New Media Content Distribution System?

[MacRumors]

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

Think Secret claims that Apple is set to unveil a new media content delivery system, which will include feature-length content, expanded television offerings, and more.

According to their source, the new system will rely on .Mac's iDisk for storage, keeping media files from ever being held locally on the purchaser's hard drive, utilizing the rumored Front Row 2.0.

In addition, Think Secret claims that Apple is poised to offer a number of new partnerships with various content providers, possibly including NBC, CBS and Paramount Pictures. Fox Filmed Entertainment has already gone on record as saying they were "open to" a deal with iTunes.

[DCBass]

Wow.

Talk about making .Mac worthwhile for the masses as opposed to the few.

I would not have guessed this. Looking forward to seeing what they have in mind.

Edit: Cool, no longer a newbie

[pdpfilms]

Originally Posted by Macrumors

According to their source, the new system will rely on .Mac's iDisk for storage, keeping media files from ever being held locally on the purchaser's hard drive, utilizing the rumored Front Row 2.0.

Oooh... i do not like this concept.

[Mudbug]

Originally Posted by pdpfilms

Oooh... i do not like this concept.

agreed - seems a little weird to me. Also begs the question of what if you're not a .Mac subscriber?

[Aaon]

Yeah, would this mean that you'd have to pay for the .mac subscription, then pay for the media? And what happens if you cancel the .mac? Do you lose your media? This sounds like the subscription services offered by Yahoo, Napster, etc, that I really don't like...

[kenaustus]

Here we go again.

I think Apple is taking this road to keep the studios happy and it's something we will have to live with.

My guess is that Apple will store a "key" on .Mac that will let you look at a movie whenever you want. It won't be that hard to transfer this to people who don't use .Mac later when their content library is expanded - just like they brought iTunes to the PC world. I'm happy to let Mac users get the initial experience and I use .Mac (well worth it for $8 a month) so I'm ready. All I need is a way to get FrontRow 2 onto my rev a G5 iMac.

[andiwm2003]

Originally Posted by kenaustus

....................................
My guess is that Apple will store a "key" on .Mac that will let you look at a movie whenever you want. It won't be that hard to transfer this to people who don't use .Mac later when their content library is expanded - just like they brought iTunes to the PC world. I'm happy to let Mac users get the initial experience and I use .Mac (well worth it for $8 a month) so I'm ready. All I need is a way to get FrontRow 2 onto my rev a G5 iMac.

what's the point when i need an internet connection to be allowed to see my movies? the reason for owning the content is that i can watch it in the car, on the train, on the plain, in my backyard or at the beach.

with this concept i might as well stop at the next blockbuster and rent a dvd.

i don't think it's gonna happen like this.

[Donm]

Originally Posted by andiwm2003

what's the point when i need an internet connection to be allowed to see my movies? the reason for owning the content is that i can watch it in the car, on the train, on the plain, in my backyard or at the beach.

with this concept i might as well stop at the next blockbuster and rent a dvd.

i don't think it's gonna happen like this.

What hapens when you introduce WIMAX into the picture. Now you have a broadband connection following you anywhere you are under one account across an entire city. Again, thanks to apple's new friend.

[EGT]

Originally Posted by Mudbug

agreed - seems a little weird to me. Also begs the question of what if you're not a .Mac subscriber?

I agree too. Not to mention the fact that iDisk is always horribly slow. It'll be interesting to see how this develops.

[alywa]

I would guess it is a ".mac like" service, with remote content storage (ala gmail), with the ablility to transfer content to matched laptops / computers / video ipods for viewing while a internet connection is not available.

This would work well with a set-top box, but if the ability to view while on the go doesn't happen, I sense this will be dissapointing. However, this is apple, so i'm sure they have thought this through.

Should make for an exciting keynote.

-alywa

[BornAgainMac]

This will work for TV shows and movies more than music. I am sure it will be pitched that way.

[J@ffa]

This article mentions the video iPod; surely it's misguided in saying that you won't actually be able to store the files on your HD? Unless of course Apple has actually discovered the secret of real magic!

[Mechcozmo]

Originally Posted by EGT

I agree too. Not to mention the fact that iDisk is always horribly slow. It'll be interesting to see how this develops.

And if you're on dial-up?

[texasmafia]

Originally Posted by Mechcozmo

And if you're on dial-up?

If you are on dial up you have no business trying to download video

[EGT]

Originally Posted by Mechcozmo

And if you're on dial-up?

Tell me about it. I'm on ISDN! Ok, faster than 56K but still painfully slow!

[Yvan256]

Originally Posted by Mudbug

agreed - seems a little weird to me. Also begs the question of what if you're not a .Mac subscriber?

Isn't .Mac exclusive to OS X users anyway? What about those on dial-up and low-speed DSL/cable? What about those with metered service (pay-per-GB)?

Seems way too complicated and limiting if you ask me. Also very costly for Apple (bandwidth usage).

And as someone said, such a method wouldn't work with the new 5th gen. iPod.

[DCBass]

Originally Posted by Yvan256

Isn't .Mac exclusive to OS X users anyway? What about those on dial-up and low-speed DSL/cable? What about those with metered service (pay-per-GB)?

Seems way too complicated and limiting if you ask me. Also very costly for Apple (bandwidth usage).

And as someone said, such a method wouldn't work with the new 5th gen. iPod.

Good point. If Apple went this route, they would obviously have to open up .Mac, at least a portion of its services, to pc users. I also think that if this is the case, that apple should have some baseline free services mentioned in the post above.

Peace.

[doucy2]

Originally Posted by Mudbug

agreed - seems a little weird to me. Also begs the question of what if you're not a .Mac subscriber?

exactly like me
this mini would probally be a total wast of money

i do like the idea of frontrow with idisk

[Tupring]

Originally Posted by Mudbug

agreed - seems a little weird to me. Also begs the question of what if you're not a .Mac subscriber?

Then you save money and download them for free, just like normal.

[GregA]

Originally Posted by pdpfilms

Oooh... i do not like this concept.

Originally Posted by anastasis

Booo! If I buy something, I want it on my hard drive for archival purposes.

I like the concept. I would hate to be buying Lost episodes and then deleting them because my hard disk is too small. I'd far rather have an unlimited list of shows I've purchased and be caching 60GB of it locally. It may even be smart enough to pre-cache episode 107 of Lost after I watch episode 106.

Originally Posted by iTron5

i want the content local for many reasons, one being what if my internet connection drops, i can't watch a show i've paid for.

I think that, given the iPod, Apple will have plans for "offline" viewing.

Originally Posted by geerlingguy

Surely Apple sees that hard drive storage is increasing by a vast amount every year, and storage on personal hard drives of movies (especially compressed H.264 files) will not be a huge deal. Plus, if Apple does it right, people could burn movies off to DVDs (with copy protection still on them) and pop them into their Macs when they want to watch them.

The only problem I foresee is the fact that Front Row only works on Macs (justly so!), but that problem could be overcome by turning the Mac mini into a more 'Tivo-like' device - more of an appliance than a computer.

Yes hard drive space is increasing, but if people begin to WIDELY accept this model it will still be an issue. "Cached" content solves that... and maybe it'll allow me to login at a different location to watch something I've recorded earlier?

And remember - Front Row only works on NEW iMACS! (for now). Quicktime, iTunes, iDisk all work on Windows, I think this will be more a marketing decision than technology decision.

Originally Posted by nagromme

Why store the content on Apple's media servers AND on their iDisk servers, AND in their caches? Why add the extra bandwidth, storage, and complexity for the user? Just stream from Apple's media servers directly to the caches to you. All the user needs for their "library" is a LIST on Apple's servers. No need to involve iDisk.

What makes you think this isn't exactly what the rumour refers to?

Originally Posted by csubear

Steve has always stressed that people want to own there media.

And by making it LOOK like a personal hard disk, people will feel more like they own the content.

[susannahyork]

Would this mean that one would have to subscribe to .Mac? Not having the files on one's own computer would eliminate file sharing for sure, but would you have to stream the content then to watch it, essentially making this a quasi video on demand?

[sfhc21]

Well that sucks. What about the Video iPod? You buy all this content, but you can't use it unless you have an internet connection.

[Koodauw]

I would think Apple of all people would understand that people want to own their content. Sure you would 'own' it, but if you cant access it without internet, do you really?

[pubwvj]

Originally Posted by Koodauw

I would think Apple of all people would understand that people want to own their content. Sure you would 'own' it, but if you cant access it without internet, do you really?

One word: SnapzPro

[awesomebase]

Well, it seems like a .Mac account would be needed for "verification" rather than storage. I can't imagine Apple trying to open up .Mac space to hold HDTV programs and such, that would increase their storage requirements exponentially. But, such a service provided to .Mac members would certainly be welcomed. I'll admit that the .Mac service has been slow to add real value over the years and only this year it has finally gotten a Backup system that works. I would welcome anything that adds to the value of this $99 annual subscription price!