Apple and Video iPod/iTunes?

[dontmatter]

I wouldn't call podcasting a revenue stream yet. Until Apple starts (1) offering some sort of subscription plan to get access to premium content, (2) forcing ads onto each download or (3) requiring podcasters to pay to be carried, there's not going to be a revenue stream at all.

I see No. 1 happening soon, but Nos. 2 and 3 probably not.

Possible premium content: NPR's "Morning Edition" and "All Things Considered," Rush Limbaugh's show (blech!), made-for-pod content from shows like Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" or other original content.

I just don't see a ton of opportunities for repurposing the same content as there is free elsewhere (like radio or cable) and getting people to pay for it.

Made-for-podcasting content by name-brands would be a much more interesting way to go. I could see MAYBE paying for a Comedy Central package that had made-for-pod audio web-isodes of "Stella," "Reno 911" and "South Park." Maybe.

Video, I think, is a whole different ballgame.

hmm... but isn' t that very close to the economics of the music store anyway? I mean, once you've paid the labels and the advertizing, the left over money just barely pays for the HD space and bandwith. The purpose is to get people to have lots of AAC content, thereby keeping the ipod on top.

But podcasts don't have labels making money off of them, and at least now, the expenses for storage are far less than those for the whole music catalog. Bandwith is a bit ugly, but apple doesn't pay much for it, for sure. Podcasts don't need to make money. They just need to be in AAC to keep zens out of the running.

The products out there are getting to be quite similar these days, but syndicated podcasts built into your jukebox software, as well as the name podcast, sure do help the ipod.

 

[mainstreetmark]

I think more that a new addon would be needed. The thing simply can't be an all in one device without seriously impacting the portability of the device. Unless Apple wants to give up the notion of portable, pocketable music in the iPod video they are going to have to do something different. My thinking is a modular device. You get an iPod photo that we all know and love but the package comes with an optimal sized device that probably looks like a subnotebook. Or subsubnotebook. Really small.

Something like this:

But a lot slicker, a lot bigger, and it would feel like one device when they are joined. And doubtlessly it will only work on the iPod Video just like the iPod Photo adapter for cameras only works on the photo. *just my WAG* You mileage may very on it.

Come on - You'll never see that. For an extra $200, you could get an iBook with wifi and it's own harddrive+powersupply.

If you're *that* serious about watching digital movies (um, whatever movies-on-your-harddrive are called) on an airplane, then just get an iBook, and load that sucker with DVD rips. Or, use it's built in DVD player. Leave your iPod in your pocket.

However, if you happen to be like me, and you go to your friends, parents or other place, it'd be groovy to plug in your iPod and play a movie, or a bunch of home videos. Or, if you're in a bar, and you have an amusing little video of some drunk doing a flaming shot, forgetting to blow it out first and setting himself on fire, then a 2" screen will be plenty good for a few laughs.

 

[GregUofMN]

Ahhhh, add the iTunes "phone capability" rumors to this video/photo/music iPod and you have the ultimate device to destract drivers!

 

[Stella]

?!!!

What about.... iPod Socks ;-)

How on earth can Apple spend so many millions of dollars on R&D (apparantly it was even more expensive than ever last quarter) and not release a single new product in, what, 7 months?
.

 

[shamino]

Having it on your iPod is just a little extra, if it happens. The videos themselves--usually played on your computer itself--are not just ads to everyone. Some people really enjoy some videos. SOME (emphasis!) are quite artistic, and fun to watch for your favorite artists. I wouldn't pay a LOT for them and I wouldn't buy many. But I'd pay something, and I'd buy a few.

Of course, any such feature needs to let you burn the videos to DVD or VCD. While watching music videos on a computer screen may be fun, bringing them over to a friend's house to watch on a TV screen is even better.

Considering that all the necessary components are either part of Mac OS or iDVD, there's no technical reason why this couldn't be done. The big question is if the record companies will give Apple the ability to sell videos with the same liberal DRM terms that they currently sell music with.

 

[shamino]

Most of the ones I see there include live concerts (often unavailable on CD), interviews, documentaries and other footage making up a considerable amount of worthwhile content. Initially music companies tried releasing a handful of music videos onto a DVD, but consumers very quickly realised what poor value it was.

They were considered a poor value at the $25-30 price point. When sold for $10, they seem to sell pretty well. The public sees such videos as music albums, not as movies. If they are priced comparably. people do buy them.

 

[shamino]

We all know it would be a great idea if Apple made a video rental store and used their 2 friggen year old Airport Express to broadcast HD video to your sweet TV. They could totally bypass the stupid argument over Blueray versus HD-DVD by skipping the physical format altogether!

