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 Store Rumblings
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Here's a question for ya! If the video's could not be played on your computer and only on the iPod, would people complain? I hear nobody complaining abou the fact that you cannot played PSP DVD's on computers or on TV, and with the videos from iTunes seems to me you get a much better deal? So why the complaining?
adamflip said:
And the TV shows were from desktop home users? No. Everything Apple does in relation to the iTMS is for one reason: To sell more iPods.
beatle888 said:
Doubt it. I'm sure Apple would love to alienate those 20,000,000 people who have bought a iPod with video in the last 12 months by releasing new videos that are 5 or 6 times better that they can't play on their recent purchase.
One has to think about Apple's perspective on this, not just the consumer's point of view--what does Apple have to gain by making feature-length movies available through the iTMS?
Music: iPod Nano/Shuffle
Music & TV: 5G iPod
Music & TV & Movies: 5G iPod? Mac Mini? An as yet unannounced machine?
I really wonder what will be the pitch from Apple if this ends up happening.
Music: iPod Nano/Shuffle
Music & TV: 5G iPod
Music & TV & Movies: 5G iPod? Mac Mini? An as yet unannounced machine?
I really wonder what will be the pitch from Apple if this ends up happening.
JimmyB248 said:
Since it would totally deny iTunes core principle of synchronisation - yes they would.
JimmyB248 said:
People really buy UMDs in the US?
treblah said:
Would not be the first time
Seriously, I think we really have to wait what Apple comes up with (Logic?! No Way! ). I'd imagine you get several versions of the content, or they implement a very non-on-the-fly system comparable to the iPod shuffle codec conversion. Those intel chips must be good for something.
JimmyB248 said:
The reason you don't hear anyone complain is that no one is buying them [so there's nothing to complain about]. UMD (PSP movies) have failed miserably, for the exact reason that an iTMS movie service [that didn't have some simple, cheap way to get it to your TV] would fail: why pay for a product that only works in a limited set of conditions when for a little more (or a little less, in the PSP's case) you can get the DVD, watch it on your TV, computer, and use readily available software to shift that copy to pretty much any other device you please?
Wasn't one of the features that made H.264 so great was the ability to store several copies of the same video in a single file, with varying resolutions, bitrates, audio tracks, etc? Why not give you both and make iTunes automatically copy just the 'appropriate' one to the device you wanted to use?
mrgreen4242 said:
I'm think you are confusing the scaling ability of H.264 with something else.
Is this what you are referring to?
Even if you could put a few resolutions in one file you are still left with a large multi-gigabyte file on the iPod. I have a hard time believing Apple will go from advertising '10,000 songs in your pocket' to '10 HD movies in your pocket'. But I have been wrong before.
AidenShaw said:
Yeah but it's nice having Underworld, Underworld Evolution and Fight Club ripped in H.264 on my iPod Video for all of those long plane and train trips
Yeah, that's why the gadget markets in Europe and Japan are so different from the US-- you're train cultures. We can't watch video on our commute because we've got to keep our eyes on the bumper ahead of us as we inch along the expressway.JimmyB248 said:
I've said it before: $2-3 DVD quality downloads to own. Undermine the rental market and make the studios fat and happy.
I've never understood why people think it's so catastrophic that technology improves with time and their year old purchase isn't as good as the one they see today on the store shelf...treblah said:
Those 20 million have an iPod they thought was worth the money when they bought it. I'm not alienated by the fact that I can't receive satellite radio on my stereo. I'm not alienated that my Mac doesn't burn Blueray discs. Things evolve and I either decide I'm happy with what I have or I upgrade.
If that 20 million was a market worth worrying about, they'll offer compatible files for them-- either bundled or separately. They still sell VHS and DVD is almost obsolete now...
Mac Fly (film) said:
As far as saying that people do not rent movies on impulse, all I can say is that I do. I will browse along the Blockbuster new Releases and go gestalt until I see something that I like and by impulse, I will get it. I feel an impelling need to get it that is not based on rational evaluation.
