Need for a iMovie Video Store

[callieX]

I think there is a need for a internet based movie store similar to iTMS. The difference would be not to down load it to an iPod type device. But a device that you would hook up to your TV. Something like TiVo I guess. I am not to faimilar with TiVo, but I am told it is hard drive based. I do not want to play movies on a iPod device but would like to get movies off the internet especially if they are cheaper than they are now. I am not sure how it would work out but it is a thought.

calliex

 

[Randman]

Mark Cuban, internet gazillionaire and owner of the NBA Mavericks has a blog (you'd have to google for it, sorry) and one his latest was an interesting one about something along those lines as well as using removable media such as portable memory storage devices to supplant DVD and VCDs due to small size/big memory. Very interesting read.

 

[mfsri]

I think there is a need for a internet based movie store similar to iTMS. The difference would be not to down load it to an iPod type device. But a device that you would hook up to your TV. Something like TiVo I guess. I am not to faimilar with TiVo, but I am told it is hard drive based. I do not want to play movies on a iPod device but would like to get movies off the internet especially if they are cheaper than they are now. I am not sure how it would work out but it is a thought.

calliex

Not from Apple, but its coming:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5915470/site/newsweek/

 

[fryke]

For those who want to post that the need is not there and that people don't watch movies on small stuff like iPods, I want to preemptively say: There's also TV series (of which DVD packages are selling quite well) and music videos.

 

[ApeintheShell]

I think the rumored "iBox" is what people are looking to download movies or television shows to. I doubt Apple would use iMovie as the basis because it is video editing software but rather another application. Who knows.

 

[ElDiabloConCaca]

For those who want to post that the need is not there and that people don't watch movies on small stuff like iPods...

I'll say that. Have you seen sales of portable DVD players? Heh. Hope none of the companies that manfacture and sell those bet the entire company on their success. They're flopping like you wouldn't believe -- they're an extreme niche item, and aren't selling at all.

We will have to see what future "portable video players" sell like, but if they start off like those portable 2" - 4" LCD TVs and portable 7" DVD players, I don't see much of a future for them.

Besides, what's the first thing that most people do when they open a Keynote presentation or some streaming video? If they're anything like most of the people I've encountered (including myself), they re-size the QuickTime window to something bigger than 2" diagonal, for the simple reason that you can't watch what was intended for a large screen (> 20", like a TV) on anything that small. The content would have to be created specifically for a reduced-size screen, since text and graphics intended for a large screen simply fade away or become unreadable on a screen that small. Frustrating, to say the least.

But this only addresses the portability idea of the whole thing. I do think that "movies on demand," much like the cable and satellite companies offer, is in high demand. No longer must you run to the video store down the street -- you don't even have to move your greasy hotwings off of your lap or set your sugarwater down. Just push a button, and BAM! You're in the middle of Lord of the Rings or Passion or something.

However, I don't think that Apple will embark on their own branded version of this -- rather, I see Apple partering with an already-established distributor. Apple didn't make their own Apple-branded cell phone for music on your phone, they partnered with Moto instead. If Apple ain't the first ones to do it, they usually partner up, which, IMO, is a good idea.

 

[lnoelstorr]

With computers moving from the study and into the lounge, and innovations such as the new cinema displays and the new iMac G5, I see an online movie store being a great idea.

 

[Ricky]

H.264 might be the way to deliver this media, but the file sizes would still make it a joke to try to download an entire movie.

The reason that the iTunes Music Store became such a big success was its ease of use and instant gratification. You won't see instant gratification with a 500 megabyte movie download.

I see it as a niche market.

 

[ElDiabloConCaca]

Well, as broadband makes inroads into American homes, I think we may see some sort of "movies-on-demand" in the next 5 years. Reports that I've read put the US behind other countries in the rollout of affordable, fast broadband. I think parts of Asia have 6 megabit broadband for $20 - $30 a month. That's not too bad.

Still, even with 6 megabits of bandwidth, an entire DVD-quality movie would take 30 minutes to an hour or so to download. I can run to the corner video rental place in less time than that.

I agree with Ricky -- niche all the way until broadband really is broadband.

 

[alexandr]

well, as long as the movies downloads faster than the total time of the movie, that wouldn't be a problem now would it - you just watch as you go..
start download, wait a couple of minutes to let the film come ahead, and it is all good. as long as your line is that good of course..

alex.

 

[ElDiabloConCaca]

Yes, but that's assuming that the user will be watching the video on their computer (which sucks, except when you're doing it @ work!) or that they have some sort of video-out capabilities on their computer (all currently shipping Apple tower machines do not have video-out capabilities [S-video, RCA]). Who wants to watch an entire movie on their computer? And who wants to watch the crap that most video-out cards produce? I'd rather buy a DVD.

That brings us back around to the set-top box solution. I don't think Apple will have their own set-top box, rather, I think, if they ever decide to get into the mess that is movie distribution, that they'll partner.