Do we all know this? I know I completely disagree.

First off, WiFi doesn't have enough bandwidth for HD video, unless you want to dedicate your entire network to doing nothing else.

Second, most of us don't have 20-30 gigabytes of disk to buffer a full length HD movie.

Third, those of us who want to keep our movies (and not just delete them after watching them once) will need to be able to burn them to some kind of media. Even with a 400G hard drive (the largest single drive you can buy right now), you're not going to be able to store more than about 15 movies.

Fourth, most people don't have enough bandwidth to download this much content in a reasonable amount of time. Even over a 10Mbps internet link (assuming you can actually get a sustained 10M throughput), we're talking about 5-8 hours worth of downloading. If you've got a 1.5M DSL line, then we're talking about 30-50 hours worth of downloading.

I'm sorry. It's going to be a long time before anybody is able to make money off of HD video downloads.

 

[skwoytek]

The big question is if the record companies will give Apple the ability to sell videos with the same liberal DRM terms that they currently sell music with.

I was wondering the same thing.

My thoughts: It seems like music videos would have more relaxed DRM. As mentioned, music videos are more for publicity than anything. The record labels cut of the money would be a new revenue stream for them, a bonus. Worst case, music video's will have the same DRM terms as music. I haven't watched videos on MTV2 or VH1 in years, too much I'm not interested in. However, I do watch videos and movie trailers from the iTMS quite often.

If the iTMS starts selling Movies, I'm sure the number of times you could burn a movie to DVD would be severly limited. Data backups may be allowed. I also think the studios, having learned from the music industry's relationship with Apple, will want more control of the pricing - Of course, Jobs will want a set price. I'm in Jobs' boat.

Of course, that's all just my speculation.

Speaking of DRM for movies, wouldn't that REQUIRE Apple to make a media center for DRM control?

 

[shamino]

Speaking of DRM for movies, wouldn't that REQUIRE Apple to make a media center for DRM control?

Not necessarily. They could treat it just like they do the music: Play on up to 5 computers, load onto unlimited video-iPods, burn to up to 7 DVDs/VCDs.

Of course, the real ironic thing is that the MPAA won't allow consumer DVD recorders to be able to record with CSS encryption. So any company that offers a video download service will not be burn a protected DVD from the download, even if they want to.

 

[Doctor Q]

Storage capacity is going to be the killer though, even a 60Gig iPod can't hold that much HD (and this is the year of HD, right?) video.

I disagree. Storage capacity might keep your current iPod from becoming a video-storage device, but that would not be a killer for Apple's plans. Storage capacity for a given price continues to leap, so iPod sizes will grow, and Apple would be more than glad to sell you a new, larger device instead of giving you a new feature for your current iPod.

 

[lajocaab]

Apple video soon

The technology is available to provide consumers with a product like "iSlate". Of course only Apple could really do it right, although several other companies are attempting to create some variation of this device. Unfortunately many are too focused on video playback only, & not creating a true multi-function device that could be used at home, at the office, or on the road. This product would integrate well into the "Digital Lifestyle" philosophy & compliment existing Apple products.

It would provide a screen large enough to actually watch video & view photos, while still being small enough to be portable. It needs to be smaller than a notebook computer, but larger than a PDA. Granted, you can not put a device the size of a DVD case in your pocket, but something doesn't have to fit in a pocket to be portable. This device could be used in so many different situations that it would have broad appeal in the market. I only pray that Apple is working on such a device & will release it in 2004. They have an opportunity to impact the industry with the iSlate & iVideo media Store as much as the iPod & iTMS will.

iSlate

New Apple mini-tablet –> PMA (portable media appliance)

Designed not to be a creative device like a desktop or laptop, but rather a sophisticated display device that communicates seamlessly with other devices via Rendezvous & 802.11, BT, GPRS, FireWire, etc.


Device Size:
8” x 5.0” x .65” (±15oz)
± 1/2 size of a 17” PowerBook
± 2x size of a Palm T5 or an iPod
± size of a DVD movie case
small enough to hold with one hand by the bezel (.5” bezel on the sides)

Screen:
±8” LCD (16:9 ratio) -> 800 x 480 pixels minimum (1024 x 600 ideally)
± 1/2 size of 17” PowerBook screen
± 2x size of a Palm T5 screen
able to display “640 x 480 material” & DVD (720x480) quality video natively

Battery:
6-9 hour Li-Ion battery (or some new battery technology)

Storage:
1.8” 40GB or 60GB hard drive (additional capacity can come from external devices)
256MB or 512MB RAM - fixed
SD slot (w/ adapter for xD & Smart Media)

Processor & OS ?:
Motorola 800 MHz G4 mobile w/ Mac OS X lite or
Intel 500 MHz XScale PXA27x w/ Mac OS Mobile?