For instance, sometimes I will rent a movie based on the attractive female on the cover. This is an impulsive irrational behavior and in fact the movie probably is in a quality that is inversely proportional to the attractiveness of the actress on the cover of the DVD. Yet, still I fall to rather primal impulses in getting movies in that way.
Other times I use other irrational impulses to rent other movies. Like what am I in the mood for. Or what am I eating tonight and what movie would go well with that form of cuisine (Italian Food with Goodfellas).
In many ways we are creatures of impulse. That is why a movie case is fraught with advertising that is meant to appeal to impulse. "Spine Tingling Adventure" and "A thrill ride." Do you think these decriptions appeal to a consumer who goes for a movie based on rational evaluation.
There are movies people rent for rational reasons. They are called documentaries.
Still it takes all kinds.
Jim Gleeson
http://jimzworld.com/cgi/wp
Wait a minute, so all you folks are saying that it's fine for Apple to charge $9.99 for a music album at the iTunes store when a CD typically goes for about $9.99 the week it's released and about $12.99 retail thereafter (at a Target or Best Buy), PLUS only takes a few minutes to rip to a Mac after purchase
YET
It's a rip off that they want to charge $9.99 for a movie that typically is on sale for between $14.99 and $19.99 the week of release and retails for between $14.99 and $24.99 thereafter and takes a half hour to rip to a machine
???
I'd be WAY more likely to buy a movie at the iTunes Store than an album... (though not likely to do either, I must admit).
YET
It's a rip off that they want to charge $9.99 for a movie that typically is on sale for between $14.99 and $19.99 the week of release and retails for between $14.99 and $24.99 thereafter and takes a half hour to rip to a machine
???
I'd be WAY more likely to buy a movie at the iTunes Store than an album... (though not likely to do either, I must admit).
My point exactly... I'd stop renting if I could download for the same cost and keep the file-- it's not like many people rent a movie twice anyway. Instead of selling one disc per 20-50 renters, the studio would sell 20-50 downloads, save the manufacture, warehousing and shipping costs and make more money. It's a win for everyone except Blockbuster...ezekielrage_99 said:If that was the case count me in
Once HD discs come out, there would still be a place for rentals and studios would still sell discs either in HD or DVDs to the people who want all the extra stuff that comes with them. Sell the special features for a buck a download and they'd make what they do on a DVD anyway.
One big difference is convenience. I can get to the video store and back much faster than I can download a 1GB movie, but not to the music store and back before downloading an album.Unspeaked said:
Another is divisibility. I'll buy a song from an album, but not a scene from a movie.
And, I think you're making a false assumption-- I think albums are priced too high for what you get. They'd have a better deal if instead of songs you were getting the video with high quality audio. Then there would be a reason to pay the same price as you'd pay for the physical media-- you're getting something extra.
Lastly, my condolences to those of you who have to go to Target to buy your music...
Analog Kid said:
I also can't see the point of selling an online movie for close to the price of a new DVD, I'd buy the DVD anytime over the downloaded file.
Why are you all so sure that there will only be one file formant/resolution offered, either iPod quality or HD quality? They seem to be the two extremes here...
Is it not possible that when you buy the film you can choose between several formats/resolutions? Seems like it to me. And even if they only offered HD quality films, they'd include a feature that would let you convert it for your iPod without affecting the source file, it's only common sense.
Is it not possible that when you buy the film you can choose between several formats/resolutions? Seems like it to me. And even if they only offered HD quality films, they'd include a feature that would let you convert it for your iPod without affecting the source file, it's only common sense.
My idea, bandwidth issues aside. Is $9.99, but you get two downloads of the same film for that price.Scruff said:
(i) First you get an iPod or iPod (Video) 6G version
(ii) You get a HD or close version. (If you like you can watch the iPod version while you wait, for the HD version to download)
This way you don't need to do any converting, and it works out more user friendly. You can watch it on the big screen in beautiful HD or take it with you.