After seeing the hellhole that iTunes licensing turned out to be, I don't think we'll be seeing video-on-demand from Apple for quite some time, if ever.

 

[fryke]

I'm just thinking... What would I pay for a H.264 version of a movie at DVD resolution (let's say... 720*468) that I can play in QuickTime (or a separate Apple Movie Jukebox thingie), on a future iPod and on my home cinema (either connecting the iPod to the beamer or the PowerBook or burning to a DVD...)? Apple could make sure about the rights management (similar to iTMS, I guess?). Hmm... A new (just released) DVD here in Switzerland costs me about 30 CHF. The download version lacks nice packaging and extras like deleted scenes and stuff. Still: I'd pay, say, 20 CHF. 2/3. Would I mind a 30min or even 2h download? Not really. Apple _could_ offer to already show the downloaded part (i.e. watch while you go as mentioned above), but I'd probably choose to wait for the download to finish, so I can use the movie where I want.

Now let's assume a movie would be about 500 MB (H.264 seems to make that possible!). A 40 GB iPod would roughly hold 80 movies at a time (if I don't also put music on that thing). Even with 20 movies on the device (I can keep the rest on the computer), wouldn't it be great if you could use the iPod to preview the movies to your friends for choosing the one you're going to watch later? And if you've _got_ that colour iPod with you on a train: Why not rewatch your favourite scenes of your favourite movies? Why not listen to that band you love so much and also watch their video at the same time? Not while jogging, I _am_ so clever as to not assume people would do that. But in trains today, people listen to the iPod and read a computer magazine that gives them two weeks (at least) old news that they've already read on the 'net.

Remember: The fact that _you_ don't want to watch movies on a stamp-sized screen doesn't mean no-one will.

_I_ can see four hip kids meet at one's place. Everyone's got their iPod ready and suddenly they have a ton of movies to choose from. And while they're watching one, they can buy/download the one they're missing on the computer in the next room...

 

[Quicksilver]

The movie would never be self-contained for downloading, the best form for presenting a movie would be using a much more enhanced version of QTSS for large scale media larger than say 100MB.

Using RTSP would also allow it to be more proteced than a full download, though recording devices could capture such a stream.

A completley new protected compression algorythm would need to be created where each machine would be registered through hardware encoding and ip addressing in some way or another by the server at any given time and/or a user side hardware device like an iMac or an "iBox". Somthing i would like to do.

A movie also runs approx: 1h 20mins so the compression would haved to be really tight, preferably under 100MB. Then you can charge the media at a per MB basis (pay for what you want to see) not the whole thing... When i see a video store i see Xserv/s with lots of movies in it.

Unfortunatley using the real time streaming protocol (RTSP) isnt as good as a fully compressed self-contained movie. Though if tinkered with a little that format used for iChat AV is getting along the lines.

Somone feel like playing around with QT API's now? No its a little deeper to the core than even that..... ok Compression/Protection/DRM algorythm dev.

 

[ElDiabloConCaca]

Remember: The fact that _you_ don't want to watch movies on a stamp-sized screen doesn't mean no-one will.

I completely understand that, but the majority of people have to want it for it to become a reality. Apple's not going to make something that a very small fraction of the population wants -- it just wouldn't sell.

Just because I wouldn't watch it doesn't mean that no one would -- you're right -- but I'd bet my money that most consumers that this kind of device would be targeted to wouldn't wanna watch it that way either. Like I said with those Casio 2.5" portable TVs and 7" DVD players: no one's buying them, and that trend doesn't seem to be turning around -- I think Apple would have another Cube on their hands with this kind of technology: very cool and compact, but won't sell.

 

[fryke]

I completely understand that, but the majority of people have to want it for it to become a reality. Apple's not going to make something that a very small fraction of the population wants -- it just wouldn't sell.

You mean more than 50% of the people are enjoying iTMS right now? I know 100% of Switzerland isn't. ;-) You're just not right, ElDiablo... Less than 5% of all people enjoy Macintosh, yet it's enough to keep Apple alive. I'm sure less than _one_ percent of all people with internet access* are enjoying iTMS right now. And still Apple does it.

You might argue that the _chance_ that iTMS becomes a bigger success is higher than with video... However that'd mean you know more about the future than I do... Last time _I_ checked more people had TVs than radios... People are visual... I'm not saying Apple should now copy that ugly mobile Microsoft thingie... Apple should do _better_ than that. Just like MP3 players weren't that big when Apple entered with the iPod, those mobile media centers aren't that big now. Or in a month or two...

*in the world

 

[soulseek]

in order to keep an idea alive it has to be at least not 'money loss' to a company.

only microsoft has the capital to keep a bad idea running (the Xbox).

look at the online music stores apart from iTMS; most of them are making just enough money to keep them running....

an iMovie store right now, cannot be made. maybe in 3,4,5 years...but not know.

right now for a movie to be good enough quality for most ppl to even thinking of downloading it, the movie has to be at least 1GB.

for ppl like myself living in sweden, if a good bandwidth is available, its a matter of half to 1 hour of downloading.

