Yeah, that's great - but how many times are you actually going to watch this content?
Lots of times - sure download it.
Only once or twice? Maybe it would be better just to use Apple's disk space and stream it to your home.
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 Replay' to Allow Movie Redownloads and Streaming?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, that's great - but how many times are you actually going to watch this content?
Lots of times - sure download it.
Only once or twice? Maybe it would be better just to use Apple's disk space and stream it to your home.
You never "own" it... You licensed to use/listen/watch.
When you purchase and download an application you don't own the application, the developer does, what you do buy is the right to use that application. Same goes for other forms of content.
When you buy a book, you own the physical book, not the story written within. When you buy a CD, you own the physical disc, not the music on it, etc.
No, fair. Although I don't know how often I am going to watch something until after I've seen it. It's just worth doing the math.
I'm rich and lazy, so it works for me.
The idea of only being able to download a show 5 times for a lifetime is laughable. If I ever do download something and it hits the 5 times, limit, I will be right back on the torrent site downloading it in seconds.
So ridiculous.
I have NO ISSUE paying and even paying a high amount for the content....but spare me this "only 5 locations" garbage.
So ridiculous.
I have NO ISSUE paying and even paying a high amount for the content....but spare me this "only 5 locations" garbage.
Look, with all do respect- I understand the fundamentals of ownership and rights.
So why is it so hard to understand that my posts regarding this "owning" is simply questioning the amount of TIMES I may do so.
If I buy something, what limits the amount of times I may re-access that purchase?
Edit/Add- DiamondMac said it better.
I'm a Blu-ray fan, but I can kind of see where Apple wants to go with all this. The thing is, online video is hopelessly hobbled by the studios insistence on DRM and all that nonsense.
And yes, you never 'own' a film or album or story when you buy a DVD or CD or book, but you do tacitly buy a perpetual license, whose terms are settled once you've paid and they hand over the physical media itself (which you do own).
The difference with online media is, especially when DRM and streaming are involved, they can change the goalposts any time they feel like it, and you'd be stuck.
"Plays For Sure" don't play no more.
And yes, you never 'own' a film or album or story when you buy a DVD or CD or book, but you do tacitly buy a perpetual license, whose terms are settled once you've paid and they hand over the physical media itself (which you do own).
The difference with online media is, especially when DRM and streaming are involved, they can change the goalposts any time they feel like it, and you'd be stuck.
"Plays For Sure" don't play no more.
One reason would be one of legality. Not always something certain people like to think about but still the truth. There was a time back in the day when downloading all and sundry might have been 'cool', but those days are gone and people still doing it are seen as freeloaders, hogging bandwidth, causing tighter regulation, and destroying jobs. And before the over used altruistic 'it's all about sharing'. Then do something really worthwhile and start 'sharing' your apartment with the next homeless person you meet, or your laptop, bank account, car .... Doesnt quite have the same appeal does it?
i think you're thinking too far ahead..
apple is giving you 5GB and options up to 50GB for iCloud... people on here have libraries of .5-2TB probably... so 50GB is only going to allow you to leverage a considerable amount of what you cant store on your iOS device..
until apple offers people TB's worth of space at an affordable price, you dont have to feel like the cloud is taking the place of local storage
any content you purchase from iTunes does not count toward the 5gb limit. The limit is for documents only.
iTunes match was also mentioned to not use your 5gb limit.
If I pay a high fee for the movie and hit the 5 location limit, I could not care less if I am breaking the law with a torrent download of it.
I am not sharing it with anyone and frankly, it is ABSURD to be told to limit it to 5 locations just b/c the movie industry wants to slam consumers in any way possible
You are wrong, media does not count.
See Photo Streaming or iTunes match, imagen and songs are not count into the 5GB limit, 5 GB is for documents and mail.
For the money that Apple charges here in Germany for movie "rentals", you can usually buy the DVD from Amazon and OWN the movie - including subtitles and the original audio track and everything at a superior quality than those inferior DRMed iTunes rips. It doesn't surprise me at all that iTunes movies are not a real success.
