New Media Content Distribution System?

[Bonte]

Pixar movies (well shorts) are available internationally. The only things missing from the international stores are television shows and some of the music videos (the US always gets more of anything).

David

Haven't seen them in the belgium store but indeed some country's have them an some don't. Damn, again those f****n separated stores, i almost feel like a negro in '60 US.

But then again, maybe there preparing other country's for the big January gig.

 

[VanMac]

Sounds Good.

Lots of questions around the 'how', but I'm pretty confidant that if Apple decides to do this, they will do it right

 

[e-coli]

I don't buy it. iDisk performance is still absolutely TERRIBLE. Even on a very fast connection. Your iDisk actually works better with Windows!

No chance on earth this is true.

 

[iTron5]

...First i don't have any use for .mac so i don't care to pay for that, and 2nd as people have mentioned i want the content local for many reasons, one being what if my internet connection drops, i can't watch a show i've paid for. I would think this would be a nightmare for apple anyway, MASSIVE storage requirements if this takes off, a huge increase in necessary bandwith for them. For me to be interested in any of the content anyway it would have to be high quality or i don't see the purpose of getting it through this distribution method ( atleast for me ) and high quality shows especially going to HD at some point would make the storage requirements that much larger for apple.


I"m seeing two types of posts here. It seems there are two points of view: 1) people who don't see any opportunity for them with the current technology and 2) people expressing seemingly feasible strategies by which a dynamite new product/service could be realized.

But to me #1 seems Luddite-like, as shortsighted as people saying "well, there's obviously no way a photo could ever be transported from one place to another for viewing". But #2 seems highly optimistic, perhaps overly optimistic. I'm reminded of how hyped we are leaving steve's keynotes at Expo, our imaginations running amok with what we THINK he said, only to find that in practice it doesn't work quite as nicely.

On balance, apple's announcements have ended up pleasing me even with the occasions on which they fall short of what (I THINK) was promised. So i'm thinking, keep an open mind, listen to the people explaining why a new technologyi might work--and hope for the best. I would be great if apple could make a breakthrough on this front.

peace
terry

Wow luddite and shortsighted huh. Interesting take on the quoted text. I know you weren't just speaking of this exclusively, but since you quoted my text, and i didn't like the announcement i'm guessing you are saying that i don't see how this 'new' technology could benefit. Well considering i in no way stated there was no oppurtunity to it, i am not sure why you quoted me. My misgivings about this just deal directly with the way the rumor states this would happen. Storing all the videos directly on idisk for everyone would create massive storage requirements. Not to mention would give you no physcial access to something you purchased. There are ways around all of this and we have no idea what apple will eventually do. For rental purposes this could be cool if handled well. I'm all for digital distribution. I love video on demand, and i've bought software through digital distribution for years. Ofcourse when i do it downloads to my computer which is what i would want if i were to purchase a movie from a service like this. By the way, this is not a new technology as you state, there are a few companies that have made movies in very limited amounts available for download for a couple years. Just not on what the level this will probably turn into.

So please before you start using words like luddite and shortsighted atleast understand what's being talked about and what your talking about.

 

[jinzo012]

W.w.w.

Anyone up for an arousing song of Winter Wonderland?

 

[mhouse]

Does Anyone Else Think...

I'm not seeing the complaint that you don't 'own' this. I see no indication that you won't own it. You just don't store it yourself. You would have access to it whenever you wanted to watch it.

The system is great for all but two groups of people:

1. People without a high speed internet connection. But so what? These folks wouldn't be able to download significant video content regardless.

2. People who want to illegally copy their content and trade it. You may not like the fact that copying a DVD is illegal but it is. Maybe it shouldn't be but it is. If Apple (or Sony or MS or whoever) is going to get digital content they will have to protect it from widespread copying or the content providers will not play ball.

And anyway the ubergeeks among us will find a way to capture the stream and copy it anyway. Apple just has to eliminate the easy piracy. Neither they, or the content companies, care if a few thousand geeks copy Toy Story to their hard drive.

 

[Mechcozmo]

I'm not seeing the complaint that you don't 'own' this. I see no indication that you won't own it. You just don't store it yourself. You would have access to it whenever you wanted to watch it.

The concern is that you could suddenly stop owning it at any time, due to the clause in the EULA that says that "at any time, subject to change" or something.

