24 hours too short

Discussion in 'iPod' started by bmat, Jan 20, 2008.

  1. bmat macrumors 6502

    Nov 24, 2004
    East Coast, USA
    I know, we all want more time. But I think 24 hrs is too short. It basically precludes someone from watching a movie over two nights. I most people don't do that, but some do, particularly for long movies or those with kids.

    Anyone else think 24 hrs is too short, and it should have been like 36 hrs, or 48 hrs, so that it was the equivalent of renting a movie over the weekend. And no, I'm not saying we should get it for a week, or a month, after it started.
  2. RBMaraman macrumors 65816


    Jul 25, 2002
    Prospect, KY
    I don't think it's too short.

    You have 30 days to start viewing once it's downloaded, and 24 hours to watch after it's started. The simple answer is: Don't start watching until you know you can watch it in one sitting.
  3. bartelby macrumors Core


    Jun 16, 2004
    Isn't it just the same as renting a movie on cable/satellite tv?
    Do you also complain about that?
  4. aosman macrumors 6502

    Jan 19, 2008
  5. skybolt macrumors 6502a

    Feb 20, 2005
    Nashville, TN, USA
  6. macdaddy121 macrumors 6502a

    Jan 8, 2003
    I don't have a problem with it but it would be nice if they gave you a couple of days viewing time.....That's just my personal opinion though.
  7. ndheah macrumors regular

    Sep 10, 2007
    Green Bay, WI
    I agree, 48-72 hours I think would be the best option. How many times do I start a movie and have something come up, all the time, and I imagine it's worth for parents. So, lets see here, I pay $8 a month for Netflix, and I can average 5-6 movies a month through the mail and that's giving me the day I receive, and the day after to watch it, we'll say 36 hours. For iTunes it's $4 for new releases, that's $20-$24 a month, while netflix is $8.

    Seems like a pretty crappy deal to me. Granted I like the fact that iTunes is great and right there, but the whole 24 hours to watch, and $4 I think, is not good enough.
  8. speakerwizard macrumors 68000


    Aug 8, 2006
    i think 24 hrs is enough, i can see why they pick that long, more or less the reason your against it, so 2 separate people dont watch it 2 nights in a row.
  9. macsforme macrumors member

    Mar 16, 2007
    It may be "enough," as in, you could probably make plans to watch movies only on the weekend or whenever you have time. The point is that it's limiting--it doesn't offer you the flexibility that traditional movie rentals allow you of watching videos over 2-3 nights.
  10. alfonsog macrumors 6502


    Jul 17, 2002
    Cape Coral, FL
    If you can't watch a movie through all at once then just go buy the dvd/blu-ray. People just can't sit and watch a movie anymore, even at the theater! No attention span at all, although some of these movies deserve it. Just rent it again if you start it and can't finish in 24 hours. I did notice it will let you finish the movie even if the time expires during watching, although it will delete immediately after stopping (tested on the iPhone.) PPV is 24 hours, store rentals you have to drive, forget to return and pay late fees (due by noon at blockbuster), new releases are usually shorter rental periods (which for some stores here "new release" could mean 3 months+.)
  11. pedz macrumors regular

    Jul 2, 2007
    While I like the new apple rental announcement overall and am very excited about the software update for the apple tv, i have to agree about 24 hours being too short. I am not sure why people are defending it. I watch most movies in one sitting, but I have kids as do others I know, and my only option is to watch a movie over a couple of nights sometimes or watch fewer movies than I do today (don't want to do that). As great as the convenience of on demand is, they are taking away something i can do today with every other distribution channel.

    The previous poster talks about attention spans, not sure where you are coming up with that in this thread, it is totally not relevant. Everyone would love to watch a movie in one sitting but it is not always feasible.

    Also, given their big sell on transfering to your ipod/iphone 24 hours doesn't seem to leave many options. I wouldn't mind watching a movie on my commute now and then, but that would take two days so forget that.

    As far as the 30 days, that is nice, but 99% of the time I will rent the movie when I am ready to see it. I would much rather have 48 hours to start and 48 hours to watch, doesn't seem that extreme to me.

