Apple to Debut 'HD+' 1080p iTunes Movie Services Later This Year?

[Enzobot24]

This is a really unnecessary move for Apple.

The people renting/buying from iTunes are content with 720p. Any videophile or home theater enthusiast has already invested (and fallen in love) with Blu-ray.

Also, a few more things (almost exclusively directed at Xtremehkr):

1. Blu-ray isn't owned by Sony. Much like DVD, there is a huge consortium of corporations backing it. That's why there's a Blu-ray Disc Association

2. Blu-rays are not more expensive than iTunes purchases. Right now, the Quantum of Solace Blu-ray is $14.50 on Amazon. The 3.5GB/720p version (that's right 3.5GB compared to the 29.5GB feature size on the Blu-ray) on iTunes...

....it costs $19.99.

Man, some people are tools.

 

[AidenShaw]

Can I have Bluray instead? :/

The Steve says "no BD for you". (Cue up "soup Nazi" visuals....)

 

[MrSmith]

You listen to your built-in TV speakers? And you're disappointed at the poor sound quality?

I have a rather modest 52" home theatre setup - and the 6.1 audio system represented about 60% of the cost - the high end TV was only 40%. The speakers built into the $3.6K TV are disabled. They might be OK, but I've never used them.

Don't get me wrong. I'n sure an expensive audio system sounds great, but in my little Japanese flat it isn't practical or necessary. But my TV did come with speakers, so it's reasonable to expect the sound out of them to be audible before talking about quality. And the speakers are fine. I play music through them - the sound is as good as the little stereo we have.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

It's not HD+. 1080P has been part of the HD standard for over a decade. Don't make it look like you're lagging digital content is somehow now better, you've only just now caught up to the competition.

You could say the same thing about "iTunes Plus", though. CD content was around for a long time before iTunes ever existed. It's "plus" for Apple, not the industry.

It seems like any 1080p AppleTV is going to have to go back to offering on-board storage to make it work at this point in time. They could throw a 2TB drive in that thing and still sell it for $200 if they really wanted to. I don't believe for a second they will, but doing any reasonable bit-rate 1080p is going to require a lot more bandwidth than low-bitrate 720p. I've got 10Mbps now and I doubt that would cut the mustard for real-time 1080p of any reasonable bit-rate. There would have to be a time delay, possibly a significant one. And while I can get 50MBps, it would cost me a lot more a month.

Heck, streaming high-bitrate 1080p wirelessly to an AppleTV could be problematic. I'm lucky to get 720P to work downstairs without any glitches sometimes. And if they're going to use lower bit-rates, there's some question of how much better it will actually look in practice compared to 720p (a higher bit-rate 720p might do better overall). I've seen HD movie rentals off Time-Warner that looked HORRIBLE (blocky distortions in fast-moving scenes left and right). At least Apple's 720p has been largely free of that sort of thing, even at relatively low bit-rates. Really, it looks great considering the file sizes, IMO.

I assume 1080p downloads will be free to those people who have already paid for the 720p version of the same movie?

Given that some of them now are the same price to download in 720p as they are to actually buy a physical BluRay disc. They can't ask for a further payment can they ?

Sure they CAN. They charged more for iTunes "Plus" and upgrade fees to get there and Apple has never been known for their generosity (more for their so-called "Apple Tax").

A better question is whether you will be allowed to BUY a significant amount of 1080p content or if it will mostly or even only be for rentals as the vast majority of their 720P movies currently are.

 

[*LTD*]

The Steve says "no BD for you". (Cue up "soup Nazi" visuals....)

Just keep the line moving and you're good. Always keep the line moving . . .

 

[AidenShaw]

Just keep the line moving and you're good. Always keep the line moving . . .

...and don't complain if you don't get free bread!

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

This is a really unnecessary move for Apple.

The people renting/buying from iTunes are content with 720p. Any videophile or home theater enthusiast has already invested (and fallen in love) with Blu-ray.

What about those of us who shoot our home movies in 1080, import,edit & render using tools like Apple's iMovie or FCP, export them for Apple's Quicktime player, import them into Apple's iTunes where they will store and playback just fine? In our living room, we have a "full HD" (1080p) set. No BD players are iTunes-friendly enough to fill in that gap between the 1080 content we've put in iTunes and the TV. Thus, we really need a 1080-capable TV solution.

Personally, I rarely rent or buy anything from the iTunes store. Since buying a 1080p Samsung HDTV, it's built-in apps include VUDU (among many others) which basically kills vs. iTunes 720p or SD. But, the Samsung isn't iTunes capable either, so the 1080 HD home movies are still challenged in getting to that HDTV in a "family friendly" way.

From 2007 to now, I've downconverted these renders to the barely HD 720p that the first generation TV supports. When I really want to wow, I can put the 1080 versions of these movies on a USB stick and play them directly on the Samsung HDTV at full 1080. Otherwise, there is an obvious difference in playing the 720p or 960 x 540 versions that are easier to deal with using existing (limited) TV.

Here's a chance for people like me to get something that solves all problems. And people like you can still enjoy 720p or SD or whatever you feel is good enough at it's fullest quality (because better hardware can always handle less-demanding software). Just because you don't see the application for your own wants or needs doesn't make the same apply to everyone else. Great for you that what is in place now works perfectly for your needs.

 

[Enzobot24]

Don't get me wrong. I'n sure an expensive audio system sounds great, but in my little Japanese flat it isn't practical or necessary. But my TV did come with speakers, so it's reasonable to expect the sound out of them to be audible before talking about quality. And the speakers are fine. I play music through them - the sound is as good as the little stereo we have.

Audio systems don't have to be expensive... especially to improve on what you're using.

Essentially, any level of dedicated speakers and receiver (entry-level, mid-range, high-end) will improve upon built-in speakers.

For one, the speakers are small. And two, the digital-to-analog converter and audio processor in the TV are not very good. For the most part, TV manufacturers know people will be adding a sound system--so they skimp on the speakers in the set.

 

[Enzobot24]

What about those of us who shoot our home movies in 1080, import,edit & render using tools like Apple's iMovie or FCP, export them for Apple's Quicktime player, import them into Apple's iTunes where they will store and playback just fine? In our living room, we have a "full HD" (1080p) set. No BD players are iTunes-friendly enough to fill in that gap between the 1080 content we've put in iTunes and the TV. Thus, we really need a 1080-capable TV solution.

Personally, I rarely rent or buy anything from the iTunes store. Since buying a 1080p Samsung HDTV, it's built-in apps include VUDU (among many others) which basically kills vs. iTunes 720p or SD. But, the Samsung isn't iTunes capable either, so the 1080 HD home movies are still challenged in getting to that HDTV in a "family friendly" way.

From 2007 to now, I've downconverted these renders to the barely HD 720p that the first generation TV supports. When I really want to wow, I can put the 1080 versions of these movies on a USB stick and play them directly on the Samsung HDTV at full 1080. Otherwise, there is an obvious difference in playing the 720p or 960 x 540 versions that are easier to deal with using existing (limited) TV.

Here's a chance for people like me to get something that solves all problems. And people like you can still enjoy 720p or SD or whatever you feel is good enough at it's fullest quality (because better hardware can always handle less-demanding software). Just because you don't see the application for your own wants or needs doesn't make the same apply to everyone else. Great for you that what is in place now works perfectly for your needs.

Well, that's not exactly what I was talking about. I'm strictly talking about Apple's iTunes Store content. The people that rent and buy films from the store don't really care about quality--they care about convenience.

Also, I'm a videophile and I love Blu-ray. And I think AppleTV should support 1080p. Further more, I really think Steve should get off his high horse and let Blu-rays play on Macs.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

It seems like any 1080p AppleTV is going to have to go back to offering on-board storage to make it work at this point in time. They could throw a 2TB drive in that thing and still sell it for $200 if they really wanted to. I don't believe for a second they will

...or maybe Apple has heard enough gripes about that particular take away between version 1 and version 2 to decide to normalize the USB port so that people could plug in local storage if they desire. That would give those that want big local storage a way to create whatever amount of storage they want without asking those who favor only streaming to pay for storage they may not want. The latter may or may not be able to stream HD+ depending on how big a versions 3 SSD turns out to be. If not, they probably stream the 720p or less version.

Hackers made TV version 1's USB port do this very thing, so it's not impossible. If an Apple-endorsed version of the same option arrived in TV 3, it would facilitate another great reason for those interested in local storage to upgrade.

1080p + optional local storage + (hopefully) app store and the thing moves nearer to perfection.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Well, that's not exactly what I was talking about. I'm strictly talking about Apple's iTunes Store content. The people that rent and buy films from the store don't really care about quality--they care about convenience.

I rent from online streaming stores (sometimes iTunes) and I care about quality. I usually check VUDU first (hoping to get a rental in 1080) then Dish VOD (if new release) then iTunes, then Netflix. Quality actually drives the rental decision.

I agree that many desire the convenience, probably because TV is so easy to use (and you don't have to go out to try to find the BD at Redbox or Blockbuster), but that ease-of-use would persist in a 1080 version.

 

[*LTD*]

...and don't complain if you don't get free bread!

Don't start, because we'll be doing Seinfeld all night.

Yes, that show was one of the few things that made TV worth watching back then. Now I own the set so it's on-demand!

 

[Enzobot24]

I rent from online streaming stores (sometimes iTunes) and I care about quality. I usually check VUDU first (hoping to get a rental in 1080) then Dish VOD (if new release) then iTunes, then Netflix. Quality actually drives the rental decision.

I agree that many desire the convenience, probably because TV is so easy to use, but that ease-of-use would persist in a 1080 version.

VUDU is a great service. The internet at my house is only 3Mbit/s, so I can barely stream in 720p.

That's why I rely on Blu-ray.

 

[Eidorian]

Don't start, because we'll be doing Seinfeld all night.

Yes, that show was one of the few things that made TV worth watching back then. Now own the set so it's on-demand!

I get at least 4 hours of it over the air everyday. It is still great.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Enzobot24, I understand. The bandwidth limitations in some areas will make <1080p options important to retain in the iTunes store. I would expect that. Just as we have the option of choosing the 720p OR the SD version now, if there is going to be an HD+ version, I would expect all 3 versions to continue to be available.

Thus, those with challenged bandwidth should still be able to enjoy the exact same experience they have now. And those with faster options will be able to go HD+. Or maybe Apple will allow an TV1-like buffer option big enough to start a download today and watch in the next few days (so those with slow Internet but high quality wants could get what they want too... just not as a stream).

And yes, VUDU is a great service. Like other non-Apple source Apps, it's not as user friendly to access it via the latest generation Samsung App store. I guess I want the (VUDU) 1080 quality in the TV family-friendly UI. No sacrifices. Here's hoping a version 3 finally gets it all right. Been waiting 4+ years now.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

This is a really unnecessary move for Apple.

The people renting/buying from iTunes are content with 720p. Any videophile or home theater enthusiast has already invested (and fallen in love) with Blu-ray.

You must enjoy speaking for other people. My 93" screen and 6.1 channel home-theater disagree with you. I don't want a disc format. If I use Blu-Ray at all, it's to convert it to a streaming format I can use off a menu-driven playback device and server storage system.

1. Blu-ray isn't owned by Sony. Much like DVD, there is a huge consortium of corporations backing it. That's why there's a Blu-ray Disc Association

The vast majority of Blu-Ray patents is owned by Sony, Panasonic and Phillips.

Man, some people are tools.

Indeed.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

You must enjoy speaking for other people. My 93" screen and 6.1 channel home-theater disagree with you. I don't want a disc format. If I use Blu-Ray at all, it's to convert it to a streaming format I can use off a menu-driven playback device and server storage system.



The vast majority of Blu-Ray patents is owned by Sony, Panasonic and Phillips.



Indeed.

Compensate often? Seriously, you are the fringe case. I don't agree it's an unnecessary move. I think it will be a slowly deployed move that gives them time to test it.

 

[mikerudolph22]

What competition? Who (aside from torrent sites) currently offers 1080p movies for streaming or download?

Vudu comes with all Samsung TVs. Been able to rent/stream full HD movies for almost a hear now...

 

[Nostromo]

This is a really unnecessary move for Apple.

The people renting/buying from iTunes are content with 720p. Any videophile or home theater enthusiast has already invested (and fallen in love) with Blu-ray.

Also, a few more things (almost exclusively directed at Xtremehkr):

1. Blu-ray isn't owned by Sony. Much like DVD, there is a huge consortium of corporations backing it. That's why there's a Blu-ray Disc Association

2. Blu-rays are not more expensive than iTunes purchases. Right now, the Quantum of Solace Blu-ray is $14.50 on Amazon. The 3.5GB/720p version (that's right 3.5GB compared to the 29.5GB feature size on the Blu-ray) on iTunes...

....it costs $19.99.

Man, some people are tools.

VOD is not here yet: http://www.deadline.com/2011/07/report-premium-vod-likely-to-fizzle-as-movie-industry-regroups/

 

[Enzobot24]

You must enjoy speaking for other people. My 93" screen and 6.1 channel home-theater disagree with you. I don't want a disc format. If I use Blu-Ray at all, it's to convert it to a streaming format I can use off a menu-driven playback device and server storage system.

Why the aversion to disc formats? If anything, a 93 inch screen is begging for the highest bitrate, highest resolution format. And Blu-ray is undoubtably that (unless you've got access to 880Mbit/s 4:4:4 HDCAM version of movies).

So you're converting Blu-rays and movies in the name of convenience? That seems counterintuitive.

 

[Nostromo]

Why the aversion to disc formats? If anything, a 93 inch screen is begging for the highest bitrate, highest resolution format. And Blu-ray is undoubtably that (unless you've got access to 880Mbit/s 4:4:4 HDCAM version of movies).

So you're converting Blu-rays and movies in the name of convenience? That seems counterintuitive.

Agree. For maximum image quality Blu-Ray is currently it.

 

[Tech198]

Slow bandwidth

Did anyone actually read the last bit?

"In order to address that issue, Apple could offer the 1080p only for downloadable movie content, although that would be incompatible with the simplicity of the Apple TV, which offers only limited storage space for caching purposes and otherwise streams all content. Alternatively, Apple could make the 1080p content available for streaming only if a user's connection is determined to be fast enough to support the bandwidth."

 

[Tech198]

Hd

Apple should rename the 720p crap to "HD-", and use "HD" for the 1080p - assuming that it's 10-20 Mbps so that the "HD" label is justified.

Then we should rename DVD to blue ray, even thought their better quality.

The difference here, however, is probably not much, but still is a difference.

Let's go further and say all DVD's that are upscaled to 720p are native 720p movies.

 

[TsMkLg068426]

Did anyone actually read the last bit?

"In order to address that issue, Apple could offer the 1080p only for downloadable movie content, although that would be incompatible with the simplicity of the Apple TV, which offers only limited storage space for caching purposes and otherwise streams all content. Alternatively, Apple could make the 1080p content available for streaming only if a user's connection is determined to be fast enough to support the bandwidth."

Well I did and as the last sentence says: "Alternatively, Apple could make the 1080p content available for streaming only if a user's connection is determined to be fast enough to support the bandwidth."

And how many people would that be that have enough speed to support bandwidth? Plus with most ISPs adding Caps this truly isn't helpful who can afford the minimum or any even during a crappy economy.

as for me the biggest problem I have is wireless when it comes to Blu-Ray player and I also have a Apple Airport Extreme but I tried extending it with a Airport Express and no good so now I am using PlugLink to connect wired ethernet with Blu-ray since I have no wired ethernet going through my wall that is the best I can do now. So at this moment streaming movies at best quality is still a question especially 3D movies are becoming the next major thing and of course you can watch streaming 3D movies on VUDU now. And like others who have said VUDU has the best HD and Audio quality is correct, sucks if you do not have a decent internet connection.

 

[winston1236]

a little late but a good idea