iTunes Movie Rentals to be Announced at WWDC?

[Squire]

Didn't read the article yet, but why on earth would Apple announce an iTunes/Movie rental service at the WWDC? With Leopard and the probability of new hardware announcements, it looks like Jobs is already going to be plenty busy giving that slide clicker of his a workout. So unless there is some sort of special tie-in with yet to be disclosed Leopard whiz bang technologies and the Video service, why WWDC?

It also strikes me that the WWDC isn't really the venue for this sort of announcement. It always gets a lot of media attention, but mostly the kind of attention that appeals mostly to nerds and not the general public per se - the target audience for Apple's video what-have-you wares. One of those hasitly assembled Apple "special events" or Macworld seem more logical for this sort of thing.

I see your point, but if the timing is right, why not?

As others have noted, a rental service for movies is not such a bad idea. For the few movies you'd watch multiple times, buying the DVD-- with all the extras-- is a better option. I can't get too excited about it, though, because it will obviously be a US-only service.

-Squire

 

[MauiMac]

WHAT??? 10.5, MacPro, Movie Rentals and 2g Nano!

WOW! "Think Secret" is really putting its reputation on the line by making this ("WWDC surprise: Apple to announce iTunes movie rentals" and Second-gen iPod nano on tap for August") two statements! What are the chances of Jobs announcing movie rentals and second-gen ipod nanos at WWDC (of all places) (in addition to 10.5 and MacPros)? But with Jobs, who knows what will be announced. "One more thing"... oh and wait just "One more thing"...

 

[gnasher729]

If I'm going to spend all that time downloading a movie, I should at least be able to keep it. Bah.

There is another possibility that wouldn't require any downloads at all. In the UK, many newspapers come with free CDs or DVDs quite often. It would be possible to ship a DVD with the latest movies that way (and you can fit quite a bit of material in H264 format on a double sided DVD), and the rental from iTMS would just unlock the material on the DVD. If you put trailers and promotional material on the DVD in a way that can be accessed directly, this would make many people rent the movies.

And if you want to watch the movie again in a few years, just put in the DVD again and rent it again; no download needed. In the end, even today harddisks are not yet quite big enough that you would want to keep all your rented movies on your harddisk.

 

[Chundles]

List of things I don't want to hear one word about at the WWDC:

iPod
iPod nano
iTMS
iMac
Mac mini
MacBook.

The WWDC is now and always should be a professionally focussed conference. All technical, nerdy and Pro stuff - Mac Pro, MacBook Pro, Pro Apps, OS X development.

All the other stuff can be updated in their own little events or quietly on the online store on or around the WWDC if needs be but the actual event should be totally professional stuff. That's why the developers pay the big bucks.

 

[JFreak]

Thing is Steve Jobs is going to pull the usual trick (stupid contracts) and only release this to the American public.

We can always hope that they also want to make business outside US.

 

[exabytes18]

With such big files readily available to the public, I want to see so many people decide to rent a movie that the ISPs struggle with their oversold services.

 

[MacBoobsPro]

Yeah, if it's $9.99 to rent, it's going to fail. $1.99, might be worth it. I'm sure a lot of people will be happy, then a lot of people will complain. Both with have good points, but the rest of us won't care.

This is were the movie bigwigs are shooting themselves in the foot. I would rather pay $5 - $10 for a download (to keep) than $1.99 (or similar) for a rental. More people want to keep the movies and will pay more for them. I.e. more income for the studios etc.

What are they freakin' stupid?

I know for a fact - if it ever makes it to the UK store - that i will hardly download any if they are on a rental model. If its pay to own i will be downloading loads.

EDIT: And i agree with bigandys post above!

 

[crap freakboy]

Until they at least come close to matching the model that Mac The Ripper, Toast and Blockbuster 3 dvd postal rental gives me, I'll have to decline the Studios kind offer regarding rental rather than ownership.

 

[A.Fairhead]

I hope the rental thing is true--I don't want to own. I'm not with Steve Jobs on this one (assuming the rumors are true that he opposes rentals).