Connectivity:
802.11 –> Desktop or Laptop, Stereo, Internet via Wi-Fi hotspots
Bluetooth –> Keyboard, Mouse, PDA, Wireless Headphones, Internet via GSM Phone
FireWire –> iPod, Computer, Hard Drive, DVD/CD writer, Video Camera, iSight
USB 2.0 –> Printer, PDA, Digital Still Camera
mini-DVI w/adapter for:
-> ADC & VGA for larger monitor
-> DVI for video projector or HDTV
-> S-Video for video projector or TV
-> Composite for video projector or TV
Stereo mini out
Stereo mini in
Rendezvous for seamless connectivity to other devices

Input:
Inkwell via touch screen &/or stylus
Keyboard & mouse via Bluetooth or USB
Microphone
Remote control via Bluetooth

Applications:
inkwell, iPhoto, iTunes, iMovie, Safari, QuickTime, iSync, Rendezvous
Preview, Mail, iCal, Address Book, Sherlock, iChat AV
Keynote, FileMaker, Quicken, etc.

A/V Formats:
Pixlet, MPEG-4, MPEG-2, MPEG-1, AAC, MP3, WAV, AIFF, Audible, JPEG, TIFF, GIF

Accessories:
Charger, External Battery, Stand, clip for iSight, Portable folding BT keyboard, BT mouse
Headphone w/Microphone boom, quality stereo headphones

Price ??:
$699 to $999


Create a device that is bigger that the largest PDA, Archos or OQO type device, yet smaller than the average notebook or tablet computer. Imagine if you will, holding a device (about the size of a DVD case) away from you anywhere from 12" to 18". Obviously a 4" screen would be inadequate, but a 7" to 9" diagonal widescreen would be more than acceptable. It could still be small enough to fit in a stack of books, a briefcase, a large purse, of any number of other carrying cases. It would be something that could be viewed in an office, at home, in a coffee shop, on an airplane or train, or even in the backseat of a car.

The idea is not to see how much visual information one can cram into a small space (3" to 4" screens) or replace existing devices like the TV or Video Projector. The idea is to create a device that is a reasonable compromise between portability & "acceptable or pleasurable" viewing for multiple applications & that also complements existing devices. Something that can also plug into a TV or other display for a better viewing experience.

Although a 4 lb, 12" notebook computer displays video beautifully (I use one everyday), it is too big for the situations I have described. Beyond the innumerable business applications it could fulfill, it could display video & photos on a screen that is much bigger than an Archos type device or PDA, & yet smaller than a notebook computer. It doesn’t need to carry everything all the time, so it doesn’t require a massive hard drive. The internal HD needs only to be large enough for the OS, applications & enough storage to carry material while you away from any connectivity to other devices or the internet.

From a strictly “video perspective”, a large part of its success would hinge upon Apple's ability to distribute video clips through an online store much like iTMS. This store could provide educational content, business content, news content, & entertainment content beyond just movies . To be truly successful, it must integrate into Apple's "Digital Lifestyle" strategy, & be truly portable (ubiquitous wireless connectivity & good battery life).

Originally Posted by: lajocaab on Feb 11, 04 | 11:05 pm

 

[iDrinkKoolAid]

i don't buy music from itunes because i can get better sound quality from a CD.

That statement is generally false. I've done a double-blind test comparing 128kbps AAC files with its CD originals using laboratory-grade headphones and a studio-grade sound card and the results were equivalent to a coin toss. I've done the same with AC3 compression (2 channel) as well. I have normal hearing, as tested by an audiologist less than a year ago.

That said, I still buy CDs than purchase from iTMS since old habits die hard and I like the physical packaging, not to mention the liner notes. I like owning the original bits, although perceptually the iTMS tunes sound just as good. I also listen to SACD, which no equivalent exists on iTMS.

 

[quigleybc]

I really wish they'd focus on OS X and their computer line, where are the tv commercials for the imac and mac mini?



Seriously, what's the deal? It's like Apple doesn't want people to know about all the great things they sell. Even the iPod commercials are so abstract that the average joe might not have a clue what they are selling. How could they not at least have good mac mini commercial?

 

[skwoytek]

Do we all know this? I know I completely disagree.

First off, WiFi doesn't have enough bandwidth for HD video, unless you want to dedicate your entire network to doing nothing else.