    Like I said, I am really excited about the service, but definitely wouldn't mind a change on this point.
  12. Stampyhead macrumors 68020


    Sep 3, 2004
    London, UK
    I haven't had a problem with the 24 hour limit so far, but then I'm single and have no kids so I don't really have things that get in the way when I start watching.
    I'm guessing it's the movie studios, not Apple, that insisted on the 24 hr time limit. I would suggest that those of you who think the limit is too short to write a polite letter to Apple telling them your thoughts and hope they will pass your comments on to the movie studios. I think if they get enough of these letters the studios may reconsider the time limit. They may not even care, but it doesn't hurt to try.
  13. hockeysc23 macrumors regular

    Sep 6, 2007
    I agree with the TS. It seems a good idea but in its current form renting from iTunes does not appeal to me and won't get me as a customer yet. Id like to see 48hrs. Or a change in cost to compete with NetFlix.

  14. madmaxmedia macrumors 68030

    Dec 17, 2003
    Los Angeles, CA
    You'll notice that attention span is not the issue, life (often kids) is.

    24 hours is fine for most circumstances, but 48 hours probably wouldn't drastically change things and would be better for some people.

    Even Pogue's 27 hour idea is better, as you could watch the movie in 2 separate sittings at around the same time. With 24 hours, if you start after work at say 7 PM but can't finish for whatever reason, the period ends the next night AT 7 PM, when you would just get home from work. So giving an extra 3 hours or so gives you the convenience of 2 sittings.

  15. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus


    Jan 9, 2004
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but... I was under the impression that this is a very low marketshare technology in comparison to Blockbuster / Hollywood / Netflix / DVD, in part because of the complexity associated with things like how long you get to watch the movie. Should Apple strive to do "just as well" as a service no one likes well enough to actually use? :eek:
  16. lord patton macrumors 65816

    lord patton

    Jun 6, 2005
    I have a 10 month old daughter, and I think it's unanimous amongst parents: give us two nights to watch the movie.
  17. Jack Flash macrumors 65816

    May 8, 2007
  18. heatmiser macrumors 68020

    Dec 6, 2007
    I'd never rent a film from iTMS, but I do agree 72 hours would be more friendly than 24.
  19. pondie84 macrumors 6502a

    Jan 28, 2008
    When you rent a dvd you are given a certain amount of time to return it by or you have to pay a late fee. It's a similar thing for itunes rentals except you don't have the option to pay a late fee.

    I really don't see what the fuss is. If you don't think you'll be able to watch the movie within a 24 hour time limit just don't rent it. If Apple see that their 24 hour limit is not feasible the market will tell them they need to change.

    What would be good, however, is for rentals to eventually go to 3 day release and then weekly, just as they do at DVD rental shops etc.

    I say all this knowing that I will likely never rent a movie from itunes. At least not for now! I'll wait until they've got a far better selection than they do now. Honestly I went through all their titles and couldn't find one I'd be interested in watching.
  20. dane989681 macrumors newbie

    Feb 13, 2008
    San Diego
    How about 2nd view option?

    Before I became a parent, I could never imagine not watching a movie all the way through... it looses impact. Now that I am a parent, it's often impossible to find a block of time large enough to watch all the way through. This is why Netflix and DVRs are so popular with us.

    Rather than a 24 hour limitation on the viewing, I would propose the viewer have the option of having a "one-view" limit. This is how it would work: I begin viewing the movie, but then get sleepy and stop it, going to bed (as many parents are forced to do). Next day, or maybe even next week (as long as it is within the 30 day window) we decide to pick up where we left off.
    As a nice feature, the player will allow us to back up a certain number of chapters so that we can get reacquainted with the movie before continuing through to the end.

    Now I realize not everyone would want this kind of model, so I would propose making it an option in order to attract parents who would love to use this service instead of Netflix.
  21. madmaxmedia macrumors 68030

    Dec 17, 2003
    Los Angeles, CA
    All people here are asking for is a bit more time, like you said rental places typically give you 3 days (or more.)

