Apple Seen Facing 'Stronger Headwinds' In 2006

Discussion in ' News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Nov 8, 2005.

  1. MacBytes macrumors bot

    Jul 5, 2003
  2. shamino macrumors 68040


    Jan 7, 2004
    Purcellville, VA
    However, Bailey said the more-aggressive price of 99 cents per episode (compared with Apple's $1.99) and the ability to watch the shows on a TV (instead of a computer or iPod under Apple's agreement) are strong indications that Apple will not be able to easily replicate its digital audio dominance in the nascent market for digital video.
    True. But there's another point that makes video better than music. There are far more TV companies than there are music companies. Even if ABC, CBS and NBC force Apple to use highly-restrictive DRM terms, other networks may not. As more companies get on board, we may find some shows costing less (maybe even some that cost nothing, using ads to provide revenue, the way broadcast shows do) and maybe even some that permit burning to DVD.

    Of course, Apple might not go along with this. They have been opposed to variable pricing and variable DRM terms with music. On the other hand, TV shows are not music clips, so they may not keep all the rules the same.

    Of course, if networks choose to not use DRM (perhaps because they put ads in the program and therefore don't care if the files are distributed freely, as long as they're not modified), then there's nothing to stop them from making the content iPod-friendly. (320x240 H.264 or MPEG-4.)
  3. KREX725 macrumors regular

    Apr 20, 2003
    Is it just me or does it seem like everyone's focus on Apple has become very "tunnel visioned" towards the video aspect of the new iPods?

    Is this mainly because it's considered unchartered territory?
  4. Gasu E. macrumors 601

    Gasu E.

    Mar 20, 2004
    Not far from Boston, MA.

    I agree. It seems to me that Apple's main concern in video is music videos, defending their dominate share of online music. At this point, TV on demand seems to be more of an experiment for Apple than a focus. I agree with that-- conventional TV content belongs on a TV--not a computer or a port-o-player. Apple is more likely interested in being ready for potential emerging opportunities, such as video blogs, which can sell more iPods.
  5. jholzner macrumors 65816


    Jul 24, 2002
    Champaign, IL
    Apple's video content is aimed at the new iPod. That is who their target is. You may be able to watch these shows for $.99 with on demand but you can't put it on the new iPod. I think people are missing the point of Apples video strategy.
  6. kgarner macrumors 68000


    Jan 28, 2004
    It's also my understanding that the $.99 is a rental fee. You pay that to download it to your DVR and you can watch it for a limited time (from the slashdot thread about the NBC/CBS announcement). Whereas, Apple charges me $1.99 but I get to keep the episode. Seems to me that the extra dollar to keep it would be a better deal.
  7. maya macrumors 68040


    Oct 7, 2004
    somewhere between here and there.
    Apple is a "news maker" did you not know that. ;) :)

    All media eyes on Apple (since forever) since they are individuals. :)

    I love this company. :D
  8. montex macrumors regular


    Jan 17, 2002
    Seattle, WA
    Didn't these same financial analysts predict that iTMS would fall behind the other music services this time last year? You would think they might get tired of being wrong. Oh, well. It's fun to watch the "Strong Headwind" businesses fail againt the Apple juggernaut.

    Maybe next year they can predict how Apple's Front Row is sure to fail against the new and improved M$ Media Center.
  9. everyman macrumors newbie

    Sep 7, 2003
    "Apple's video content is aimed at the new iPod. That is who their target is. You may be able to watch these shows for $.99 with on demand but you can't put it on the new iPod. I think people are missing the point of Apples video strategy."

    Exactly right!!! These people are completely missing the point. I have had On Demand from Comcast for a long time. It's nice. And I use it once in awhile. But I still am forced to be glued to my TV.

    I bought the iPod video mostly because I was curious. I admit I was influenced by the very enthusiastic reviews I was read about it in the iPod forums.

    I have been watching LOST one episode at a time. I was always curious about the show. So I am using my new iPod as an opportunity to watch it.

    Watching LOST one episode at a time on my new iPod is one of the greatest pleasures I have ever experienced in using an iPod. There's something about the immediacy of the sound and the gorgeous screen. And the show itself. It's fantastic.