As long as downloadable content does not come in BluRay quality and is more expensive than a used DVD, the industry should not be surprised at all that people prefer downloading movies from Internet torrents. You'll get the best quality WITHOUT DRM, WITHOUT annoying "FBI warning" screens and in all available languages and with all subtitles in a matter of minutes from the torrent networks.
The movie industry would be smart if they just threw their stuff on the Internet for one or two dollars a piece or for a flatrate fee that will allow you to donwload as many movies as the studio owns - and without DRM, of course. Even in that scenario people would still pirate movies because you simply cannot stop piracy, but the studios would have a least some additional income that they would NOT have otherwise.
It's the digital age. People don't want to "RENT" movies for a ridiculous fee. Whatever you can download, you want to own. Storage space is cheap. And you want to copy the downloaded content to whatever device you own, without any copy protection ******** in your way.
You know, back in the good old days of TV and VHS everybody recorded whatever they wanted from TV and stored the VHS tapes in their shelves at home. People collected their favorite movies or TV shows -- and the producers did not have any additional income from this channel either. But apparently, that system still worked for the industry, because the TV stations had to pay some fee to get a license to broadcast the stuff and then charged the "sponsors" for the ads. Or collecting some money from the GEZ here in Germany. It was okay for everybody.
Now why don't they just put their entire catalog on some servers and charge a small fee for access to those servers like above? Stupidity and greed are the only two possible answers that I can come up with. The industry cannot increase their income by waging war on possible customers. And they certainly cannot be successful by charging cut-throat prices for stuff that I can get in better quality for free by downloading it from other sources.
It has already become impossible to sell DRMed but legal music, and it is also impossible to sell music online that costs more than the physical CD. The book market is about to follow the same route and you will soon see that authors will find out that they no longer need a big publishing house. It's only a question of time until the movie industry will have to seriously rethink their online strategy as well. The old distribution channels no longer really work, most people don't even want to go to a movie theater anymore, and they certainly don't want to be pestered with ads and legal threats when they pay good money for a physical medium.
But then again, maybe it'll take another twenty or thirty years for them to change -- until people who grew up with the Internet and understand it are in charge of the studios. Or whatever is left of them by that time.
The studios had to be dragged kicking and screaming into that agreement. And they got a levy placed on all recordable media to cover the possibility that someone was recording copyrighted material.
Good idea, but like stated already there are limitations to this (ie downloading 5 times, DRM)
I personally don't use Itunes for tv shows or movies, but to each their own
I personally don't use Itunes for tv shows or movies, but to each their own
Make it a month to keep a movie you've rented for $3?
In regards to Redbox, you're absolutely right. It's $1 for one night. So you have to get in your car & drive to a redbox, pay the dollar & then the next day, get in your car & drive it back.
Or you can sit at home, pay $3 & never leave you're house for a movie you'll be able to have for the same amount of time as a redbox rental. So no, I don't consider it expensive to rent on iTunes.
Now you move into interested territory and what we call the 'small print' In effect what we are moving towards is the fact we are paying for the right to use it but will own it... I doubt it. In reality we never own the content of the DVD, we are merely purchasing a licence to use it...
I can't decide to hit the thumbs up because it's true, or the thumbs down because it's true....
I'm reading this restriction more like you can download the content five times for "recovery purposes".
So I buy a movie and download it to my Mac. My Mac's HDD fails and I didn't have a backup, so that download is now gone. I replace the HDD and re-download the movie.
If you have a backup, then you don't need to re-download.
So I buy a movie and download it to my Mac. My Mac's HDD fails and I didn't have a backup, so that download is now gone. I replace the HDD and re-download the movie.
If you have a backup, then you don't need to re-download.
I think that this will be the "one more thing" of the iOS event. We'll see a new iPod line, the iPhone update, and new Apple TV features. Then iTunes 11 will be released, but this could be something to top everything. It'll be something new and well.