 

[Super Dave]

The concern is that you could suddenly stop owning it at any time, due to the clause in the EULA that says that "at any time, subject to change" or something.

I definitely understand the concern. That's why I don't rent music from any of the companies I think will soon go under or exit the online music market.

However, and be honest here, do you believe this is remotely probable? If you all of a sudden couldn't watch your videos no EULA would save the movie companies from legal retribution.

Plus I'm sure Apple has it in THEIR contract with the companies that they can't do anything like this without Apple's permission. I suspect Apple negotiated the 3 to 5 computer bump as a trade off with the 10 to 7 CD burn between Fairplay 1 and 2. The RIAA would have just taken the CD burns without giving more computers.

David

 

[Spike72afa]

The end of the world as we know it.

Over the last few years, we have seen the mothership putting sleeper cells out there waiting for the signal to take over the world. I believe that Jan 10, we will hear the signal go out....
Consider the following:
1. You have the computer system which best support audiovisual content delivery.
2. "Year of HD" has put h.264 on everybody's machine. (that is everyone with QT7.
3. h.264 allows you to scale video from ipod size up to TV size...
4. Airport express: wirelessly transmit content within your home.
5. iTunes store has proven to be the only successful business model that is accepted by consumers and gives content producers a reasonably fair control over the sale of their stuff.
6. Currently video for sale on ITMS is limited to music and a few broadcast TV items. Already we are hearing of multiple studios approaching apple for distribution.
7. All the pieces are in place. In the new world, you can buy all any content you want from the ITMS. Then you can play it on your computer, on you ipod, or wirelessly transmit it to your home theater. The DRM would allow you to burn an archived copy to DVD.
Very cool!!!

 

[wkhahn]

On the right path

...This concept reminds alot of the new Amazon DVD rental service in Europe (don't know if it's available in the U.S.): You can order a fixed number of DVDs and keep them as long as you like. When you want to have new ones, you need to send your current ones back. Renting movies costs nothing, other than a monthly subscription fee, and you can return movies for new ones as often as you like.

Apple could do it like this as well. As an example: For $9.99 a month you get enough iDisk space for 3 full movies (for $15, you get space for 5, and so on). When your disk is full, and you'd like a new one, an old one has to go. Other than the subscription fee of disk space, the service would cost nothing.

Wouldn't that be something?

You beat me to it. It would be a subscription service at the current price of a .mac account but instead of using iDisk, they'll call it iFlix. It would work like Netflix(or Amazon as above) but the movies would be downloaded to your local machine, with the same DRM that are on Videos and TV shows now. You could keep 3 at a time, and when you want to download a new one, it would give you the option of which one to delete. If you don't want to delete a movie, you could bye it outright. You would get one burn to DVD (with DRM intact) and rights for 1 more computer. The downloads would happen overnight/while you're at work. And with this subscription, you would get a free .mac account.

 

[Bonte]

I don't buy it. iDisk performance is still absolutely TERRIBLE. Even on a very fast connection. Your iDisk actually works better with Windows!

It works better on Intel, small difference. But i also don't believe in HD content, way to big for streaming delivery.

Is this technical posible? Not streaming on demand but in batches every 10 minutes to lower the load on the servers and the network. A bit like how digital cable works today, any toughs?

 

[Super Dave]

<snip>
3. h.264 allows you to scale video from ipod size up to TV size...
<snip>

I'm not sure if you meant what I think you did or not, but just a clarification. Any large screen video can be scaled for small screens, so that is nothing new. As for the reverse process, that is not true.

The reason H.264 is toted as being able to handle anything from cell phones to HD is because the hardware required to decode is minimial if the video size is minimal, but gets quite tasking as the video becomes large. This is why an iPod can decode H.264 at 320x240 (and 480x480?) but it takes a G5 or dual G5 to decode H.264 at 1080i. It's the same codec, but it is certainly not the same file or the same processor.

David

 

[Mechcozmo]

I definitely understand the concern. That's why I don't rent music from any of the companies I think will soon go under or exit the online music market.

However, and be honest here, do you believe this is remotely probable? If you all of a sudden couldn't watch your videos no EULA would save the movie companies from legal retribution.

