quality for watching on my TV, with some way to convert to an iPod format.

As it is now, the iTunes movies are best purchased when you're in a rush, and only want to watch something on your iPod, but don't have the time to buy and convert a DVD. I think that's all Apple is aiming for, because movie studio restrictions prohibit them from really delivering a product that could threaten physical media sales.

(Also, most people in the USA don't have broadband, and that will have to change for online downloads to make serious inroads.)

skellener
Dec 7, 2007, 01:13 PM
This one is easy...no HD content for iTunes in 2008 = AppleTV dead. Add HD content (TV & Movies) and for movies, at least make them rentable and you might increase the base. If no HD and no movie rentals are coming, they might as well end of life the product in January.

skellener
Dec 7, 2007, 01:14 PM
free TV episodes with embedded commercials You can just watch TV for this.

JesterJJZ
Dec 7, 2007, 01:24 PM
Good, I hope video distribution fails. Hate the idea of compressed video. I can tolerate the Music Store eventhough I've hardly used it, but I like having a physical copy of the films I buy without the need to download and back them up myself. Plus they haven't solved the problem of including bonus features yet. The behind the scenes stuff is half the reason I buy DVDs anyway. On top of that I've stopped buying standard def and have strictly moved to HD.

SigmundFraud
Dec 7, 2007, 01:44 PM
iTunes/ iPod's success was founded primarily on a base of fair-use ripped CDs and illegal downloads, that consumers then built upon from the itunes store. The inclusion of mp3 compatibility was central to the ipod's success. Apple probably got away with pandering to pirates because at the time Apple would not have been considered a significant threat by the studios. By the time Apple came to dabble in video, Apple had emerged as the single biggest (legal) threat to incumbent media distribution companies. In having to establish a new video business, it looks like apple complied with industry concerns.

The world of online video, is, lets face it, primarily DivX torrent downloads. While the Apple catalogue remains limited (or non-existent outside the US), it is understandable that people would want to expand their choice. Neither DivX or a digital TV compatible format is supported on :apple:TV. Outside the US, :apple:TV can only show movies and shows re-coded by the end-user; really too much bother.

I'm not endorsing illegal content, but it seems to me that realism needs to prevail here. iTunes music store has proved that many individuals value honesty and supporting artists over free content. That said, most of the world's ipods are probably weighed down with pirated music. This in turn has probably kept The Studios real; demanding rich content at a very fair price. The iTunes video service has not been kept real; limited content for a relatively high price-premium. If iTunes offered most of the world's TV and movie releases for a fair price, many ordinary people wouldn't even think about bit torrent. But without that "bottom-up" pressure from pirates, I can't see anything changing. :apple:TV will remain an elegant solution for United States citizens who enjoy the simplicity of iTunes and can tolerate a relatively limited catalogue.

Yvan256
Dec 7, 2007, 01:48 PM
You can just watch TV for this.

I don't know how it works in the USA, but you can't do this at all around here in Canada (except maybe half a dozen channels in the major cities).

No cable/satellite = one or two channels at best, and certainly not ABC/NBC/Fox/etc.

As for the iTunes prices, I'd pay 0.50$ for a TV show rental and 0.99$ to buy it. For movies, let's say 4.00$ for a movie rental and 8.00$ to buy it. The resolution could be 640x480 because it would play on iPods, wouldn't look that bad on a TV and is less than a DVD to explain the price difference to the studios. As long as the bitrate is high enough and a good encoder is used, of course.

Prof.
Dec 7, 2007, 01:56 PM
No wonder why the videos aren't selling like the music is selling. IT COS'T MORE MONEY!!! If I were to buy every video I liked off iTunes, I'd be bankrupt within a week. Plus, some people don't like buying movies cause you only watch it once or twice then you never watch it again. So, it's kind of a waste of money to some people. That's one of the reasons why I don't like buying videos.

Prof. :apple:

AtomicPunk
Dec 7, 2007, 03:11 PM
... and supporting an advertising model for TV shows.

You've got to be kidding me. Aren't we advertised to enough, already? Yeesh.

The way I see it...

If I were to "PAY" a total of $1.99 per TV Show download, then I do "NOT" want advertisements in the middle of my viewing experience. If I were to "Rent" TV shows, then I should be free of advertisements as well. Now, if I were to use a Subscription based model, then I would expect that they would want to put in Advertisements, but I would hope that Apple would extend a feature set that would allow to skip advertisements. Yet, if the content were FREE, meaning I do not pay for the Download nor do I have to pay rental or subscription fee, then I would expect see advertisements. But, this doesn't mean that I will use other services over iTunes.