That being said, I see this as the reason to the Hulu rumor. Could make sense that Apple would want some of the IP from Hulu to perfect it's streaming service. I don't believe Apple will ever buy it though.
But iTunes Replay, or iStream, even the abilities go to some unnamed product. It'll be legal and legit.
(Also it'll have no connection to your free 5 gigs of iCloud. I'm sure. It's apart of iTunes products)
That being said, I see this as the reason to the Hulu rumor. Could make sense that Apple would want some of the IP from Hulu to perfect it's streaming service. I don't believe Apple will ever buy it though.
But iTunes Replay, or iStream, even the abilities go to some unnamed product. It'll be legal and legit.
(Also it'll have no connection to your free 5 gigs of iCloud. I'm sure. It's apart of iTunes products)
Na, they'd find a way to dick it up. It would be like you have to subscribe to MGM for $10 a month, Paramount for $10, Disney for $10, and on and on to get at all movies you'd potentially want. You'd go broke and Amazon would be a helluva lot cheaper in the long run.
IF this rumor is true about a Netflix-competing-streaming service, it's interesting since the studios have been afraid of doing such deals with Apple. (Denying Apple TV show rentals for instance, which are more lucrative than streaming agreements that Netflix has for the studios). This is where I'm skeptical, because Netflix and Apple are viewed as public enemies #1 and #2 by Hollywood.
Though, a deal with Apple could give them leverage on Netflix...
Another note, Apple current sucks at streaming video content. Unless someone has a ultra high speed internet connection (few people actually do), the load time for an HD movie rental now on the average internet connection speed via apple tv can be 45 minutes to 4 hours! (Apple refunded me a months worth of rentals when I complained and it was quite educational.) Now, standar def does play after a minute. Mind you, I have a pretty fast connection. (Apple's support site is also flooded with threads from other ticked off users.)
I'm all for a competing service and will gladly pay for good content, but Apple seems to have a history of missing back end performance for these ventures. (.Mac, Mobile Me, Apple TV, etc.) so I'd hope they have a whole new system lined up if they go this route. I know it's not the Apple TV since Netflix streams 720P instantly without a hitch.... and I had to wait an hour to watch a 42 minutes episode of Glee I rented in HD on the same device, with the same router and internet speed.
Though, a deal with Apple could give them leverage on Netflix...
Another note, Apple current sucks at streaming video content. Unless someone has a ultra high speed internet connection (few people actually do), the load time for an HD movie rental now on the average internet connection speed via apple tv can be 45 minutes to 4 hours! (Apple refunded me a months worth of rentals when I complained and it was quite educational.) Now, standar def does play after a minute. Mind you, I have a pretty fast connection. (Apple's support site is also flooded with threads from other ticked off users.)
I'm all for a competing service and will gladly pay for good content, but Apple seems to have a history of missing back end performance for these ventures. (.Mac, Mobile Me, Apple TV, etc.) so I'd hope they have a whole new system lined up if they go this route. I know it's not the Apple TV since Netflix streams 720P instantly without a hitch.... and I had to wait an hour to watch a 42 minutes episode of Glee I rented in HD on the same device, with the same router and internet speed.
When I had a 6mbps DSL connection, HD movie rentals took about 15 seconds to start playing on the Apple TV2. Something must be wrong with your particular connection.
Now that I moved up to 12mbps Uverse, my HD movie rentals start streaming pretty much instantly.
Now that I moved up to 12mbps Uverse, my HD movie rentals start streaming pretty much instantly.
THat's the point of having stuff tagged. In theory you'd be able to view only iTunesReplay titles with the click of a tab like you can things that are not on your device v your whole library
Also my source told me that the whole 5 thing isn't about downloads but about how many devices can be registered to the same Apple ID and use the streaming service. Then you can also have 5 authorized computers that can download the purchases and do regular syncing.
Not if it comes from a master set of files via the iTunes servers, then all that matters is how much space Apple has