Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iTunes Movie Rentals to be Announced at WWDC?

Maybe I'm missing something...

...but why on Earth would Jobs announce this at a developer's conference?

WWDC showcases the new hardware and software, but this isn't either, it's a product of little or no interest to developers. It's the wrong audience.

A more realistic possibility is a seperate, unrelated, keynote. The iTunes Music Store was announced at a special event, and I'd imagine any "movie download service" would be announced similarly.

I don't think the idea is impossible. I can see a $5 fixed fee thing working quite well, with $1 going to Apple to cover their operating costs. They can probably get an hour or so of moderate, better-then-VHS-resolution, quality for 100 megabytes if they choose a reasonable codec. The system probably fits Apple better than a selling system, where questions like "I can burn my music to CD, how come I can't burn my movies to DVD" will be asked. The major issue I can forsee though is that most of us want to watch movies on a large screen. Most Mac users don't really have anything that would work for that. Perhaps a little, cheap, Firewire widget that does TV out should be in Apple's future.
 
This is a different animal

Booga said:
In the music business, Apple has taken advantage of people's willingness to give up some sound quality (ie MP3 and AAC formats) in exchange for ease of use in buying and using the music. I don't expect the movie service to offer HD, at least not for most movies. I expect they'll do the same thing they did with music-- actually offer slightly LOWER resolution than DVD in exchange for a very convenient package.

That's how Apple got the music industry on-board, and it would offer a great story to the movie studios, who are constantly worried that the higher and higher quality formats mean they're "giving away their masters". Instead, people may be very willing to buy lower quality copies as long as it's extremely convenient.
Click to expand...

Most people can't hear the difference between MP3 and AAC (or just don't care) and that's mainly because of low quality headphones but believe me if you're going to be selling movies you better have some decent resolution because people are going to plug their laptops/minis/media centers into their TV's and watch the movies. I was just watching some TV's I ripped from one of my DVD's last night and it looked ok with my 1080i 42" screen but I also tried playing one of my iTunes shows on my HD TV and it looked pretty crappy. I can understand watching TV shows on your CPU/iPod but if you go after movies they are going to be on the TV and the resolution better not be crap or else it'll be noticeable and nobody will buy it.
 
Good news for me.

There are only a handful of movies that I would ever want to own, and these are films that I feel strongly about and like to loan out to people all the time. I have never understood people who build a personal movie library-- it is so expensive, and who are these people who watch these things over and over again?

If rentals are cheap, like 2-3 dollars, gimme gimme gimme. It'll save gas money to a traditional video store, and keep me from having to strategize about netflix.

Of course, it would be best to have an option to buy too, but I guess we can't have everything.
 
for me, price must be less than 5 dollars, but not 5 dollars. i'd say even 2 dollars, since we're not going to own it, and owning a 40 minutes show from iTMS costs that much. This has to be competitive with stuff like netflix where the actual DVD is likely going to be much better quality than the low resolution crap they're likely to use with iTMS. ideally i would expect something like the 480p HD trailers they have at apple.com, but given the size of these files (let's see 1.5 minute trailer at 480p (848x400 it says) is 40MB, so say, a 120 minute movie at similar bitrates would be 3.2 GB) you're going to have to rent it the night before you want to watch it just so it'll download, even at fast broadband speeds. i'd say this isn't going to work. of course, i've always thought that movies apart from actual physical media will never be able to reach the quality we're all now expecting (soon 1080p tops) and even used to (DVDs), so i'm definitely biased towards this not working.
 
This might get me to drop Netflix if it

1. Is $3.99 or less for downloads (the cost of a new Blockbuster rental).
2. Movies are at least DVD quality.
3. Can be played via a Mac Mini or Airport Express AV hooked up to my TV.

I would like to see bittorrent technology used to help cut the bandwidth costs for Apple and a queue system which automatically downloads the next movie in your queue and then deletes it at a specified time after you have played it. I will support this because if it works out then Apple will have the leverage to put $9.99 to keep movies on the store and I can still buy what I want for under $15 total after the rental.

As for people not wanting to store large videos on their hard drives, it is the 21st century. I have 1/2 Terrabyte of storage in external hard drives. So do many others and that's alot of storage for DVD quality films. I just read an article the other day about some disk format that is being developed at Harvard that will hold 50Tb! Storage isn't an issue and I can see many people having media servers instead of DVD/CD collections in their homes in the future.
 
Kind of goes against the whole iPod concept, doesn't it?