AtomicPunk
Dec 7, 2007, 03:19 PM
No wonder why the videos aren't selling like the music is selling. IT COS'T MORE MONEY!!! If I were to buy every video I liked off iTunes, I'd be bankrupt within a week. Plus, some people don't like buying movies cause you only watch it once or twice then you never watch it again. So, it's kind of a waste of money to some people.

Well, it actually depends on the movie. There are movies I like to own. But, where the article does make sense is by asking for a "Rental" service.

I am still leery of Subscription service model, since I actually like to own what I want to own. Based on how other Subscription based services [Napster, Rhapsody, etc] I would not like to have to pay a monthly fee, on top of paying to own certain content I want to own. Not that music has anything to do with discussing video downloads, but based on the "models" being discussed, it can easily apply to both music and video downloads.

I won't mind renting a video, then purchasing the few that I would like to own, but I don't like renting music.

apollo8fan
Dec 7, 2007, 03:21 PM
DVD resolution: 720x480
iTunes video resolution: 640x480

They're not that different. <snip>

Actually, the difference is bigger than it looks. A 16:9 DVD is encoded at 720x480 (345600) pixels and upscaled to 853x480 (Anamorphic). A 640 pixel-wide 16:9 iTunes movie is 640x360 (230400) pixels; this is a 33% reduction in total pixel count over DVD content, which is certainly nothing to overlook. Plus, since the iPods need the AVC Main profile, some of the really good compression tricks of h.264 can't be used because of the lack of processor power.

Manic Mouse
Dec 7, 2007, 03:22 PM
Well for a start people can't rip their current DVDs as they can with their music, which means they have to re-buy their current collection to get it on iTunes before they think about buying any new movies.

Not ideal.

MikeTheC
Dec 7, 2007, 03:25 PM
Ever since the details were announced about the AppleTV, it's a product that's just never interested me. I mean, apart from my complete and utter lack of interest in television programming, I remember thinking "Ok, but where's the functionality for recording off of TV/satellite? How come this thing isn't a DVR?"

I've never seen a point in people spending $300 for a box that basically just lets them stream purchased TV off of their computer onto a TV set. Oh well...

apollo8fan
Dec 7, 2007, 03:27 PM
<snip>I've never seen a point in people spending $300 for a box that basically just lets them stream purchased TV off of their computer onto a TV set. Oh well...I've loaded my entire DVD collection into iTunes and now I don't have to worry about my kids ruining another DVD. This is a great product for parents.

Rot'nApple
Dec 7, 2007, 03:53 PM
and iTunes music is successfull because people buy music, not rent. Opposite consumer preference for each product.

AGREED!!!

And Apple please don't make any movie service subscription base. I don't want to pay a monthly subscription fee because I do not rent, purchase or see that many movies outside of what's on cable tv as it is now! To pay each month for the privilege of possibly renting a movie, HD or otherwise, to play on AppleTV or iPod or iPhone or iMac etc. would be a real turn off, for me anyway.

If you want to sell a digital "membership card" for a one time small fee, I can live with that, but not a "X" amount / a month fee, please!

BenRoethig
Dec 7, 2007, 04:43 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Forrester Research, Inc has released a new research study (http://web1.forrester.com/Research/Document/Excerpt/0,7211,43478,00.html) that is critical of Apple's iTunes video attempts, and states there is room for competition in the industry.



Forrester conducted an online survey of 5,379 US and Canadian individuals aged 18 to 88. Forrester believes that only 4% of the online population buys iTunes videos, in contrast to a total of 19% iTunes store consumer population. Forrester acknowledges that while those 4% are satisfied with their service, the iTunes video store will remain a curiosity rather than a game-changer.

One of the pitfalls mentioned is that there are currently easier ways to get [free] TV shows, including consumer DVR's and services like NBC Direct. Furthermore, Forrester calls out Apple's lack of a catalogue of hit movies. One result of Apple's video misfortunes is that although awareness of the AppleTV is at 45%, the purchase intent is only at 3%.

