Most likely it would work exactly like how a normal streamed QuickTime movie downloads. It buffers for a few minutes, and then you can start watching it, and it downloads in the background, and saves it to file letting you watch it again for X times/days. This is exactly how Movielink works.VanNess said:
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.
iTunes Movie Rentals to be Announced at WWDC?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
kainjow said:
Ah, ok, thanks for the info. I never used Movielink and I'm not familiar with it. I've never steamed any content that would even approximate the length of a hollywood movie, with the possible exception of S. Jobs keynotes. So far, H264 seems to serve those very well. (Except for the first week or so, when it seems the server is bombarded.) In any event, I don't think that content is actually downloaded to disk as its streamed.
On the other hand, movie trailers (like Apple Quicktime trailers) are downloaded in the background to some secret location on the disk as they are watched, and, although they usually perform well, occasionally they hiccup (stall momentarily) for whatever reason (traffic, general internet latency), sometimes even the regular non-HD ones. So if Movielink has figured out a way to provide a bulletproof buffer for streaming high-quality (DVD) content over regular US DSL, great. Maybe Apple can one-up them with even higher, H264 quality.
But if the stream ever stalls, even momentarily, count me out. My gauge for judging (and accepting) any online Movie service is that it must meet or exceed the present terrestrial-based DVD experience. There is a local DVD rental store within 2 blocks of where I live. That modest, unassuming little establishment happens to be Apple's and Movielink's greatest competition in my book. They have to give me a compelling reason not to go there.
Reading this thread I realized that technical issues are not deal-breaker for many people -- it's still price that matters the most. If download-to-own costs $10, then everyone keeps demanding better specs for the material and it never ends. But if rental costs a buck a piece, then it's fun to watch and quality feels acceptable.
It's all about money, guys. Like it or not.
It's all about money, guys. Like it or not.
kainjow said:
With NF you get three movies at a time, and you can get plans with more. It does require a little planning, but right now, the quantity of content you can get in a month for the price can't be beat. If you think it's so stupid, what do you propose as the smarter alternative?
For iTMS to beat it, it would have to match netflix's pricing as well, which would be $1 or less per rental. I don't see that happening. They'd also have to have better quality and include all DVD extras with all movies.
Until then, I'll happily stick with netflix.
milo said:
I don't use netflix, but I think it's a great thing and itms isn't going to be able to overtake it. I'd take netflix over any computer movie rental service anyday
Well, if you are going to burn it to a DVD so that you can watch it on your TV, then you have to wait until the whole movie downloads. That's a hassle, but otherwise I would have to buy another computer to hook it up to my TV. No, thanks, unless Apple comes up with a cheap appliance.kainjow said:
