You realize that is a very limited selection of videos at those rates right? Also, this is mail order and not over-the-counter retail.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Wants to Sell 4K Movies for $20 in iTunes, While Film Studios Want $25 to $30
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You realize that is a very limited selection of videos at those rates right? Also, this is mail order and not over-the-counter retail.
I'd be willing to pay $25-$30 for 4K HDR if I can also rent/buy 1080p for $15 and SD for $7-$8.
Some movies are worth the extra quality. Others aren't, so 1080p is good. Other things like children's shows for our children are completely fine in SD.
Some movies are worth the extra quality. Others aren't, so 1080p is good. Other things like children's shows for our children are completely fine in SD.
You forgot to add to your list that the digital content is only there while it’s available. It is your responsibility to actually download the movie, tv show or music and back it up. There are times music was removed from the iTunes Store and I did not have it downloaded to my computer, it is lost forever. Even when I go to my purchases downloads I can only see partial albums and not all the songs. It sucks.
However I do like the flexibility of digital. Buy once and use on all devices easily.
That's what you would think, but with the shifting dollar they always have it higher than the posted rate. Then throw in our beloved HST.
Wow. That is quite a rant. I'm not saying Apple's prices are a deal. Far from it. I just think they have a good idea about where the maximum price point is. Obviously, they charge as much as they can. But, I know as greedy as they are, the music and movie studios are much greedier. The fact that Apple has to fight with them to keep the prices from being even higher is insane. Personally, I would never pay $20 for one movie.
I wonder how many of you guys posting in this thread:
1. Have 4K TV
2. Have 4K UHD Bluray player
3. Ever seen 4K movie from UHD disk
4. Ever seen 4K movie streamed from Netflix or other sources
5. Ever seen 4K broadcasting from satellite
Yes, I can see the difference while Netfilx is "ramping up" from 480 to 2160 when you start watching any of their 4K content. I somehow do not see the huge difference in quality between 4K UHD BR and normal 1080p Bluray while watching disks that normally would cost here around 35$ (both versions included in a package as mentioned in some of the posts above).
For me 20$ (or 20€ here) is a real alternative if I can store the file that is equal to 25-30 Mb/s streaming and see it as many times as I want later.
1. Have 4K TV
2. Have 4K UHD Bluray player
3. Ever seen 4K movie from UHD disk
4. Ever seen 4K movie streamed from Netflix or other sources
5. Ever seen 4K broadcasting from satellite
Yes, I can see the difference while Netfilx is "ramping up" from 480 to 2160 when you start watching any of their 4K content. I somehow do not see the huge difference in quality between 4K UHD BR and normal 1080p Bluray while watching disks that normally would cost here around 35$ (both versions included in a package as mentioned in some of the posts above).
For me 20$ (or 20€ here) is a real alternative if I can store the file that is equal to 25-30 Mb/s streaming and see it as many times as I want later.
Last edited:
You do realize that this comment was a response to someone who said that this content is not overpriced...right? I was disagreeing.OR Apple wants to roll out their newTV with the marketing spin of best price in digital downloads. Apple may indeed be looking out for us consumers here. But then again, rumor is that the next iPhone will be priced higher than the last one and margins are well known to be large. If Apple is looking out for us in the price of other company's product pricing, it seems they could much more easily do us a similar favor in how they price their own products.
As a consumer, I'm certainly glad that any company is trying to drive down prices I would potentially pay. That's great. But we shouldn't be so quick to crown one saint and all of the other players villains. Apple is not exactly the "most profitable company in the world" because they drive prices we pay to the lowest possible levels.
Well, my original post was not incorrect and that's all I am pointing out. Consumers bought home video movies before 1983 and 8mm movie excerpt films before tapes.
Am I the only one here thinking that this is not ridiculous?
For me, going to the cinema has always been a a social thing - something I do with friends a lot.
I cannot remember a single movie I went to with under 3 people overall (wow this is sad, can't even remember my last cinema date).
In Germany, you pay between €12-16 for a movie ticket, another €5 for a beer, and even another €5 for a bag of popcorn. That makes approximately €25 - for each person.
Multiply that by 3 and you have €75 here.
I'd definitely be willing to pay 25€ (and probably even above) for a most current movie (2-3 weeks after release). Divide it by three, let your friends bring some beer and snacks, and you're good to go.
I think Apple should definitely jump at the chance in regard to people building their own home cinemas with their 60" + 4k TVs nowadays anyway.
For me, going to the cinema has always been a a social thing - something I do with friends a lot.