In an open letter to Apple, Forrester suggests it's time to change their video game plan, including winning NBC back (background (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/30/nbc-rhetoric-vs-itunes-increases/)), adding a movie rental model (rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/11/10/rentals-evidence-in-itunes-7-5/)), funneling more web content into iTunes, and supporting an advertising model for TV shows.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/07/research-study-itunes-video-failing-to-duplicate-music-success/)

This is not surprising at all. With iTunes Apple brought in a completely new way of doing things that was better for the consumer. Instead of 12 -18 songs, you could now carry thousands of songs in a smaller package and buy them from your computer without ever having to go to the store.

Videos and movies are completely different. Instead of ushering in a new age for movies, Apple is instead holding that age back showing only arrogance and stubbornness. He's the deal apple gives you: you have to pay almost as much for an iTunes movie as you do for a DVD. The iTunes movie is of lower quality and doesn't have the extras that DVDs do. In order to watch the movie on your TV you have to spend at least $300 on an external Apple TV. You can't import or export movie files like you can music files.

In addition, unlike the music files, movie files are still very large. About 20-25% as big as DVD video. ACC music files are a little over 10% the size of of the song on the CD. A regular movie is about a gig in size limiting how many movies your computer, iPod, or AppleTV can carry. This could be avoided with a rental service, but Apple doesn't want to move a way from its music model. Speaking of the store, it really only carries Disney movies. One last hurdle is that you can't record off TV. Sorry, but many of us don't want to buy highlights of the game a week after the fact.

The movie model is failing because it lacks most of the advantages of both the music side of iTunes and traditional video media. It has future potential, but physical hurdles and Apple unwillingness to adapt are major roadblocks.

knewsom
Dec 7, 2007, 05:36 PM
not a big surprise to me... seems that whatever it is I want to watch I can't find on iTunes, and what I can is low quality, SD, 4X3, and unusable in anything but an iPod or appleTV.

For tv shows, typically I watch them on the network site, for shows that aren't on network sites, I download illegally. It's not an issue of the money for me - I'd gladly pay the dollar or two, if the quality was there, and the freedom to burn it to a DVD.

seedster2
Dec 7, 2007, 06:23 PM
Apple TV has been dead in the water ever since it was introduced. It looks cool but needs a massive overhaul to be a real player.

AppleTV doesnt output HD and there is no surround sound:confused:

To make matters worse even if it did, with FIOS it would take you quite a while to download HD quality flicks from the itms.

With the introduction of BR and HDDVD no one even thinks about buying a full length feature that you cant really use freely besides on your pc.

Why pay for television shows when all their respective sites will be showing their own content there for free? No NBC content whatsoever will hurt them as well. No desirable content and limited capabilities make this venture a bust

elgruga
Dec 7, 2007, 08:02 PM
iTunes/ iPod's success was founded primarily on a base of fair-use ripped CDs and illegal downloads, that consumers then built upon from the itunes store. The inclusion of mp3 compatibility was central to the ipod's success. Apple probably got away with pandering to pirates because at the time Apple would not have been considered a significant threat by the studios. By the time Apple came to dabble in video, Apple had emerged as the single biggest (legal) threat to incumbent media distribution companies.

I'm not endorsing illegal content, but it seems to me that realism needs to prevail here. iTunes music store has proved that many individuals value honesty and supporting artists over free content. That said, most of the world's ipods are probably weighed down with pirated music.

A typical 'analysis' based on the premise, invented by the writer, that 'iPods are probably weighted down with pirated music;.

Sorry, no.

My analysis shows that ipods are full of legal music, with an average of 3 'pirated' songs per iPod.
(Yes just like you and Forrester, I made it up)

I might also remind the writer that only the USA has an issue with what you call 'piracy'.
In Canada, for example, it is not illegal to share songs.
This is the same in many countries.

The RIAA may scream piracy, but thats NOT the rest of the world.

Eventually, the idiots at NBC will realise that they can run their buggy-whip business and still get cash from selling shows on iTunes. Why they think its an either/or, I cant imagine.

Maybe one day, some of the fools on this forum will see that the big reason for high-priced music and films is because all the people involved feel they are entitled to salaries that are equal to the entire LIFETIME earnings of one working man or woman - for just making ONE film or record.

What do you call that?

I call it......PIRACY.

DaBrain
Dec 7, 2007, 09:07 PM
and iTunes music is successfull because people buy music, not rent. Opposite consumer preference for each product.