Second, most of us don't have 20-30 gigabytes of disk to buffer a full length HD movie.

Third, those of us who want to keep our movies (and not just delete them after watching them once) will need to be able to burn them to some kind of media. Even with a 400G hard drive (the largest single drive you can buy right now), you're not going to be able to store more than about 15 movies.

Fourth, most people don't have enough bandwidth to download this much content in a reasonable amount of time. Even over a 10Mbps internet link (assuming you can actually get a sustained 10M throughput), we're talking about 5-8 hours worth of downloading. If you've got a 1.5M DSL line, then we're talking about 30-50 hours worth of downloading.

I'm sorry. It's going to be a long time before anybody is able to make money off of HD video downloads.

Don't think I'm singling you out Shamino; I like the points you make. I agree with your second and third point, completely. Those will be issues.

However, I think any new wifi products from Apple will be faster than 54Mbps, probably 108Mbps. I see no reason why, like computer games, Apple shouldn't push the technological barriers. A wifi network at 108Mpbs would have bandwidth for the ~55Mbps needed for HD video and the average net connection speeds of 1.0Mpbs to 4.0Mps, with a little room to spare. Much of the internet is ultimately limited by the T1 speeds (1.5Mbps) to which the end sites are connected. Although there are other uses of wifi bandwidth, I don't believe many would bog down 108Mbps.

With downloading, I know many people who use iTMS on dialup. Purchase music and go to bed, watch TV, leave for work, etc. With the number of people downloading commercial SD movie content now, I believe there would be plenty who would jump on to download HD.

Will everyone have these setups? No. But, think of the numbers of people who upgrade just to play the latest games. Video cards aren't cheap. In the end I'd say, it's feasible.

Regardless, while a new Airport Express may have HD capabilities for short movies such as iMovie content. The airport Express definitely needs video incorporated. I doubt we’ll see an upgrade to it unless this is the path.

 

[iWillard]

What was great about the iPod is that it allowed me to take my collection of 250-300 CD's and condense into the size of the ipod... I can carry it around and listen to it anywhere (with the help of my iTrip, I mean, ANYWHERE)... now what a USEFUL video iPod would allow me to would be take my growing stack of DVD's and watch them anywhere... If I could condense 100 (heck, even 25) DVD's into an iPod sized product, then watch them on it, or more importantly hook it to a TV and watch them anywhere, that would be the greatest...

The ironic thing is that I rarely... rarely listen to my iPod on headphones... yes... rarely... I listen to it in my car everyday, I listen to it through my stereo at home, and I take it to friend's houses and listen to it there.... so for me, a video ipod could not even HAVE a screen, as long as it hooked easily to a TV so I could watch DVD's from it....

my 2 cents....

 

[Porchland]

hmm... but isn' t that very close to the economics of the music store anyway? I mean, once you've paid the labels and the advertizing, the left over money just barely pays for the HD space and bandwith. The purpose is to get people to have lots of AAC content, thereby keeping the ipod on top.

But podcasts don't have labels making money off of them, and at least now, the expenses for storage are far less than those for the whole music catalog. Bandwith is a bit ugly, but apple doesn't pay much for it, for sure. Podcasts don't need to make money. They just need to be in AAC to keep zens out of the running.

The products out there are getting to be quite similar these days, but syndicated podcasts built into your jukebox software, as well as the name podcast, sure do help the ipod.

Longterm, though, free podcasts detract from Apple's now-profitable business of selling music downloads. Apple wants you to download the new Foo Fighters album, not free podcasts.

I think Apple adopted podcasts to gain some degree of control over how podcasts interface with iPods and to prevent some other application from becoming the defacto; they did it to protect iTunes.

I'm fine with Apple making money. I just think free podcasting is a limited phenomenom that doesn't give Apple -- or really anyone besides content providers -- much of a reason to grow it.

 

[Loge]

Do you know what I find hilarious? That companies are actually selling music videos and people are buying them! Music videos are/were made to promote the song so people would go buy the album. They are/were seen as marketing. NOW they are actually able to sell these things? It amazes me.

I couldn't agree more! Getting people to pay for the advertisements they watch has to be the marketing holy grail!

 

[rickvanr]

Longterm, though, free podcasts detract from Apple's now-profitable business of selling music downloads. Apple wants you to download the new Foo Fighters album, not free podcasts.

That's why there is a pod-cast called "new music tuesdays" where they preview all the new CD's and old gems you can buy.

I think Apple adopted podcasts to gain some degree of control over how podcasts interface with iPods and to prevent some other application from becoming the defacto; they did it to protect iTunes.

