Formula for failure:
A. Apple distribution channel
M. Movie studios content
N. Need
G. Greed
(a * (m * n))* 2 = g
A. Apple distribution channel
M. Movie studios content
N. Need
G. Greed
(a * (m * n))* 2 = g
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
$20 for a 4K movie that doesn't even have a DTS-HD MA track is a rip off. Another reason why I'll never purchase movies from Apple/iTunes.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
People basically wanted iPhone 8 last year, yeah. But they didn't get it, and I think most people realized they were OK without it due to record sales. For those that still want it, are they really going to pay those prices? Of course they will... then gush about getting one, shout down anyone finding fault with Apple pricing and toss around "...but who has the most profitable phone" in market share threads.
I have a 4K TV and have started shooting 4K Video. I can see a difference between HD and 4K content on the TV. That is from the same camera & lens setup, just changing the capture quality.
I don't know what differences streaming 4K will have over 1080p but I suspect that the compression artifacts could be a lot worse/more visible with the 4K stream.
That's because their hardware and software is higher-quality than the rest of the industry.
[doublepost=1504032628][/doublepost]
I'm with you.
If I'm paying $20, I want the whole theatre experience: Billboard-sized screen, whatever.1 sound, etc.
BTW, is that a "purchase" price, or "Rental" price? What are they proposing for a typical iTunes Movie RENTAL for a 4k movie?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Yes, my post wasn't specific to yours- just building upon the overall conversation. Sorry if you saw it as personal.
However, you did cast Apple as continuing to "fight over pricing" which reads (to me anyway) as casting Apple as the consumer's champion in this fight. I'm much more suspicious that Apple is wanting to bring what is generally much more expensive hardware (than direct competitors) to market with the proposition of cheapest digital pricing. In other words, our "champion" is trying to prop up their desire for hardware profits by cutting the profits of those who own the content. And not only does Apple want the lowest price but they take their hefty cut right off the top too.
Yet here we are (most of us posting) seeing them as our valiant champion and the other party as the greedy villain. I'm doubting the reality is that black & white.
And yes, I agree with you that pricing is why there is not yet an Apple subscription service. Rumors surrounding those conversations seemed to consistently present Apple as wanting a very competitive price vs. cable/satt and burgeoning streaming service competitors AND their usual big fat cut. Is there any wonder why no such deal has been cut yet?
Meanwhile, much weaker/poorer competitors have come to market with streaming services that are being delivered on Apple's own hardware. There too we can cast the content owners as villains and/or conspirators preventing Apple from rolling out such a service... OR we can "think different" and wonder how Sony, Hulu, YouTube, Sling, etc could get such deals done but the great & mighty Apple with all the spare cash in the world just can't seem to do the same. Of course, it has to be conspiracy or greed as Apple can play no negative role in such things.
[doublepost=1504032756][/doublepost]
Those opting to steal something can see $10, $5, $2, $1, a quarter, a dime, a nickel and a penny as INFINITELY more than they have to pay by stealing. There is no right price for a thief beyond free.
Last edited:
Theatre movies haven't had any duplication or distribution costs for a few years now. Everything is streamed direct-to-theatre over secure datalinks (I think satellite).
Got the TV, 4K Player so that means I have the disks, streamed I have but not satellite. In the UK, I think that satellite has a limited time compered to a digital pipe into the home. We seem to have better options for streaming.
The 4k sport I have on streaming, that is exceptional considering it is that good. It is better than Netflix 4k. I can see the difference between 1080p and 4k. This is a way forward I want to chase and activly
I would not have spent out on the TV otherwise, I did the testing at the stores first.
Each to their own though and the eye is the final decider.
Thing is, when the price of the film from apple is a few bob lower than a bluray, and unless there us something that matches or comes close to the disk cost, steaming loses.
I want to see this succeed but will wait to see the final product. It might be surprisingly good.
How about rentals? Are we going to have an option to rent 4K movies and not for $10 - $15. Because I can rent a blu ray movie from REDBOX for like $2.50. I know that is 1080p qaulity but I'm NOT spending 1/3 of the price of the movie to rent it for 24 hours.
This isn't a rental so it's not a one time consumable. It's a purchase so you could watch it all day every day until you die if you wanted.
Yea but still. $1,500 for a laptop in today's economy is just gross. We wonder why the debt in this country just keeps growing and growing. MacBook Pro's shouldn't cost a penny over $1,000. In 10 years they will cost $2,000 and the employees at work will still not have received a pay increase to make up for that inflation.
