Apple/Sony DV Collaboration = HD Movie Download Store

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Jan 18, 2005.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    #1
  2. Administrator emeritus

    Mudbug

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Location:
    North Central Colorado
    #2
    don't think so - not yet at least. Bandwidth is still not there for enough people to make it profitable. And cable companies are already offering this service (essentially) through movies on demand, and they're offering them at a higher bitrate than you'll get from a streaming service.

    essentially speaking, if you have a TiVo & Digital Cable/Satellite, you're 90% of the way there to a download store already.
     
  3. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    #3
    H.264 Codec combined with deeper broadband penetration and cheap mass storage makes this very possible. Looks to be a shoe-in for 2005.
     
  4. Administrator emeritus

    Mudbug

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Location:
    North Central Colorado
    #4
    you may be right. but I doubt it.
     
  5. macrumors 65816

    asif786

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Location:
    London, UK.
    #5
    when this happens, it's going to be soo cool.

    but, being in the UK is a pain, because it means we're not going to get it any time soon - its at least 2/3 years away..

    still, with SJ going on about the year of HD, it could still happen.

    /asif
     
  6. macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #6
    When fiber starts to really take off in the US in the next 5 years. Then lets talk video. As it stands. The size of file needed to fill a high def TV is at least in the triple digit MB range which is no small download even for people who have a wide pipe to their home. That and like the iPod Apple is going to have to debute a killer app for video. So far we've seen nothing. I still want to know why the hell Sony's #1 was on stage at MW for a stinking video camera. When I read that on MR's low bandwidth reporting of MW events I just about **** myself thinking OMG Sony and Apple teaming up on the Music front!! Alas it was not to be…yet.
     
  7. macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #7

    Take anything Jobs says with a grain of salt....Everyone knows where his comment on "Year of the laptop" went. Take what he says as face value: Year of HD is the year everything Apple is going HD.
     
  8. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #8
    Apple streamed the keynote to millions of viewers in High Def... why could movies not be streamed to homes the same way.
     
  9. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #9
    Remember, Steve broadcast the keynote to millions of viewers in high definition video.

    According to the article, "video using H.264, encoded at full high definition resolution (1920x1080 24p) [can be] played back between 6.8 and 8 Mbps at full HD quality"</i>

    80.2.11 B (Not G but B) transmits at 11 Mbps. A person need only a simple wireless connection to relay the streaming video from his computer to their TV.
     
  10. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    #10
    i don't believe that the stream was hi-def, just the initial recording and display at macworld itself. most of us don't have an h.264 codec and there's no way apple could push an HD broadcast with another codec.

    as for an iTMS for video... i don't think it will happen this year, but it is inevitable. american broadband usage is ~50%, H.264 seems to be tailormade for a tiered pricing structure (e.g. you pay premium dvd-esque pricing ($30 and up) for blur-ray/hd-dvd physical media, with all sorts of extras, commentaries and highest quality compression available. you pay $5-10 for an H.264 version with just the movie. maybe adding iPod video/mobile phone/pda playback for an additional fee of $2-3).
     
  11. Administrator emeritus

    Mudbug

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Location:
    North Central Colorado
    #11
  12. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #12
  13. macrumors 68000

    Sharewaredemon

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Location:
    Pitch forking mulch in Nova Scotia, Canada
    #13
    An interesting thing I don't think anyone has raised about putting movies on portable players is the fact that they would have larger file sizes and thus the movies would not be able to be loaded into the internal RAM. Wouldn't this be really hard for the microdrive in the iPod and other iPod esque players? I remember reading somewhere that, although you can boot from an iPod, it is not suggested, as it will shorten the life of the iPod. Also, that was why it was a bad idea to use UBS 1.0 to transfer songs to the iPod as it would fry the hard drive.
     
  14. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #14
    Agreed... movies on an iPod are not only unlikely but unpractical.

    I don't know why anyone brings it up at all. If anything, it would be like the articles says... streamed to your computer and relayed to your TV over a standard wireless connection.
     
  15. macrumors 68040

    maya

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Location:
    somewhere between here and there.
    #15
    Yeah right, does one actually realize that HD movies are 10+ gigs in size alone. Not until the file size comes down this will not happen.

    Streaming HD, right can you imagine while you are watching a movie stream you have some loss packets and the movie experience is ruined.

    At present I do not see this happening, unless Apple and SONY have some great solution.

    Streaming movies = bad idea on so many grounds.

    Downloading HD movies via Apple(iTMS) or SONY (online store) is going to be a LONG painful process. I do not think it will catch on in the mass market since how many people actually have T3 connection speed (besides me ;) ). :)
     
  16. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    #16
    With AVC H.264, 2.5 Gigs.
     
  17. macrumors 68040

    maya

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Location:
    somewhere between here and there.
    #17
    I find that hard to believe however if so, then why the whole push towards Blu-Ray and HD-DVD technology.

    I believe they are trying to fit LOTR trilogy on to one Blu-Ray and(or) HD-DVD disc. ;) :)
     
  18. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #18
    Did you not read the article? H.264 changes that. The file sizes will actually be approximately 2 Gigs.

    To put this in perspective, Steve Jobs broadcast the Mac World expo in HD to over a million people. You wouldn't download the mosvie you bought from Apple... you'd STREAM it.



    Why would there be packet loss? Lets say this thing is true and Apple goes worldwide with this thing. Now lets assuming every movie is available at all times. I can't imagine one movie would be being broadcast more than 10,000 instances at a time. While there may be packet loss when Apple broadcasts a single HD show (MacWorld Expo) to MILLIONS of people... but to thousands... NO WAY.


    They have a great solution. It's a new codec called H.264. Did you not read the article?



    Perhaps you should present some of those bad ideas. The ones you've listed thus far are groundless.



    Why would they make you download them when you can stream them?



    While you would need a broadband connection, a T3 connection is massive overkill to stream this sort of video.
     
  19. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #19
    its true.



    This thing isn't released yet. How would people know not to push other technologies when one hasen't even proven itself yet?
     
  20. macrumors 68040

    maya

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Location:
    somewhere between here and there.
    #20
    Have you seen this in "real world tests" or are we speculating on this happy world of HD streaming.

    Remember you are guessing as to the traffic a specific movie might get, there could be many other faulting factors. This is not a few meg music file these are movie files. and Even if a 10+ GB movies content is now 2GB and streamed there is no "effective" way of pausing and replaying it without a drop.

    I have watched the Keynote and not during peak hours and a few days after the Keynote was live. Yet still I have dropped frames and trying to pause and resume well that didn't go too well either. Forwarding and Rewinding was not a problem. Then again this could be the limit of the current QT technology.

    Anyhow its too early to say anything in regards to this until its tested in "the real world". What happens if the stream is lost and all you got to see was half the movie, do you call in Apple/SONY to tell them that this was the problem, what if they tell you that the problem was on your end.

    Too many questions, anyhow if this flies in "read world tests" then all the better. :)
     
  21. COS
    macrumors member

    COS

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    #21
    No, I didn't personally test anything but I did see it in action. Assuming the demoers were strait up lying to us... I have no reason to not believe them.


    Check this out: QuickTime 6 features a new advance in streaming: Instant-On. Dramatically reducing the wait before playback, Instant-On provides broadband users quick access to streaming content. In addition to accelerating start-up playback, Instant-On also enables real-time scrubbing through on-demand streams using the time slider. The playback is updated instantaneously, allowing you to locate precisely your desired content.



    Keep in mind that this is a stream going out to hundreds of thosands (at times millions) of people. Assuming this thing went mainstream, I can't believe a single movie would be being streamed more than 10,000 (and thats generous) instances at a time. That's a sinch for them to stream to you without concern of packet loss.


    Agreed. We're just talking about whether or not its possible or not.


    Same situation if your download from the music store doesn't come through all the way I guess. I would imagine that you are given an account that would allow you to access that stream at any time... over... I don't know... a 4-day time period? If it dropped off, simply access it again and scrub to the point at which you lost the stream.
     
  22. macrumors 68040

    maya

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Location:
    somewhere between here and there.
    #22
    I just viewed this stream and at first I was impressed, then the picture was still, while the audio and timeline kept moving alone. And then it timed out and needed to be rebuffed.

    It seems it needs a little more work, however it looks promising indeed. :)


    I wonder what this would mean for Theaters, will the movies now be streamed and a release to home users be shorter. :)
     
  23. macrumors 65816

    asif786

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Location:
    London, UK.
    #23
    i think we all know that an iVideoStore is going to come sooner or later. We dont now when it's going to happen, but it is..there's no debating it; its the next logical step.

    I think it will be HD. There's no point using old technology. Plus I think HD tends to get us geeky types excited, so I would love it. Also, note how Apple's new iPod commercial is HD. Things are changing - I dont think Apple would backrack by using non-HD content.

    Lastly, the Keynote WAS NOT streamed in HD. The projector at the Moscone Center was HD - that's it. The technology isn't present yet to be streaming in HD, and apple sure as hell would've kicked up a big press thing if it was being streamed as HD. It would be a big milestone..

    So, iVS is coming, we just dont know when..

    oops, one more thing (lol - SJ style): Jobs is popular in Hollywood. All the studios use his computers and software, all the actors use ipods, most use macs, and lastly, he is chairman and CEO of the hottest animation studio in the world. Hollywood is like putty in his hands - if he wants an iVS, he'll get it.

    just my opinion ;) --asif
     
  24. macrumors 68040

    killmoms

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #24
    No, they won't, and no, he didn't. H.264 will make movies in high def approximately the size of today's movies on DVD. That's 4 - 6.5 or 7GB, not 2. And the stream was shot and shown in HD AT THE KEYNOTE, it was streamed at tiny, low-quality QuickTime after the show. Unless you mean to Apple Stores or other locations, in which case you're still wrong—it was downscaled to SD and broadcast via the normal satellite network.

    They didn't do that. Did I miss the part where the QuickTime stream of the keynote took up more area than my PowerBook's screen?

    It would be a great solution if the files still weren't too big for normal people to put up with downloading.

    Actually, he's right, and you're completely wrong on every count.

    Incorrect. 1080i HD as it is "streamed" between TV networks is 19.7Mbits/second using MPEG-2 and AC-3 for audio. HD compressed using H.264 is still 6 - 8 Mbits/second. A T1 line is 1.5Mbits/second. Cable at its ABSOLUTE BEST is 3Mbit/second. DSL is 1.5Mbits/second tops. Only when we have fiber to the premises (which Verizon is doing some limited test of) on a wide scale will this become viable. And even then the intro package which costs $40 a month is still only 5Mbit/second down. Maybe we'll see a service like this in Japan, where the bandwidth flows like water (seriously, 20Mbits/second down for $30 a month), but not in the U.S., at least not in High-Def.
     
  25. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    #25
    HD has 4 times the resolution of SD, so for HD video to fit in the same amount of space as a regular SD DVD, the data compression would have to be 4x more efficient. So a MPEG2 HDTV movie file that is 10GB would compress to 2-3GB using the MPEG4 codec.
     

Share This Page