I'm not one of those complaining... concerned? A bit. But I'm not worried that it would happen, and if it did, that Apple could get away with it. I'm confident that it will all be A.O.K. But I do like running my own server... FTP/HTTP/eMail for safety and security reasons. I'm a walking contradiction.

 

[Sunrunner]

I'm not sure if you meant what I think you did or not, but just a clarification. Any large screen video can be scaled for small screens, so that is nothing new. As for the reverse process, that is not true.

The reason H.264 is toted as being able to handle anything from cell phones to HD is because the hardware required to decode is minimial if the video size is minimal, but gets quite tasking as the video becomes large. This is why an iPod can decode H.264 at 320x240 (and 480x480?) but it takes a G5 or dual G5 to decode H.264 at 1080i. It's the same codec, but it is certainly not the same file or the same processor.

David

But thats why it is so flexible. The system can autosense what it can handle and retrieve the optimized resolution for the platform.

 

[Sunrunner]

It works better on Intel, small difference. But i also don't believe in HD content, way to big for streaming delivery.

Is this technical posible? Not streaming on demand but in batches every 10 minutes to lower the load on the servers and the network. A bit like how digital cable works today, any toughs?

I think one of the overlooked features Apple is really getting at here if they use the iDisk as part of a video service is the ability to pre-queue subscribed video for the user. For instance, user selects a series that they want to watch and then every week a new episode is delivered through iDisk and auto-synched to the local computer in the middle of the night. Then when the user wants to watch the latest episode, BAM, instant-on.

 

[GregA]

I think one of the overlooked features Apple is really getting at here if they use the iDisk as part of a video service is the ability to pre-queue subscribed video for the user. For instance, user selects a series that they want to watch and then every week a new episode is delivered through iDisk and auto-synched to the local computer in the middle of the night. Then when the user wants to watch the latest episode, BAM, instant-on.

That's a likely scenario. OR even if a user watches an old series, it could pre-queue the next episode in the series.

In fact, it also works well with the concept of buying a show. You have a list of your "bought" shows you can watch any time (assuming a huge cache). And you have a "shopping" mode to buy a show. For people on <1.5Mbps connections, perhaps there's a lag between when you click "buy" and when it appears in your "bought" shows list.

 

[Super Dave]

The UberApp Cometh?

Anyone remember "Vingle?" Is there perhaps an UberApp coming that will encompass the iTunes music store, the TV downloads, the upcoming rumoured movie streaming store, an ability to chat about the media within the app and who knows what else?

iTunes certainly needs some fixes so that the video content doesn't feel like a giant hack on a previously great program.

David

 

[Donm]

what's the point when i need an internet connection to be allowed to see my movies? the reason for owning the content is that i can watch it in the car, on the train, on the plain, in my backyard or at the beach.

with this concept i might as well stop at the next blockbuster and rent a dvd.

i don't think it's gonna happen like this.

What hapens when you introduce WIMAX into the picture. Now you have a broadband connection following you anywhere you are under one account across an entire city. Again, thanks to apple's new friend.

 

[maestro55]

So... it looks like a broadband connection would be able to handle 1 or more streamed dloads.

As you pointed, the quality wasn't high on the movies you were downloading. How would it be on movie of the higher qualities that you would want if you were paying to view it? I don't want my videos to skip frames. I don't want it to look any bit fuzzy. That is why I generally don't download content, and when I do I get the highest quality possible. The fact is, I want the best. It isn't such a big deal when downloading free content, but if I am paying then I do want the best.

 

[treblah]

From Paul Thurrott's Internet Nexus:

Apple will announce a variety of iTunes content deals with NBC on Tuesday, which will bring the following recent and classic NBC TV shows to iPod and iTunes owners: Conan O'Brien, Law & Order, Triumph The Insult Dog, The Office, Surface, Adam 12 (original version), Alfred Hitchcock Presents, Dragnet (color episodes), Knight Rider, Law & Order (first season), Battlestar Gallactica (original version), and Monk.

Also, I've received word about how Apple will tie its upcoming media content system to individual users. It's a great idea, and one that really has very little to do with DRM and more with a common sense approach to curbing piracy. More on that soon.

This was posted last night. Hopefully he will post some real info soon.

 

[Tupring]

agreed - seems a little weird to me. Also begs the question of what if you're not a .Mac subscriber?

Then you save money and download them for free, just like normal.