Owning music downloads fits my habits/needs. Owning movie downloads does NOT. The vast majority of movies I watch I never see again. And I don't want to store big movie files long-term. And I don't want to pay a higher price! Lower the price and make it short-term. I like that better.

For the few movies/shows I'd want to own, I want the discs (Blu-Ray preferred ) and the ability to take them to a friends' house.

Also, if it's a rental model, I can be more forgiving on quality. They'd have to be better than iPod 320x240 (except, obviously, when played ON an iPod), but if they're a little bit short of DVD quality, I'd still be bored enough to seek instant gratification and rent some. The price would have to be right, of course. Netflix rentals cost about $2.50 each on my plan. For slightly-sub-DVD quality and near-instant delivery, I'd pay maybe $2. For FULL DVD quality I'd certainly be willing to match Netlflix's price, or even pay a little more (for iTunes convenience/speed).

I agree; I watch movies a lot more than I buy movies. When I go to the cinema, I pay to watch the film, not to own it. Most people do this - owning films is something of an impulse post-viewing, in my experience. If iTMS can provide a rental service, that's great. If they end up providing purchases too, then, that's great too. Apple will be able to target 'viewing' markets as well as 'purchase' markets, if the difference is easy enough to see there.

I guess my thoughts are to not rule out rentals - I'm sure many of you work with films like I've just described

 

[ZoomZoomZoom]

I actually prefer renting to buying, if the price is right. Don't have to worry about driving back and forth, and don't have to worry about late fees. I'm the kind of guy who doesn't download music from iTunes though, and I like to have everything I own also in a physical format. (I buy CDs.) Thus, I like this system because I can look at a movie just once or twice (It's not like I watch most movies more than once anyways) and if it's really good, I'll go to a store and buy it.

Of course, this all depends on the price of the rental. If it's anything over $3 maybe $4 pending on quality, I'd rather just bring myself to a movie theatre. Or borrow a DVD from a friend.

 

[gekko513]

It does make more sense renting movies than renting music. It's not often I like to see the same movie several times.

If the service is cheap enough, I can see that the convenience of getting a movie with just a couple of clicks in iTunes will make this an attractive offer for many. It is a hassle having to rent physical DVDs.

 

[zerolight]

Thing is Steve Jobs is going to pull the usual trick (stupid contracts) and only release this to the American public. Rubbish if you ask me, we live in a world of more than one country. Which is why this sounds like another stupid pipe dream that the rest of the world will never get to enjoy *points at TV shows*.

Iggy

Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.

The only way it can work is if iTunes waits until after all the channels have aired it first. In the UK you'd find 24 showing up on something like E4, then Channel 4, then some of the scrubbers like Channel 5 or Bravo would likely have a deal, then it could show up on iTunes. By then the show is so old that there's no point. Hence, I imagine, why we don't get iTunes TV Shows here.

 

[whooleytoo]

I don't think the time is right for online digital movie rentals. Even with a relatively fast broadband service, it still is going to take a fair amount of time to download the file. If the file only plays once, or just for a day, or a few days it's just not worth the effort, IMO.

On the other hand, if it were a subscription service, or a download & keep it would be. Perhaps, in the not too distant future when we all have much faster connections, the download rental market might make more sense.

Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.

So <the inevitable reply> why don't the air the shows on the same day in every country? In the TV age, it wouldn't make sense. In the digital age, it's the only way that makes any sense.

 

[Macnoviz]

I was trying to avoid the whining, but now that you bring it up... when is apple going to bring the video content to other coutries?

In Belgium, we were promised video downloads in 2006

Yeah, if it's $9.99 to rent, it's going to fail. $1.99, might be worth it. I'm sure a lot of people will be happy, then a lot of people will complain. Both with have good points, but the rest of us won't care.

Yeah, $2 seems right for a movie (in twisted Apple calculations this is 2,49 euros) I normally watch movies only once, so rental would be better, especially with a modest hard drive

We can always hope that they also want to make business outside US.