I like to know that I can listen to (or view) my music on my schedule, at my convenience, on my time. If someone's telling me that I've got to hew to THEIR schedule, then it's just ceased being convenient.

Thanks, but I'll pass.
 
I completely agree with this:

nagromme said:
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).

How often would I rent? Depends on selection... which means, probably not often :) At first. But it would be cool to see it grow to a collection that could rival Netflix.

After all, I already do all my movie watching on my Mac (sometimes connected to TV).
Click to expand...

This is exactly how I feel about the situation. Renting is the key, and a $1.99 price point is perfect. The movies I purchased for $15 I almost never watch again, I am a sucker for impulse buying. I rent movies now for a buck at RedBox anything more that $2 isn't worth my time when I can have the disc in hand to watch when I want in beautiful DVD quality.
 
Why not offer both a subscription and an a-la-carte system? The rental movies could be cheaper, lesser quality and last for only a certain amount of plays/days while the ones you buy to own can be of higher quality, more expensive and you get to keep it.
 
gauriemma said:
I like to know that I can listen to (or view) my music on my schedule, at my convenience, on my time. If someone's telling me that I've got to hew to THEIR schedule, then it's just ceased being convenient.

Thanks, but I'll pass.
Click to expand...

Apple are allowed to change their minds about the purpose of iPod / iTunes ( just like a woman , as we keep on being reminded! ) :)

When you rent a movie from Rogers, blockbusters etc, you watch the movie to their schedule...
 
gauriemma said:
I like to know that I can listen to (or view) my music on my schedule, at my convenience, on my time. If someone's telling me that I've got to hew to THEIR schedule, then it's just ceased being convenient.
Click to expand...
It's not supposed to be convenient, it's supposed to make the movie companies money. ;)
 
Good. I want to be able to rent TV shows as well. You can really only watch The Daily Show once.

Let me sum it up for everyone:

Renting music = Bad
Renting video = Good
 
slu said:
Renting music = Bad
Renting video = Good
Click to expand...
Agreed. Video and music are two totally differant things. If I like an artist, I buy their music and listen to it over and over. When it comes to a movie, yes I may like to buy a movie for my personal records, that is what a DVD is for. but if I say "that movie looks interesting, I wonder how good it is?" then I will only want to rent it and BUY it later if it is good.
 
you will

treblah said:
I'm sufficiently excited. Here's hoping for higher quality (than the current TV shows).
Click to expand...

if there will be a true video ipod coming out in the nearer future apple is forced to offer better quality. Bigger screen=Better Quality

Apple offers these shows etc. for the ipod (the availability to use these on our computer is a freebie) thus the current quality is fine for the current ipod's screen.

I have a feeling any new videos being added to the store around the new ipod release will also likely be widescreen. This will be needed!!!
 
HDnut said:
:eek: I guess we will all become big fat jelly fish at this rate, I like getting in my car and interacting with other people:D . Pay per pay is BS, look at XM and Sirus radio, a joke. Oh we won't have commercials, and now most of the channels do, and I can see this happening on downloads, you get the download and the first 10min is Ads. Plus I have better things to do than sit in front of my computer all day long, do that enough at work and when I am taking a break like now :rolleyes: What the Movie industry needs and music industry needs is a huge shot of quality not quantity, I can't think of too many movies and or music CDs that I would want to buy right now, or even rent.
Click to expand...

Have you ever listened to satellite radio? I am guessing not, because every music channel (on Sirius at least) is commercial free. Over 100 channels I believe.

The funny thing is that you have "better things" to do, yet here you are, on a computer, posting to a computer enthusiast message board. The irony is stunning. Please smash all electronics in your home immediately.:rolleyes:
 
World Wide DEVELOPER Conference.

This is great news, but if you look at the TS article, it says that they expect not only a movie rental service but also a new iPod nano at WWDC.

WWDC is big enough with Leopard and the Mac Pro... two groundbreaking new products of interest to developers. These iPod announcements would be perfect for a press event in September or October... cheaper or capacity-upgraded full-size iPods, new iPod nanos, iTunes 7 with movie rentals, and maybe new MacBook Pro's and iMacs using Merom and Conroe.

That would make a kickass special event. Or maybe use Apple Expo Paris for that. But please, I don't think they'll totally overload WWDC and turn it into a circus... its a developer conference!
 
ifjake said:
ideally i would expect something like the 480p HD trailers they have at apple.com, but given the size of these files (let's see 1.5 minute trailer at 480p (848x400 it says) is 40MB, so say, a 120 minute movie at similar bitrates would be 3.2 GB) you're going to have to rent it the night before you want to watch it just so it'll download, even at fast broadband speeds.
Click to expand...