That would be a Big 10-4! If they had rentals at NetFlix prices or better, I would buy an Apple TV or 2 tomorrow and rent iTune movies! Until then no money from me! I been waiting since the Apple TV came out for this option! Let's go Apple! You can do it! :)

Need to amend my comment some. Because, I was thinking that even Netflix has a crappy on line live streaming selection and it's not because they don't want to offer the latest DVD's for streaming. They have come right out and stated that it's the movie companies, producers etc that do not allow them to make all their DVD content available. So having said and thought about it, ID say we are in for a longggggggg wait, thanks to all the providers of movies. I fear it will be a very long time unless a miracle happens and they actually start to think out side the box! But IM not holding my breath on that happening anytime soon!

B. Hunter
Dec 7, 2007, 10:06 PM
Last time I saw, we Canadians didn't have access to any feature films on iTunes. Maybe if that changed, the statistics would improve.

Don't forget TV shows.
I would love to see The Beachcombers and North of 60 available on iTunes.
The Beachcombers is the most popular series in Canadian TV history.
I thought it would have been out by now on DVD. Some real idiots are missing sales with that.

BTW I am American.:D
You have good television shows up there.

hexonxonx
Dec 8, 2007, 02:21 AM
I WANT to buy movies on iTunes but everytime I look, there are the same old movies there. I'm not interested in anything that is offered at this time. TV shows I do like.

Porco
Dec 8, 2007, 06:15 AM
Quite simply...
People want to own music.
People want to rent movies.

Maybe not everyone... but in general. Those 2 rules apply very well.

This keeps getting repeated, and maybe there is some truth in it for some people... but I just don't think this is why video downloads are not taking off like music did. I think it was more true when were in the days of VHS, but DVD has made buying movies (and TV shows) to keep a massive business.

I think price, DRM, resolution and bandwidth are the problems. If Apple raise the resolution, they have less customers who will realistically consider downloading massive files, though capturing some more buyers because of the quality. If they lower the resolution, the quality is not worth it to anyone, despite being easy to download. All that is bad enough, but then you can't burn the files to disc like you can with music purchases, and the proposition becomes a non-starter. Then when you see you can buy a DVD for often the same or less as the lower quality, DRM crippled video file Apple are selling, everything but the immediacy of the download looks like a bad idea (whether you're renting OR buying for that matter).

As much Apple probably hates the idea and would never go for it, a price cut for an immediate download + physical DVD in the post would probably make this thing work better.

matt311rocks
Dec 8, 2007, 06:46 AM
I occasionally buy music from itunes. I don't subscribe to any HD tv so you give me HD and rental options.... I would defiantly get a few movies off there and maybe even buy a :apple:tv.

wmikulic
Dec 8, 2007, 07:09 AM
appletv simply isn't compelling and so it will continue to fail. If Apple wanted to duplicate the success if iPod, which allows you to put your CD into your Mac and move the music to the iPod, you would have to be able to do the same with video: insert a DVD into your Mac and stream/move the video to appletv or to the iPod touch.

appletv would be even better if you could just put the DVD into the appletv and it automatically puts a copy onto its harddrive, and optionally allows you to move a copy to your video iPod.

the Digital Millenium Copyright Act is the worst thing to ever happen to the American public as far as fair-use. Basically fair use (your ability to personally use content you legally rented or bought) is dead.

rjvamp
Dec 8, 2007, 05:40 PM
I think the sample was way to big on the age group. Those upwards of 88 would, based on technology sales and marketing, be a far less likely group to buy into this type of technology. I wouldn't put much faith in the report.

sonicboom
Dec 8, 2007, 09:31 PM
$1.99 is too much for an episode of a TV show. $.99 would change everything (make it up in volume).

The iTunes movies are way over-priced, since they are essentially watch once and toss (or accidentally delete). DVDs are a better value. Apple needs to move to a rental service, or sell the movie file for < $5.

Better quality would be nice but this is really about price.

Fix that, and I'll buy an AppleTV.

Cleverboy
Dec 9, 2007, 05:54 AM
This is hilarious. Roughly Drafted's criticism of McQuivey was spot on.

Two items in need of improvement. iTunes Video / Apple TV.

What does iTunes video need to be MORE successful?

I think they're doing fine. Keep negotiating, add more studios. If you really must... raise prices a bit (add flexible prices). Movie rentals? I'd buy them. Kind of a bum deal, but the suggested model looks very appealing. Release it already! Add cheap content! Check into copyright-expired content. Sell it for 99 cents a pop.

What does Apple Tv need to be MORE successful?

Here we go, ready?

1.) Price: $150-$199
2.) Features: Integrated EyeTV DVR support (just add a USB dongle)
3.) Features: Built-in H.264 encoding acceleration
4.) Features: Full overlay/control integration with television
5.) Features: Standard non-digital TV support
6:) Features: USB storage support & network drive

#5. Has cost Apple Tv the MOST business by far. It's okay to support the new standards, but don't cut people off that don't happen to have a modern digital television. Sure, they'll be screwed soon enough, but let them figure that out. In the meantime, collect your profits.

Catch #3, though? The hidden feature that the industry is killing Apple by heavily litigating? Letting people RIP their DVDs and play them from their hard drive to any Apple TV in the house. Apple would be first in line to launch a RIP & PLAY campaign for DVDs. People would GLADLY throw away the clutter and stream videos from their computers. If Apple TV was an easy to use, low cost Kaleidascape-type solution... And a DVR... for $150-$199... built-in wireless networking... DONE! NOTHING else would matter much. People would wet themselves for an Apple TV set up.

~ CB

Digitalclips
Dec 9, 2007, 08:01 AM
If they ever offer HD TV shows at reasonable prices, I will drop my cable subscription.

If they ever offer a "rental" model for movies I will drop Netflix.

If they offer HD movies for purchase, I'll start buying movies again and stop worrying about the high def disc format wars.

100% agreement here.

Virgil-TB2
Dec 9, 2007, 10:59 AM
The :apple:TV needs to have HD and 5.1 surround support, and then I'll pick it up. Most people have setups like that these days, so there's no reason why the :apple:TV shouldn't have it.Just to point out the obvious ...

AppleTV already has HD and 5.1 sound. :eek:

It's iTunes content that doesn't.

Yvan256
Dec 9, 2007, 11:02 AM
Forrester conducted an online survey fielded in June and July 2007 of 5,379 US and Canadian individuals ages 18 to 88.

I can already see how it happened.

One day, in a Forrester meeting room...
- "How can we make it look like Apple is failing with iTunes in the movies and TV shows area?"
- "Oh I know, let's include people in the survey who are too old, don't use computers and don't even have access to the iTunes content."
- "Make these people 99% of the survey, too! Brilliant!"

:rolleyes:

Virgil-TB2
Dec 9, 2007, 11:11 AM
The cost is insane, and the selection is too limited....I totally agree with this.

I am in a similar situation because I live in Canada, so the things that AppleTV and iTunes offers are kind of "hypothetical" and perhaps more easily analysed at a sort of arms length way than is possible in the US.

It's *all* about cost, and Apple does not control their own costs when it comes to media so they are limited in what they can do.

Cost is like the giant elephant in the room that no one is really talking about.

Apple is purportedly switching to a rental model which is great, but how much will these rentals be? Currently, I buy all my media on physical DVD's (thousands of them) and I rarely pay more than ten bucks for each with maybe ten or twelve first-run movies per year thrown in there at something approaching full-price.

If I wanted to be even slightly dishonest (I don't), I could rent the same movies, rip the files and return the DVD's as I know many people do. That would lower my cost for movies to about 7 bucks a movie on average, maybe even 5.

Even if Roughly Drafted is correct and Apple is about to open the most compelling online video store that ever was, ... the movies would still have to be something like 2 or three bucks to own/rent before it gives me any advantage at all price-wise. And these movies will be of lower quality, and I won't get the actual movie at all in some cases, just a download that dissapears the moment I rent the next one.

The biggest change in the move from physical to digital media that no one ever really wants to bring up is that the cost has to be far less. The media companies just don't get this at all. They have already apparently got Apple to agree to spend 15 bucks a movie wholesale! How can any one make a profitable download or digital rental service out of something with up front costs the same as retail physical media?

Cleverboy
Dec 9, 2007, 12:00 PM
The biggest change in the move from physical to digital media that no one ever really wants to bring up is that the cost has to be far less. The media companies just don't get this at all. They have already apparently got Apple to agree to spend 15 bucks a movie wholesale! How can any one make a profitable download or digital rental service out of something with up front costs the same as retail physical media? Oh, that's not true. People bring this up ALL THE TIME. Just not the people who're offering it. :) Oh, and Jobs... Jobs tries to bring it up with the movie studios but they just frown at him. Like this... :mad: Then they look around and say, "Steve Jobs doesn't want anyone else to make any money!" And Jobs holds his head in his hands.

~ CB

pgwalsh
Dec 9, 2007, 05:07 PM
maybe now they'll start offering HD video, so i can start buying :cool: :apple: Exactly

I want HD content and movie rentals on the music store. And for :apple:TV I want HD or BR and surround sound support. Thank you. I'd like rentals as well, but I'd like to use something other than my computer or the AppleTV.

and iTunes music is successfull because people buy music, not rent. Opposite consumer preference for each product. Um.. If the video's were downloading in HD for $3.99, I'd do it without hesitation. Especially if they had a lot of titles. No more trips to the video store or mailing DVD's back to netflicks.

The choice of Movies on iTunes is pretty poor. Reminds me of years ago when our local store had a couple of shelves full of VHS video's for hire. The owner didn't think there was much of a market - and then Blockbuster arrived near by. exactly

Video quality and resolution are important to me. This 640 pixel wide crap is for the birds. Couldn't agree with you more. Get HD and Titles.

I also think they should cut a deal with Sony, Microsoft and a few others so you can download movies to your PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 or DVR. I certainly don't want to deal with my computer or purchase an AppleTV to rent movies online.

Steven Ballmer
Dec 9, 2007, 09:22 PM
The sharks in video are a lot bigger than the music weenies!
Jobs is too domineering, he just can't beg like he needs to!

Counter
Dec 10, 2007, 08:10 PM
Being able to cherry pick songs out of albums doesn't come into play with video. I think this is a HUGE selling point of iTunes for music. Maybe convenience doesn't come into play as much with video either. I dunno, I'll never buy either because I like factory pressed stuff: the ultimate backup.

And yeah, the quality difference between CD to MP3 via iTunes and DVD to Video via iTunes is HUGE.

iTunes video is going nowhere fast. Especially with HD on the up.

TurboSC
Dec 11, 2007, 02:17 AM
lets hope Apple has plans on reviving the AppleTV for MacWorld. That'd be the perfect place and the perfect time to do so it seems.

John Musbach
Dec 15, 2007, 03:35 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Forrester Research, Inc has released a new research study (http://web1.forrester.com/Research/Document/Excerpt/0,7211,43478,00.html) that is critical of Apple's iTunes video attempts, and states there is room for competition in the industry.



Forrester conducted an online survey of 5,379 US and Canadian individuals aged 18 to 88. Forrester believes that only 4% of the online population buys iTunes videos, in contrast to a total of 19% iTunes store consumer population. Forrester acknowledges that while those 4% are satisfied with their service, the iTunes video store will remain a curiosity rather than a game-changer.

One of the pitfalls mentioned is that there are currently easier ways to get [free] TV shows, including consumer DVR's and services like NBC Direct. Furthermore, Forrester calls out Apple's lack of a catalogue of hit movies. One result of Apple's video misfortunes is that although awareness of the AppleTV is at 45%, the purchase intent is only at 3%.

In an open letter to Apple, Forrester suggests it's time to change their video game plan, including winning NBC back (background (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/30/nbc-rhetoric-vs-itunes-increases/)), adding a movie rental model (rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/11/10/rentals-evidence-in-itunes-7-5/)), funneling more web content into iTunes, and supporting an advertising model for TV shows.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/07/research-study-itunes-video-failing-to-duplicate-music-success/)

I agree, why would I pay to watch tv shows when I can just as easily record them on my dvr and watch them for free when I want to? :confused: People with computer tv tuners can even record them to portable video file formats and upload shows to their Apple products that way so it's no surprise that this idea isn't doing so well. I doubt even renting content will do too well as that niche is already filled by on demand content which is now provided by most cable providers for free. I hate to say this but I think even Apple can't beat what is already being offered in this area and they should instead refocus their energy on areas they are currently doing very well in...

slu
Dec 19, 2007, 03:04 PM
Catch #3, though? The hidden feature that the industry is killing Apple by heavily litigating? Letting people RIP their DVDs and play them from their hard drive to any Apple TV in the house. Apple would be first in line to launch a RIP & PLAY campaign for DVDs. People would GLADLY throw away the clutter and stream videos from their computers. If Apple TV was an easy to use, low cost Kaleidascape-type solution... And a DVR... for $150-$199... built-in wireless networking... DONE! NOTHING else would matter much. People would wet themselves for an Apple TV set up.

~ CB

The only problem is that, in the US, according to the DCMA, breaking the DRM on a DVD is illegal, even if you consider it Fair Use.