Amen

Surely the TV Shows issue is because the US shows are sold on to European TV Stations, usually after the show has aired in the states. These TV Stations aren't going to be too pleased if they've shelled out a bucketload of money for the UK premier of 24 for example, only to have it show up on iTunes before they've even aired it.

The only way it can work is if iTunes waits until after all the channels have aired it first. In the UK you'd find 24 showing up on something like E4, then Channel 4, then some of the scrubbers like Channel 5 or Bravo would likely have a deal, then it could show up on iTunes. By then the show is so old that there's no point. Hence, I imagine, why we don't get iTunes TV Shows here.

The shows would probably be different in the international stores, like here in Belgium we will have to split, one for Flanders (Dutch subtitles, although a lot of people also know English, like me) and one for Wallon (French dubbing/subtitles)
And there would probably be an offer of Belgian TV shows, along with international ones that have already aired here. I do hope we will have the chance to buy some more shows that, won't come out in Belgium, at least not on DVD.

 

[Detlev]

This does play into the news published about the industry allowing people to burn movies to DVDs but can someone do the math? What would the file size be for 2 hour movie at present? What about if it were compressed into a zip or tz file? What would it be if the quality were improved? How long would it take to download these files with dialup, on dsl, on cable. I would think that most people would not be downloading using their offices T1 connection

How long would you wait or tie up your computer's internet connection to download an old movie from Disney?

Here is another issue to think about. With large files being downloaded to your HD and then errasing them you will have to defragment your HD quite often or you will suffer. Is there rumor of improved Disk Utility or other method of handling this?

 

[Chundles]

Can someone do the math? What would the file size be for 2 hour movie at present? What about if it were compressed into a zip or tz file? What would it be if the quality were improved? How long would it take to download these files with dialup, on dsl, on cable. I would think that most people would not be downloading using their offices T1 connection

How long would you wait or tie up your computer's internet connection to download an old movie from Disney?

OK, I'm just going to do the maths...

Let's see, divide by 1024.....carry the one....add 6...average speed of an unladen swallow...take the inverse and...

The answer is: Very BIG!!

 

[Eraserhead]

I dunno, I could work if they streamed it. Even if they did it so you waited 15 minutes so there was loads of streamed data on your computer first (so no awful pauses) I can see myself using it a lot for even £2. You could go round with a laptop (or an iPod with WiFi ) and plug it into a TV and watch a film on it, it would be good.

 

[Stella]

Waste of time. Two reasons:

- Several hours of downloads
- Available in the states only

Apple still haven't rolled out videos to the rest of the world yet ( for what ever reason , i.e., licensing. Apple seem to be dragging their heels regarding getting licenses. It shouldn't take this long ).

 

[whooleytoo]

OK, I'm just going to do the maths...

Let's see, divide by 1024.....carry the one....add 6...average speed of an unladen swallow...take the inverse and...

The answer is: Very BIG!!

With those math skills let me guess.. you work for NASA? Or British rail? Or counting votes in US elections? (Or in the Irish government.. "one for you, two for me, one for you.." )

How big are the music videos? I can't download them, so I can't determine the size, but if you knew the size of a music video, and you know its duration is roughly 5 minutes, you can extrapolate from that the approximate size of a 1:30 movie (i.e. multiply file size by 18). Multiply by 8 to convert to bits, then if you have (say) a 1Mbps connection, the math is easy peasy.

 

[rosalindavenue]

I don't think the time is right for online digital movie rentals. Even with a relatively fast broadband service, it still is going to take a fair amount of time to download the file. If the file only plays once, or just for a day, or a few days it's just not worth the effort, IMO.

I agree with respect to downloads-- but I think this is going to be streaming. Did you ever try the frontrow movie trailers? (before Apple let it go dead in January or so-- it was a beta test, I'm sure) Even with a hacked version on my ibook, the trailers were instantaneous and high quality. I think that's how these are going to be rented-- you'll have either a period of time you can stream (preferable) or a number of times you can stream before losing the rights.