I completely agree with this.

 

[wPod]

i want a video pod!!!!

thats all.

 

[saurus]

Not gonna happen

I find it amusing that a single discussion about the ability to download a music video, automatically means video iPod. I personally doubt it's gonna happen, at least not this year. Here's why...

1) Music videos are approx 3 minutes long, would anyone spend $500 for a player that probably got a 5" across screen just to play a few music videos? Maybe the few die hards amongst you, but in reality, Jobs original quote still holds true. If Jobs was looking to download movies, then a video iPod would make perfect sense.

2) Back in January, Jobs had a high ranking representative from Sony make a cameo appearance. They never mentioned why. Since that point in time, Sonys major successful release was the Playstation Portable. That machine already has a decent screen that would provide an excelent video playback for the likes of music video (and they already sell proprietary "DVD"s for it). How hard would it be for Apple to provide a plugin of sorts to connect the PSP to iTunes? Would you spend say $99 for the video equivalent of the iPod Photo camera interface (or just a software update)? Since music videos appeal more to the younger generation, many have already got one. This way Apple doesn't have to deal with broken screens, and other hardware gripes, just a cable that probably returns 90% pure profit!

3) The digital convergence of music and video would initially be better suited for a media center. Since nobody has actually done this right yet (probably because nobody's tried to consolidate music, video, storage, networking and video-on-demand all with standard+hi-def output), I'd expect Apple to finally release a decent home media center in September, and leave others in the dust. If thats true, Tivo's gonna be very worried.

As for anyone who's already happy with Microsoft Media Center, they'd better read this quick...
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/904797.mspx
With Microsoft solutions, there's always one more thing to worry about...

Heads up - the PSP already does H264!

 

[Loge]

The iPod enabled listening to my CD collection anywhere; how about a video iPod that lets me watch my DVD collection anywhere - forget silly music videos.

 

[iWillard]

The iPod enabled listening to my CD collection anywhere; how about a video iPod that lets me watch my DVD collection anywhere - forget silly music videos.

That's what I said!

 

[Porchland]

I was thumbing through the June issue of Cargo this afternoon and saw a feature on four different -- what the article called -- Personal Media Players (ahem, PiMPs). I don't remember the brands except that one was the Archos (I guess) AV700.

All of them were $400 or $500, had 3.5- to 4-inch screens and could hold content that you downloaded off your DVR and/or DVDs.

If this is where Apple is headed with an iPod video, it would be similar to Apple's wait-and-see-then-clobber-everyone-with-a-far-superior-product it took with the iPod. I hope this is where Apple is headed and not to putting video on a 2-inch iPod screen.

 

[Porchland]

Of course, any such feature needs to let you burn the videos to DVD or VCD. While watching music videos on a computer screen may be fun, bringing them over to a friend's house to watch on a TV screen is even better.

Whether or not the DRM will allow it, don't assume that you'll have to burn things to DVD to get them to play on your TV.

There are a number of BIG decisions that Apple has to make right now that will affect the future of the iPod line, and one of them is how download the video content and how to get it to the TV. Do you download it to your computer and then sync it to a drive on your computer? Does Apple do a deal with Comcast to stream it as part of Comcast on Demand? Will your TV need a Airport Express 2? Does Apple need a DVR? Is the Mac mini a Trojan horse DVR?

Apple approach to and implementation of video over the next year or so is going to be fascinating to watch.

 

[cyanide]

my thoughts on an ipod video player...

okay, here are my thoughts on an iPod DV or whatever you will call this marvel of engineering, which it will indeed have to be. For starters, it MUST be a new, different piece of hardware with a more advanced processor, but more importantly a revamped buffer. But tech specs aside, i think this new ipod should be somewhat similar in design to today's cell phones. The outer display remains the same, displaying song information, playlists and the like. what changes is that the ipod swings or flips open to reveal a widescreen ratio video screen for viewing.. you guessed it..videos. before everyone flips out and tells me how much this would cost and how you couldn't control the movie while its open, stop. it wouldn't cost that much, look at the Nintendo DS. yes thats a console, yes they take a loss. no i dont think thats the best route for a non-gaming machine. maybe the inner screen is a touch screen and brings up floating controls like QT 7 when touched in a certain corner or something. the point of this post isn't to be precise with what IS going to happen, but rather to say what I personally think would be great. especially if they can keep it thin. with apple's new in-bed with intel we may just have the chips we need for this type of hardware. i made a VERY QUICK mockup of how i think this might look. please be gentle, it honestly took 5 minutes. let me know what you think, positive or negative.