    Unless you have personally used the iPod video yourself, reserve judgement. I would never have predicted how addicted I am to this thing. And you cannot tell by seeing it in the store. It's only when you use it with your own video content that you are interested in, that you begin to see how amazing it is.

    Apple's iPod video is going to be HUGE. It's just a matter of getting the content. And no matter how hard others try to stop it, the public will demand it.

    Don't underestimate Apple's design and iTunes regarding the video either. Others will try to copy them or thwart them, but this thing is SWEEEET.
  10. hyperpasta macrumors 6502a


    Aug 1, 2005
    New Jersey
    A hunch...

    We'll see something video-related at MWSF.

    My wish is an AirPort Express AV that uses 802.11n for video streaming. It works in iTunes, but now also streams the interface of Front Row from any Front-Row enabled Mac (new Mac mini?). The Airport has a built-in IR receiver for using it from your couch.

    A HUGE ad campaign goes out advertising Mac OS X, iLife, Mac mini, and Airport Express AV. Like as big as the iPod campaign.

    I think that would get switchers in droves.
  11. ddrueckhammer macrumors 65816


    Aug 8, 2004
    America's Wang
    I'm with you 100%! If there were an Airport Express AV that could stream content purchased from iTMS to my plasma, content that is better quality (maybe 800x600 MPEG H.264), and a Front Row Interface to control it remotely I would purchase it tomorrow!

    I know some people would like to see a Mac Mini DVR type device but I'm not sure if this would fit into Apple's strategy of selling content online and I personally think it is short sighted compared to on-demand internet content.

    I really don't understand why the Studios/Networks/Labels have such a big problem giving Apple a chance to sell their goods. They should be happy to have another avenue to sell their goods and services. Plenty of people are still going to buy DVDs but it could open up entire new markets if they would allow content to downloaded from a central location at a fair price. I don't think the security argument flies either because one can already download any TV show or Movie on bit-torrent networks. The Networks/Studios need to get with the program because when more people start getting broadband (and I'm sure they are) they will have a major piracy problem if there is not a reasonable for pay service established.

    Finally, Verizon recently upgraded their phone lines to fiber optic in my area, raising the bandwidth ceiling to 15 Mbps...It currently takes about 45 minutes for me to download an episode of Lost at 3 Mbps. I guess that means with the increased speed I should be able to download an episode in about 10 minutes!
  12. trebblekicked macrumors 6502a


    Dec 30, 2002
    Chicago, IL, USA
    the way i see it, apple is going to be the first company to figure out how people want to acquire and use portable video- they've got the pay-per-download side with ABC/Disney, but they've also set themselves up as the number one aggregate for podcasting. i, for one, am curious as to wether video podcasting will develop as strongly as regular podcasting has.

    personally, i think it would be great to see video podcasting pick up steam; that could get the major companies to think past immediate sales and focus on advertisement and other revenue streams, and like you said, take some of the shine off of DRM.

    this is a very, very interesting scene that's developing, and i'm anxious to see it played out.
  13. sworthy macrumors regular

    Nov 8, 2002
    wait a second here... they want to make DVR owners pay for this stuff? In that case, there target audience is merely people who don't know how to record something for free (and without commercials!)

    this is completely different than the iTMS.
  14. AlmostThere macrumors 6502a

    I don't doubt it for a second. I know several people with personal media players (iRivers mostly) and everyone of them raves about it (more than I have seen anyone rave about an iPod). These usually come with tools to put all sorts of video files on to them, and come with a bigger screen but point is that personal video, for those that take the plunge, seems to be incredibly popular.
  15. saurus macrumors member

    Nov 15, 2004
    Saint Paul, Minnesota
    More mis-analysed FUD

    These unfounded predictions are nothing short of annoying. Facts first...
    1. NBC is offering their shows for $.99 each
    2. NBC are offering these only through DirecTV
    3. A new DirecTV PVR is required to save them
    4. DirecTV's PVR requires a $5.99/month subscription
    5. You are required to purchase the PVR, at present the cost is unknown.

    What we do know is that this is NOT compatible with their TiVo PVR, so please tell me what the break even price is before Apple has to worry...

    Once again, nothing more than a FUD factory disguised as news.:rolleyes:

Share This Page