EDIT: Poster below me is 100% correct-- this is about ipods; they'll have to sell downloads for those and they wont be anything like DVD quality.

 

[Thataboy]

This would only be viable via streaming, and that won't happen because you can't stream to an iPod.

Therefore, we can expect a big download. I imagine the movies will be the same quality as can be found currently in the store. Remember, the online store is to drive IPOD sales. Apple does not have a Music Store because it wants you to have music so badly. The point of a Movie Store would be to drive 6G iPod sales. Therefore, it makes sense to optimize the viewing experience for iPods.

The only way this would be viable, in my opinion, is if a rental were $1.99-$2.99 MAX. Other than that, I can bloody well use Netflix and Instant Handbrake (deleting the files once I return the movie). I am not so impatient that I can't wait 1 day to get a movie from my queue. For $1.99, I could be persuaded.

However, let's be real here. Bandwidth + movie companies greed = huge prices. I can totally see them trying to do this at $9.99, which is warped and insane (and therefore right in line with content producers' mindsets). Even $4.99 is nuttery.

Now... when Apple finds a way to stream movies to an Apple high-speed MVNO-equipped iPod -- now THAT would be hot. But that won't be around for years, if ever at all.

Finally, no way in Hades is this to be announced at WWDC. Maybe a week before or after, but NOT at the same time. I actually don't envision this announcement being made at all, as it would surely coincide with a new iPod (and aren't those all supposed to be delayed?).

 

[Fuchal]

Paying to rent 320x240 videos with stereo sound is a complete waste of money.

 

[noservice2001]

so ud have to return the movie after? how can that be, it's a rental?

 

[Multimedia]

I Don't Think This Will Work

When you can buy DVDs that you can rip with Handbrake for iPod for as little as $4.99 I don't see how a limited use "rental" model will work. Especially in light of the NetFlix unlimited rental model.

 

[tny]

This does play into the news published about the industry allowing people to burn movies to DVDs but can someone do the math? What would the file size be for 2 hour movie at present? What about if it were compressed into a zip or tz file? What would it be if the quality were improved? How long would it take to download these files with dialup, on dsl, on cable. I would think that most people would not be downloading using their offices T1 connection

How long would you wait or tie up your computer's internet connection to download an old movie from Disney?

Here is another issue to think about. With large files being downloaded to your HD and then errasing them you will have to defragment your HD quite often or you will suffer. Is there rumor of improved Disk Utility or other method of handling this?

Zip, Tar, and GZip are all but irrelevant here, as the compression used in MPEG2 and MP4 leave little room for Zip to optimize (I just zipped an 850 MB MP4 video, and picked up 12 MB in the compression).

I have a 2.5 hour movie in EyeTV right now; in MPEG2 format (CD quality), it's 7.5 GB. The MP4 re-coding I did is I think 1.4 GB (that's on another computer). This is 29.97 FPS/640x480 video; your mileage may vary, as both MPEG2 and MP4 compression vary depending upon the nature of the content.

Where I live, Cable gives 6 Mbps down, burstable to 12 Mbps for the first 50 or so MB, a lot higher than T1's 1.5 Mbps down (though of course a T1 also has 1.5 Mbps up, and Cable around here does maybe 512 kbps). Obviously the cable speed is dependent to some extent on the traffic at surrounding homes, though I think they have significantly reduced the pool size for cable (somebody else may know a lot more about this than I do), which would give you a lot closer to that ideal 6 Mbps (assuming that the server can maintain that speed, which few can).

I suspect that you can count on the videos being 320x240, not 640x480. It looks about as good as VHS, and will cost Apple less in infrastructure costs (which they will have to be a lot more careful with than they have been with music).

This is a very bad idea. Given how well sales of DVDs do, I'd think that the movie industry would realize that the ownership model will be very successful for them. It's bad for Apple, too, as they have to have pretty much the same infrastructure for rental that they would have for an ownership model, but smaller margins (unless the movie industry is stupid enough to think we'll rent for $9.99).