Warner, Paramount, Disney, Fox, Lions Gate to Join iTunes Rentals

[!¡ V ¡!]

Everyone is rather assuming that Apple will go down the 'Download and keep' route, rather than the pay to access time restricted "BBC iPlayer": a 'Youtube type' flash style movie web page... That would solve the time waiting and DRM issue wouldn't it?

iTMS is that webpage, this is pretty much what I have been saying. Why download when you can access it via the server and the content will be streamed to as many devices you have and anywhere in the world. That could also explain why Apple is inviting the Euro-Press to this event.

Streaming movies and music, cut the red tape and you have access that is local to the US and can be accessed worldwide.

 

[bommai]

This will flop as hard, maybe even harder than AppleTV IMHO.

One of the biggest problems with digital delivery of movie rentals and the like is most people would like to watch movies on their home theater system with their expensive big screen HDTV, surround sound system, etc. etc.

How in god's name, APART from spending an additional $300 on AppleTV, can people do this with iTunes Rentals? I'm no way in hell paying $4 to rent a movie I can watch on my laptop/PC monitor...that's as lame as can be.

One of the reasons Xbox Video Marketplace has taken off as it has is because the Xbox360 is already hooked up to your home theater in high-def with 5.1 audio so you can download a movie rental and watch it, no additional cost.

Also brings into question for someone who has nothing, they can spend $300 on an AppleTV or $400 on an Xbox 360 that will do more than just play movies/music.

I'm sure the Apple faitful and all 10 AppleTV owners will jump at this but I think for most people this will be Apple's 2008 mistake.

You keep complaining about the limitation of watching on a small computer screen and about Apple TV. AppleTV allows you to watch it on your big screen. While, Apple has not sold millions of AppleTVs, I believe they have sold about 400,000 of them (me included

Rentals will succeed if the following happens

1) Big selection
2) Reasonable price ($2.99 is better than $3.99)
3) Fast downloads with no ISP throttling!!
4) At least 720x480, True 5.1 surround. This is what most people watch.
5) 24 hours to watch after starting to watch, not after downloading.
6) Ability to buy it directly from AppleTV, no need to go to computer. No need to even own a computer.

 

[milo]

anyone know why the price point is $4?

Because that's what the cost from the studios dictates. Amazon is $4 for new releases. On demand as well. Is anyone else offering downloaded movies for much cheaper than that?

When I first read about this rumour, I too, thought about this. Seems like a bigger effort to download than going to your local store.

Bigger effort? Nah. Sure, it may take longer depending on your connection, but the "effort" is just a couple clicks, then sync your iPod or aTV. Is downloading iTunes music more effort than driving to the store?

Why are you excited about this? What does it give you that you do not already have at the same price? Are you unfortunate enough to not have a video rental store less than five minutes from your house? If so, where do you live? And, again, if so, is your DSL/Cable connection fast enough that downloading a movie will work for you?

You answered your own question. It gives you the convenience of not leaving your house. It gives you the availability of movies that your local shop may not have in store. And it provides an option to netflix users whose dvd's are in transit or get the impulse to watch something that wasn't at the top of the queue.

If you really want to see movie X, and the iTunes store carries it while your local store doesn't, what's so bad about having this option?

The ONLY time this would be better is if you absolutely HAD to watch a low resolution movie on your iPhone IMMEDIATELY instead of getting the DVD the next day.

You can watch content on a TV instead of just an ipod...and who knows if the resolution won't get upped when they release this?

 

[kjr39]

This is all speculation. Everyone labeling it a failure already are really making predictions on very little info.

Welcome to Macrumors...

 

[dizastor]

I hope there's also a subscription model.

That would make it a rental by mail killer for me.

 

[Cooknn]

To compete with Netflix and Blockbuster they need to come up with reasonable monthly subscriptions. $4 per movie is too steep. I don't do VOD from Comcast for that very reason.