Your numbers are pretty close to acuritre. I used the Spiderman 3 trailer for my numbers. It's encoded at 421.8 KB/s (3.2953125 Mb). So for a 2 hour movie (120 minutes, or 7200 seconds) that's 3,036,960 KB which is 2.8839 GB. To downlaod in real time, you would need at least a 3-6 Mb connection since typically, you only get the bottom of the promised speed. This means my 1.5-3 Mb DSL conection would take roughly 4-5 hours to downlaod the movie. Not good!
 
I think everyone has touched on an important issue with this: it is not a good that is going to be embraced by the public, at least anytime soon. Who really wants to rent a movie for a few dollars so they can watch it on their iPod (and can iPods even last through a whole movie??). Anyway, I'm not impressed and this smells of a 'too soon' move.
 
bigmc6000 said:
Most people can't hear the difference between MP3 and AAC (or just don't care) and that's mainly because of low quality headphones but believe me if you're going to be selling movies you better have some decent resolution because people are going to plug their laptops/minis/media centers into their TV's and watch the movies. I was just watching some TV's I ripped from one of my DVD's last night and it looked ok with my 1080i 42" screen but I also tried playing one of my iTunes shows on my HD TV and it looked pretty crappy. I can understand watching TV shows on your CPU/iPod but if you go after movies they are going to be on the TV and the resolution better not be crap or else it'll be noticeable and nobody will buy it.
Click to expand...

I agree with almost everything you just said. In my opinion movies are for bigger screens. I would like to be able to watch these on my tv rather than a smaller computer screen.
AND THEN there became psp. As we can see there are many people out buying psp formatted discs to watch movies. These movies only work on psp( I suppose you could hook it up to your computer,tv, but ultimately the average/common usage of these is for portable movie watching. Personally I find this rediculous and pointless, but if u look at many consumers, they seem to think otherwise. If apple can offer these via itunes to ipods there will be loads of people who will love this. With a bigger screened ipod one could compete with the psp Video market. Most people with a psp seem to have an ipod too (in my experiences), and if this works, expensive movies for a psp, may be swapped for cheap ipod video rentals.
 
Could be Great for Independent Movie Producers.

iTunes is the best place to release your movie via the internet if you want it to be seen. FrontRow I have found works great for streaming movie trailers and the quality is pretty good too (though not DVD quality but much better than anything iPod video encoded).

Anyway if implemented beyond just studio movies this could be a major milestone for independent filmmaking.
 
Apple don't want to be left out of this online movie thing. They tried to convince the studios, but they couldnt, so I think they have no choice but to make it a rental service before it's too late
 
bankshot said:
A major consumer announcement at a developers conference? Not gonna happen. End of story!
Click to expand...

I agree with this comment. There is no way a developer conference would be used as an announcement for ipods
 
You Tube

I must have watched 20 different video clips from the Daily Show on You Tube, streaming in almost real time. Why would I want to buy that content on the Itunes store?
 
a movie will be 500MB at least and thats just iPod quality. Full-screen computer monitor quality thats watchable is at least 700MB that ive experienced.

people want to rent and watch movies on their tv so if there isnt a way to do this easily, even rentals will fail.
 
My theory is this: We are going to get first run movies in the iTMS.

This is why it is rental only. The movie companies are worried about releasing DVDs at the same time as a film hits the theater. (Not sure why.) Jobs finally got to them--he tricked them by fighting for the sale/rental but he didn't even care about that. He wanted the first run movies and I think he got them. Now you'll be able to rent a brand new film the day it is released in theaters. This is the only real selling point for movie downloads. Why download a limited copy of a movie when I can get if from numerous other sources?

This will be Jobs' 3rd home run in iTunes. First was music, the no brainer. Second was TV. Nobody was thinking about downloading existing TV shows before Apple did it. Everyone thought they were working on movie downloads. TV was brilliant. There is an immediate need--if you missed Lost and forgot to tape it, you need to get it soon because you can't miss what happened, etc.

Movies don't work that way. You can wait a while to see a movie. Also, movies have been available on other media for 30 years so there were other places to go for the content. TV shows just started appearing on DVD recently.

Would I ever download 1979's Superman The Movie? Nope, never. have it on DVD. Would I download 2006's Superman Returns? Yep, definetly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back