    If you have kids, you would know that sh*t happens, and 24 hours can be restrictive. I don't really care if Apple offers 2 hours, 24 hours, or 2 days. But I don't think going to 2 days is going to affect the business model in any way, and would make it a much better proposition for a significant number of customers.

    Even David Pogue's idea of 27 hours is significantly better than 24, because if you rent during the week and start watching after work but don't finish, you're screwed the next day because the 24 hours are going to expire just as you get home.

    It's ultimately a matter of practicality, and there's no real practical issues involved in extending the rental period to 27 or 48 hours. (30 days for example would be way too long and decrease their revenue, but no one is asking for that.)
  22. TEG macrumors 604


    Jan 21, 2002
    Langley, Washington
    It is only 24 hours if you watch it right away. It is actually 30 days, just 24 after you start watching. Really, if you can't watch a 90 minute movie in 24 hours, there is something wrong with your concept of "Television". They are actually more generious than some services, like InDemand, which after you finish the movie, and you want to go back to see something in it (like to rewatch an important scene) they charge you for it again. These are the same restrictions that UnBox also imposes, it is all done by the MPAA members, so don't blame Apple, blame the MPAA.

  23. kkat69 macrumors 68020


    Aug 30, 2007
    Atlanta, Ga
    24hrs is PLENTY of time. If it was to short, the first people to change would be COX, Comcast, DirectTV, etc. Those guys would add more time yet they do not.

    If you want more time, go to Blockbuster, then lets see you hold the DVD for 29 days then decide to spend another 48-72hrs to watch it. I bet next time you rent from there you'll see some late fees.

    Best advice was already given. If your not going to watch right away, DO NOT START. Better yet, don't even "Rent" it until your ready to watch.

    You can't give the excuse, "Well, we were planning on safaring in the Sarengeti, and wanted to start the rental process and it would be 29days before we would be able to setup base camp and start to watch the movie. Then a Rhino came into camp and we had to leave, I wasn't able to continue watching the movie until 36hrs later"

    Personally the wife and I and even with our kids don't sit down in the morning and go "Ok, what are we watching this week? Let's go ahead and purchase the movies now, then we can watch them 25 days from now" If anything, we'll look, decide, then when we're ready, we'll rent and watch. If we have to leave for some reason, well, so be it.

    You don't expect the Movie theatre to say "Come back, and don't worry, you have 72hrs when you can come back and finish up your movie!"
  24. madmaxmedia macrumors 68030

    Dec 17, 2003
    Los Angeles, CA
    I don't understand why this has to be such a 'yes/no' thing. 24 hours is a totally arbitrary number. Is 10 hours enough? 24? 48? 72?

    Another poster mentioned the MPAA, that's probably a big factor since all of these on-demand type services seem to have a 24 hour limit. It's simply something that was agreed upon a while ago, and hasn't changed. That doesn't make it 'right' or 'wrong', it just is.

    The Blockbuster example is facetious. No one rents a movie for watching 24 days from now. We all rent/download movies intending to view them in the next day or so. It is a positive for ATV that you get 30 days to start watching, just in case.

    But what some posters are simply saying is that they would prefer say a 15 day/48 hour window, rather than 30 day/24 hour.

    Would it kill the MPAA or drastically reduce their revenue to offer say 36 or 48 hours? I don't think so. That's all we're saying.
  25. kkat69 macrumors 68020


    Aug 30, 2007
    Atlanta, Ga
    Since we've now shifted to this, let's look at it this way, rather than 24hrs we want 36-48hrs. Ok, so when we get that, let's also shift our software demo periods from 15 days to 180 days.

    Do you see the point here? The longer the period yes the more revenue they loose. If you can 'demo' a software for longer why would you buy it? If it takes you longer than 24hrs to normally watch a movie, then you need help with that narcolepsy. 1 day/24hrs is plenty of time. Again, if you want more time, join Netflix or physically rent.

    Everyone wants something for free. We want our music free, we want our movies free, yet we're all against software piracy right?

    24hrs, if I were the MPAA I would say "If you can't watch a digital movie in 24hrs then tough!"

Share This Page