 

[elcid]

I would like to see how this will be implemented. We have seen time and time before that even if something is streaming that if you are watching it on your computer someone will be bound to turn it into a regular file that you can save (myTunes, ourTunes, ripping off Pandora.com)

Personally I don't find a problem other than the fact I have to watch it on TV. 4 bucks doesnt bother me and I am 100% sure that the 24 hours begins after you begin the movie. I really dont know how many people really want to watch a movie mulitple times in 3 days but I know I pop it out and send it back when I am done.

 

[zedsdead]

Considering the recent iPods and iPhone now support 720x480 at high bit rates Apple may at least up the resolution on their "near DVD quality" to "dvd quality." Still would like to get 720p content or even 540p.

 

[nagromme]

My Mac IS my TV. No need for AppleTV. I ditched my TV when I got my 24" iMac, added EyeTV, and never looked back I will never own a dedicated TV again. (Though I may get some kind of big screen/projector to use with my Mac, for video and gaming.)

 

[paquetja]

Good VOD comparison

they probably settled on these parameters because they are identical to most video on demand (VOD) settings. You get the movie for 24 hours from the minute you purchase it, regardless of when you start watching it and its $3.99 a movie. The truth is that we use it all the time and the only limitation is the number of movies available (maybe 50 total at a time). If I had blockbuster selection, I would happily do all my movie watching this way. Of course, I'd rather have the option of 1 complete view rather than a time limit (although I've only re-rented a movie because time ran out once), but its mostly fine this way.

The big questions are (a) what will the selection be like, (b) how long with the download process take (c) what will the resolution of the movies be and (d) do you have to wait until the end of the download to start watching. If the answer to 'd' is yes, then the 24 hours might be much more annoying. With VOD, you can start watching right away as it downloads.

All in all, its pretty exciting. I like owning music which I listen to repeatedly, but there are virtually no movies that I need to see more than once.[/QUOTE]

I completely agree. VOD is popular here in the good ol' north, and movies cost 3-6$ for a 24 hour viewing period. It's DVD quality and you can watch it right away. So at a 4$ price point, it's reasonable ONLY if it's DVD quality and the 24 hour period starts after the download is complete.

Seems reasonable to me. But if it's below DVD quality and the 24 hour period isn't really 24 hours, then no one will use this service.

But it's a step in the right direction, and hopefully will come to Canada before global warming melts all the ice up here

 

[b1wils1]

i think it's a good thing. even if the conditions don't meet all of the expectations of the masses now, they should activate the thing, and let it find it's way much like the music store has.

 

[EagerDragon]

As the parent of a young child, I fall asleep halfway through movies pretty often, even if they are good. Why can't I get it for 2-3 days, like I could in the old days when we rented physical media?

100% with you, now days is difficult to get the entire family to sit an watch a movie from begining to end, something always comes up.

Some member of this site do think that is a personnal problem, I guess they don't have a family.

 

[HyperZboy]

RedBox at McDonalds is $1 a day. RedBox is even at many grocery stores and Walmart locations.

I seriously doubt I'll consider spending $3 MORE for 24 hours considering the McDonald's is walking distance from my house!

Unless you live in the middle of nowhere, geez, what a rip-off.
This idea is gonna sink like a rock.

 

[JasonElise1983]

"Atonement". Liked it but fell asleep 90 minutes into it. "There Will Be Blood." The movie came on 2 different DVDs it was so long. It took me 2 nights.
512ke

Where exactly did you get these DVDs? They aren't released yet....hmmmm....

-JE

 

[jackc]

The 24 hours doesn't bother me too much, but unless Apple TV comes down in price significantly I don't see how it can really take off.

But what do I know?

 

[milo]

How in god's name, APART from spending an additional $300 on AppleTV, can people do this with iTunes Rentals?

iPod to TV via cable. I've been doing this for months, and it works great.

 

[EagerDragon]

Sigh. $4 for a single day is Way Too High.

I hate to join the historically incorrect ranks of Apple nay-sayers here, but IMHO this can not succeed. Certainly, I can't envision ever taking advantage of this. I'd rather rent a real disk at the corner, rent it via mail, or just plain buy it. Offering a less-frills option at the same cost as the mid-range-frills options with no convenience benefits is just plain stupid.