But many ppl dont have that kind of internet speed, and instead of waiting to dl theyd just go give 2-3 euros and rent a DVD, nowadays they come out so quickly and they would be much better quality

as for an movie player.. hahahah thats a good laugh.

portable players are all about comfortable entertainment.
i dont imagine any logical *average* person (yes that's the consumers that matter, not ur or me) holding a video player in the metro and watchin a movie on a 2 inch screen. it just Wont work.



However i do see myself downloadin movies from the internet in a few years instead of buyin dvds. thats where things are heading in the future... (but not in the near future)

 

[ElDiabloConCaca]

Well, then we'll just agree to disagree, Fryke.

I guess I really didn't mean "the majority of the entire population of the world" because that's just unrealistic in any sense. There's hardly an item in the world, save for food and shelter, that the majority of the entire population of the world is interested in purchasing.

Maybe you forgot that the iTMS isn't available only to the 5% Macintosh users, but roughly 90% or more of computer users. And the Macintosh desktop computer is not the only thing "keeping Apple alive" -- remember the iPod? Apple is no longer Macintosh-centric or specific, and you no longer have to be a Macintosh user to enjoy Apple products -- that bumps that 5% you quoted WAY up.

Music on demand is, and I apologize for the cliche, in demand. There was a specific want for it, and many companies stepped up to fill the void. This was evident by the rampant music file swapping in the late 90s and early 00s. I just don't see that need or want for video right now, but I'm not saying that will always be like that. When the MPAA comes around filing lawsuits against movie-swappers, you'll know the time has come.

This doesn't even touch on the miniscule screen that would be incorporated into a "video iPod" that you say a lot of people would be willing to watch a movie on. I propose this: go out to your local electronics store and pick up one of those Casio portable TVs with the 2.5" screen. See how long you can squint at that screen, and imagine watching an entire movie on it -- hell, try to make out ANY text that is displayed on that screen. I'd be willing to bet money that the eye strain and tiny speaker sound would far outweigh the benefits of the portability and you'd rather wait to watch the movie on a much larger screen.

In addition, I still don't see the usefulness of having a portable, 2" movie box. Portability is for people on-the-go, and who has a spare 2 hours in the middle of their day to watch a movie on a tiny screen? Some may say, "Well, they have the option of watching it in segments or parts or little bits at a time," to which I say, "Who the hell wants to watch a movie like that?" I know that I get a little annoyed when I'm interrupted in the middle of a movie -- they're usually meant to be watched from beginning to end without interruption, unlike music which comes in bite-size doses.

I also don't agree with your assessment that more people own TVs than radios, but you don't have any data to back that up and neither do I, but I believe that radios are more widespread than TVs. But, since we can't prove it either way, that makes it a moot point.

 

[fryke]

You're speaking of demand (which, you say, was there when Apple made the iTMS), yet fail to see all of those movie/TV series/music video downloadz? And about having two hours between the day: Read about my first post in that thread. ...

But then I guess this whole discussion is just a repetition... And the opinions will vary...

 

[Ricky]

Adding a poll...

 

[ElDiabloConCaca]

Good points, Fryke, but I just don't see the demand. The movie/TV series/music video downloads are climbing in number, but not so much that it has yet become an epidemic like music downloads became. I have no doubt that it will happen in the future, but I don't think it'll be the near future... 3, 4 years from now.

At any rate, I'd like to see the results of this poll, but I have an eerie feeling that the majority of votes will be "yes" -- simply because if you change a word or two in the poll, it would basically become, "Would you drive a Ferarri if you could?" or "Would you live in a mansion if you could?" or "Would you fly into space if you could?" I'm not belittling the poll, but of course people would rather download a movie instead of driving to the video store. But it oversimplifies the subject and doesn't address the main concerns over whether or not it's feasible at this point in time and things like the portable screen size. Still, I am interested to see the results, and I know, for one, that I will be voting "yes."

Remember when the iTMS first came out and some people were griping that Apple could have made the songs a little cheaper than $0.99? One of the more frequent reasons was, "Hey, Apple has to pay for bandwidth -- it ain't free." Transferring gigabyte-sized movies would be too expensive at this point, and that price would be passed on to the consumer. We can only speculate at what the cost would be: for $15 - $20 you can get a boxed DVD with liner notes, extras on the DVD, deleted scenes, etc. Take away everything but the movie and add in the cost of bandwidth, and we may very well be back up there at $15 - $20 for a download. Which would you rather have?

Again, Fryke, I'm not trying to get into a war here: you have your reasons for thinking that an online movie store is feasible, and I have my reasons for thinking that it's not at this point in time. Good discussion, bud.