[doublepost=1504034223][/doublepost]
Go to Walmart. A standard Blu Ray is $20 - $25.
Most likely pushed to a local server rather than streamed, as that would make more sense and they wouldn't have to worry about bandwidth issues.
So when folks buy a 4K AppleTV and a 4K movie and then find out their internet service is too slow to play it without buffering ever 2 minutes. Who will that uproar be pointed at then?
sarcastically asking. I have a clue who they will blame other than themselves for not researching enough.
sarcastically asking. I have a clue who they will blame other than themselves for not researching enough.
Wouldn’t worry about that when Apple will probably only support 60hz and no 24p mode so it will be a juddeting pile of poo like the current Apple TV.
Sales performance will tell them whether there is a viable market at the price points they want to charge.
To me picture quality comes first, then convenience. Earlier this year I have purchased 2 top-of-the-line, latest gen. 4K TV's from Sony for over $13k. I am willing to pay premium to import 4K movies like Shin Godzilla and other anime titles, just because those aren't available in 4K in the US. I also happily bought Planet Earth 2 on 4K the day it was released. If I really want to watch something, price isn't my biggest concern.
As long as the iTunes 4K format has the same image and sound quality as the disc releases, I will choose it over discs at the same price points.
To me picture quality comes first, then convenience. Earlier this year I have purchased 2 top-of-the-line, latest gen. 4K TV's from Sony for over $13k. I am willing to pay premium to import 4K movies like Shin Godzilla and other anime titles, just because those aren't available in 4K in the US. I also happily bought Planet Earth 2 on 4K the day it was released. If I really want to watch something, price isn't my biggest concern.
As long as the iTunes 4K format has the same image and sound quality as the disc releases, I will choose it over discs at the same price points.
Personally I am not that serious about this whole thing.
It is a box that works for me. The remote could use some reworking and is my single frustration point if I even want to use the word frustration.
I am simply to the point to where if a company makes a product and I don't agree with it. I find something else that does. I don't have the time to be so aggrivated with something that I need to make time in my life to discuss how much I don't like this thing.
If this resteraunt serves bad food, don't go there. If that road is too congested or bumpy, find another way. Is that computer aggrivating, find something else. Is that spouse mean and hateful, find a new one. Do you have a splinter in your finger, you don't leave it there, you get rid of it.
Back on to Apple. Apple is not going to be what everyone thinks they want it to be. They never have, never will. Apple is what they are, whatever that is to someone. You like what they make, you buy it. You don't like it, don't buy it.
I'm not an iPad person what so ever. I don't like them at all. But there are 5 of them in my house. I can understand why someone likes something and others don't and that's ok.
This is such a stupid question that gets constantly asked by elitist who don't like pop culture. Yes, almost everyone has a few favorite movie or movies that they watch over and over again whether it airs on TV or something that they buy. How many times do people watch Holiday classics like The Wizard of Oz or Charlie Brown Christmas? How many times do people watch Godfather, Harry Potter, Goodfellas, Star Wars or Indiana Jones when it's on TV?
Not everyone is a huge collector and collect movies just for the sake of collecting and have thousands of movies, but a lot of folks will buy 3 or 5 films that they love and watch the heck out of. And if you have a familykids like to have movie nights with their friends and purchasing a blu-ray for $15 will always be cheaper than taking a family of 4 out to the movies.
[doublepost=1504037529][/doublepost]
Especially when most services are so inconsistent with their Digital Support. Vudu ticks me off because their 4K UHD content is only available on a very limited number of devices. So I can't even watch that $29 4K Digital only movie on 4K devices that have Vudu (for instance not on my PS4 Pro, nor my 4K UHD Player, etc.)
You are absolutely right. They don't get it. People usually prefer to stream on Netflix / Prime / Hulu, and probably only pirate a handful of movies a year. If prices weren't absurdly high for digital iTunes movies I would happily pay without hesitating. Paying a one-time $15 fee to watch a digital movie once in my own living room is crazy. $5 is much more reasonable and will bring much more sales.
Sounds brilliant to me, but I've no idea what Amazon charge for 4K films on its service? Or how much 4K blue ray films will cost? Still if Apple want to charge less then Hollywood does that's fine by me.
The debt of this country has nothing to do with prices of computers or any electronics for that matter. For every outrageous high priced item there is an extremely cheap item that you can use as an alternative. So people’s personal debt in many cases are their own fault. Buying things they can’t afford or don’t need.