I am seriously disappointed in Apple here, should these reports prove true. Jobs should have walked away if this is what the studios were demanding, let them fail at their over-priced schemes, then come back six months later to save the day. Worked well with music!

I may rent once via this service just to try it, but I rather go to RebBook and get a DVD for $0.99 per day. Some of us don't have our behind glued to the couch and don't mind picking a physical disk with all the extras from the store on the way home.

Agreed, $3.99 for a day is way too expensive.

 

[freeny]

No need to return the videos and no late fees.

sounds good to me

 

[bommai]

My Mac IS my TV. No need for AppleTV. I ditched my TV when I got my 24" iMac, added EyeTV, and never looked back I will never own a dedicated TV again. (Though I may get some kind of big screen/projector to use with my Mac, for video and gaming.)

I have a 24" 2.8 GHz iMac too, but 24" is not big enough for me (even though it is full 1920x1200 resolution). I have my computer just to the side of my entertainment system. I have a DVI to HDMI cable connecting my mac to my 61" 1080p TV. I also have a mini toslink to toslink optical cable connecting my mac to my receiver. So, I have a 61" Mac screen for Front Row, eyeTV, hulu.com, etc. Very convenient. I also have a PS3 for Bluray.

 

[bonforte]

Streaming? No way...

It has to download. It will "stream" when it has enough to start, but it will certainly download. Here is why:

1) Apple doesn't want to pay to download files 4x, etc. In efficient
2) Streaming is much more expensive (you have to send all the content to Akami servers and Akami bandwidth is 5x more than just standard stuff.
3) What if I want it on my iPod? have to have it downloaded
4) Apple TV is not needed. Just iTunes. These movies can work on anything you can use with iTunes (iphone, Mac, ipod, appleTV)
5) Also, 30 days with 24 hours from moment of start means you can "take it with you" on your iPod or iPhone. That is a no brainer.

 

[Jetson]

In Norway the rental prices are at 16 to 20$ that is expensive, but 4dollars my God stop your damn whining....

I hope you are kidding.

Otherwise calling my reasonable opinion "whining" and your needless, emotional cursing shows you to be 2 fries short of a Happy Meal.

 

[freeny]

iPod to TV via cable. I've been doing this for months, and it works great.

I agree.

 

[jeremy.king]

So nobody uses Unbox? These rumored terms are exactly the same as Amazon's.

Good to see competition.

 

[bonforte]

RedBox = VERY limited selection...

The reason redbox is cheaper is because the selection is so bad. You can rent movies for $0.99 (like older releases at Hollywood Video), but the selection is limited. The newest releases accont for 80-90% of rentals at a Blockbuster). At NetFlix, it is more like 40%. So for Apple, they will have a great selection (not as good as NetFlix, but better than VoD by an order of magnitude).

And you can put it on your iPhone, etc. And you can have 10 ready to go, on your mac. No problem, just need to watch it within 30 days of renting...and 24 hours from "playing".

 

[Porchland]

Sigh. $4 for a single day is Way Too High.

I hate to join the historically incorrect ranks of Apple nay-sayers here, but IMHO this can not succeed. Certainly, I can't envision ever taking advantage of this. I'd rather rent a real disk at the corner, rent it via mail, or just plain buy it. Offering a less-frills option at the same cost as the mid-range-frills options with no convenience benefits is just plain stupid.

I am seriously disappointed in Apple here, should these reports prove true. Jobs should have walked away if this is what the studios were demanding, let them fail at their over-priced schemes, then come back six months later to save the day. Worked well with music!

$3.99 for 24 hours is exactly what Comcast charges for on-demand movies -- and Comcast actually charges more ($5.99, I think) for HD movies. Is it too much to ask for you to actually watch a two-hour movie with the first 24 hours after you sit down and press play?

I have not seen any rumors or reports of movies being available in HD, but that would make a nice little surprise.