I cannot remember a single movie I went to with under 3 people overall (wow this is sad, can't even remember my last cinema date).
In Germany, you pay between €12-16 for a movie ticket, another €5 for a beer, and even another €5 for a bag of popcorn. That makes approximately €25 - for each person.
Multiply that by 3 and you have €75 here.
I'd definitely be willing to pay 25€ (and probably even above) for a most current movie (2-3 weeks after release). Divide it by three, let your friends bring some beer and snacks, and you're good to go.
I think Apple should definitely jump at the chance in regard to people building their own home cinemas with their 60" + 4k TVs nowadays anyway.
$20 is far too expensive (never mind $25 or $30).
If the price was $15 id buy a couple of times a year at most - for big blockbusters.
If the price was $10 or less then I’d grab one or two a month.
Anything more than that - then I’d stick to streaming services (such as Netflix)
If the price was $15 id buy a couple of times a year at most - for big blockbusters.
If the price was $10 or less then I’d grab one or two a month.
Anything more than that - then I’d stick to streaming services (such as Netflix)
I keep hoping we'll see someone offer discounts for the copyright we've already paid (VHS, maybe Beta, Laserdisc, DVD, 1080p Blu-ray).
$7 for a movie is reasonable...maybe $10 if you future proof the movie (ie. I only buy it ONCE and get the upgrades to 8k, etc free, forever).
A more sustainable model is streaming/subscription. Apple needs to embrace this if they're ever going to be a big player in television.
And the movie studios don't get it....which is why so many of us have NAS at home for our extensive movie collections.
Make it reasonably priced or we'll just take it...
$7 for a movie is reasonable...maybe $10 if you future proof the movie (ie. I only buy it ONCE and get the upgrades to 8k, etc free, forever).
A more sustainable model is streaming/subscription. Apple needs to embrace this if they're ever going to be a big player in television.
And the movie studios don't get it....which is why so many of us have NAS at home for our extensive movie collections.
Make it reasonably priced or we'll just take it...
The movie industry wants to increase the value of their movies without actually doing anything different except choosing a higher quality output file. It's literally zero cost to the movie studios.
IMO, $20-25 is what it should cost for a new release 4K movie. The boost in resolution does not jutstify a price increase over 1080.
I don't think Apple has the clout in this area to demand such things, but I do agree with the price and not just because I want my movies to remain affordable.
IMO, $20-25 is what it should cost for a new release 4K movie. The boost in resolution does not jutstify a price increase over 1080.
I don't think Apple has the clout in this area to demand such things, but I do agree with the price and not just because I want my movies to remain affordable.
1&2 - Xmas (specifically, the after Xmas sales)
3 - later, the evening I pick up 1 & 2.
4 - See 3
5 - no satellite, no problem
Right now, 4K tvs start at $328 (43"; - 50" are selling at $400) at Mal-Wart. 4K discs are 29.99, BUT they also have a number of them that have multiple movies and sell for that same $29.95 (which means that the 4K discs are as low as $10 each).
what bout 3-5$ for a movie rental... ?
[doublepost=1504031282][/doublepost]
25-30$ is ok if its released the same day as cinemas.......
you cant apply the same rule to dine-out / cook at home.. at home it MUST be a LOT cheaper....
[doublepost=1504031282][/doublepost]
25-30$ is ok if its released the same day as cinemas.......
you cant apply the same rule to dine-out / cook at home.. at home it MUST be a LOT cheaper....
This business makes no sense at all. 1. Most people don't want to buy movies anymore. With so much subscription content you can wait and as others have mentioned you'd be better off buying a disk that isn't or is at least less compressed
Don't they still overcharge for those movies though?
Don't they still overcharge for those movies though?
I would pay $19.99 at max for a new release digital 4K and I own 550 movies I have bought through itunes. I am a rabid anti-pirate, but what will piss me off and move me to piracy is if they try to charge me full price again to upgrade my 1080 movies. $1.99 - $2.99 for a 4K upgrade anything more than that and I'll stop buying 1080 or 4K and just start downloading.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I'm with you there. One of the great joys of the first generation was the ability to synch content to it so it could stand alone.
However, I think the better way to resurrect such a feature would NOT be Apple arbitrarily choosing 1 or 2 storage sizes (as there is no way they can get that choice right for all). Instead, I argue for:
- normalize that USB port so people can hook up whatever level of local storage they want (but those happy to stream everything from their computers or via the Internet aren't paying the extra for some built-in hard drive) and/or
- make it NAS aware, so that local storage can simply be on a NAS hard drive on the home network.
But what do I know?
Last edited: