“At first blush, the video iPod is not about to revolutionize Hollywood in the way the iPod revolutionized music,” Richard Siklos writes for The New York Times. “Why? Two reasons. One is that studios are not rushing to make their most popular movies and shows available for the video iPod (note that only Disney shared the stage with Mr. Jobs last week, and the primary motive may have been its desire to repair relations with Pixar). Perhaps even more important, mobile gadgets with access to everything that is already on television are on the way.”
“Just last week, EchoStar, the satellite broadcaster, released one such device, a portable personal video recorder called PocketDISH; it got much less notice than the video iPod got. Think of PocketDISH essentially as a pocket-sized TiVo – a small computer that lets you record television shows onto a hard drive with the click of a button – with a screen for watching what you’ve recorded. And like TiVo and its clones, it can record any program you can watch on a full-sized TV at home, and then allow you to fast-forward through the ads when you view it,” Siklos writes. “Of course, probably the biggest factor working against the instant success of a video iPod is that the video world has yet to experience the copyright-infringement meltdown that the music industry did a year or two ago, when millions of people were swapping songs free rather than buying CD’s in stores.”
Siklos writes, “There is no disputing the wisdom in that, or of Apple’s supremacy over just about any rival these days in introducing a device using its marketing and design prowess and brand appeal. And there are chewy, unresolved legal questions raised by gadgets like the PocketDISH or Slingbox.”
Siklos writes, “Still, the video iPod only has it half right: if it took material from the television as readily as it did from the Internet, it could be a blockbuster. But then who would pay $1.99 to download an episode of “Lost” from iTunes if the iPod could also hook up to your television and record that same episode free? Unlike its musical forebear, the video iPod may not be ready for prime time.”
Full article here.
Advertisements:
The New iPod with Video. The ultimate music + video experience on the go. Buy it now at the Apple Store. From $299. Free shipping.
The New iMac G5 – Built-in iSight camera and remote control with Front Row media experience. From $1299. Free shipping.
By SteveJack
“Studios are not rushing to make their most popular movies and shows available for the video iPod,” Siklos writes. He forgot to add the word “yet.” Apple will sell millions upon millions of these iPods as music players this holiday season. And tens of millions of them by next spring. Tens of millions of units whose users have the capacity to seamlessly play video and buy content for $1.99 via Apple’s iTunes Music Store. Do the math indeed.
How long do you think an ad-based revenue model can last when everybody fast forwards through the ads that bring in the revenue? We hate TV ads as much as anybody and the TV executives just keep piling more and more ads on us as they struggle with increasingly fragmented viewership. (Obviously this website is ad-based, and the revenue from the ads allows us to keep this site running and free for whomever would like to visit. Thank you for patronizing our sponsors, without whom we would not exist.) Advertisers aren’t going to place ads on TV if viewers are just going to fast forward through them. They’ll stick to live events like sports, where enough of an audience feels the need to watch it live. But, how will shows like “Lost” that people can easily record and watch later – while skipping the ads – generate revenue to pay the writers, directors, actors, editors, crew, etc.?
Siklos can’t think outside of the idiot box he’s been watching all of his life. There is precious little content that needs to be watched live. TiVo owners already know. As people continue to move to systems and methods of watching video content that delivers only what they want to watch, without the ads that support that content, something’s got to give. You can’t make shows like “Lost” today without advertisers footing the bill. Once the advertisers leave, to give a very simplified example, shows like “Lost” will make money by charging $1.99 per episode. While it will struggle on for years, the era of “free” ad-supported TV, where viewers watch when the netowrks tell them to watch, is already over. As usual, the TV executives are the last to know.
Looking ahead, Apple’s probably thinking about a monthly charge to download whatever you want or some set maximum number of items that makes sense. It’ll cost around what you’re paying today for cable or satellite. Apple or somebody will figure out a way to deliver live events with quality and do so reliably and to large numbers of viewers. The first to drop dead will be the local TV affiliates, for which there are little use already today. All they have right now that’s “unique” are their local “news” and weather reports (which is why they constantly over-promote their news and why they already blow the local weather so far out of proportion with “breaking weather” cut-ins for sun showers seemingly hourly, doppler radar installations that can see the silverware on your kitchen table, etc.). Plus there are usually three or four or more competing local news outlets per market. Local advertisers, like national advertisers, will increasingly look elsewhere as their ad dollars achieve less and less. Other parts of the “TV business” will follow suit or change and adapt to serve new concepts.
The reason Apple’s iPod and iTunes is such a milestone, is that these iPods will be in millions of hands quite soon and iTunes already has tens of millions of registered users (complete with credit card info on file). People like Siklos who criticize the iPod+iTunes Store at this early juncture for video quality, content library, etc. and who are fixated on recording content when it’s broadcast, then scrubbing past the ads during playback really haven’t thought very far ahead. We could do that in the 1980’s with VCRs; it’s nothing new. iPod already plays content on screens other than and larger than its own. You don’t even need an iPod to buy and watch TV shows from Apples iTunes Store, you just need iTunes and a computer, which also can play content on screens other than and larger than its own. As bandwidth increases and content providers become more comfortable with Apple’s delivery, the quality of the video available for purchase from Apple’s iTunes Store will increase. What you see from Apple right now is a just a test. If you thought the iPod+iTunes changed the music business, you haven’t seen anything, yet. The iPod+iTunes is going to alter “TV” in ways as yet unimagined.
SteveJack is a long-time Macintosh user, web designer, multimedia producer and a regular contributor to the MacDailyNews Opinion section.
Related articles:
Apple opens Pandora’s box for the media business, could have profound long-term consequences – October 17, 2005
Apple has the potential to change not just the audio industry, but the whole entertainment industry – October 17, 2005
Advertisers welcome Apple’s iTunes Store commerical-free content – October 17, 2005
Podfather: iPod porn is going to be huge – October 14, 2005
Forrester Research: Apple transformed music distribution, now it is doing the same for video – October 14, 2005
Get ready for the iPod video torrent search sites – October 13, 2005
Apple’s new iMac G5, iTunes 6, iPod video designed to bait Hollywood – October 13, 2005
Apple video iPod+iTunes could create mass audience for video on the go, despite studios’ misgivings – October 13, 2005
Using QuickTime Pro to create videos for playback in new Apple iPods – October 13, 2005
Analyst: Apple has just produced ‘the tipping point’ for entertainment content – October 13, 2005
Apple’s video play likely to unsettle movie, TV, advertising and retail markets for years to come – October 12, 2005
bikersrule: I just hope that somewhere down the line Steve Jobs has an ipod planned with a screen maybe twice the size.
My suggestions: Go and get a 12″ ibook, than you can enjoy the 2 hours movie better.
Who knows, may be they will release an ultra compact mini iBook?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
I think a lot of people are missing the point of this whole exercise. Adding video capabilities to iTMS is so that Pixar will no longer _NEED_ a Disney to distribute their future films. Home theaters are quickly becoming the norm these days for a huge number of people (at least in modern countries). As more and more people have large screen TVs, and movie ticket prices climb towards $15 and beyond, wouldn’t it be enticing to enjoy the latest Pixar flick safe at home on your giant TV and not have to find parking/buy $6 popcorn/hear all the noise from other moviegoers/miss part of the show when nature calls — all for $2? If Pixar can pull this off, “going to the movies” will become a whole new experience. And you get to _KEEP_ the movie (take that, Netflix). Profit margin will rise (no middlemen) and other studios will see that as a way to boost profit. It’s almost the same deal with music CDs.
As for comments about Tivo and such, I’m a Tivo lover and I have to admit that TV shows can easily be recorded that way _IF_ you remember to set it and/or you have a season pass for it. Otherwise you have to wait for its re-run if it ever happens. Also, unless you have a PC, you can’t take your Tivo-recorded shows with you. I hope this will give Tivo some incentive to quickly come out with Tivo-to-go for Mac or my Tivo will soon become just a time-shift box.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
MW: material. There’s a lot of material to come on iTMS.
I noticed the Pocketdish announcement last week, and went to the site to find out more.
1. I could only see the press release about the announcement (and that was hard enough to find).
2. It said exactly what was in the article I read.
3. There was no photo/picture/specs of the gadget
4. There were no other links or obvious information about this (cost, availability, etc).
Personally, I think it was a clever ploy to get SOME publicity on the back of the apple announcement. The lack of any other material is indicative of a hasty release.
Furthermore, if the NYT correspondent thinks this is a good alternative, either he’s seen a lot more than anyone else, and/or he imagines that marketing and other factors aren’t important
SteveJack is right, of course — this will change the TV model.
SteveJack is wrong, of course — Ad dollars aren’t going away, and broadcast TV programs aren’t going to rely on a per-episode fee to pay the bills. Advertising will (already is) simply move where it’s more effective anyway: into the program content. The Desperate Housewives will drink Starbucks and wear Prada and use Trojans.
You can’t kill advertising, and you don’t really want to. How else are you going to know what you want? You gonna go walk around and SHOP? Might be OK for the lay-deez, but I work for my money, and I’m not wasting my Saturday looking in store windows. I’m content to see it on TV and go get it.
I haven’t had my coffee yet. Forgive the rant. But I’m right.
jackspratt raises a very good point. Although many of us have the equipment and know-how to record, edit and convert our own free videos for the iPod, it is a lot more convenient to buy the content when it is available. When you consider the time saved, US $1.99 is a very reasonable price to pay.
The NY Times article seems to have hit a raw nerve with MDN. I am not going to read such a long rant; please make MDN comments shorter than the articles they refer to.
I agree that films do not suit the iPod well. First of all the battery would run out before the end, second the screen is 4:3 and third, it is not comfortable to watch a movie on the really small screen. Admittedly I have not tried this yet but if the concept worked we would all be doing it on Portable Media Centres all ready.
Anything short and sweet will work better as iPod video content. Music videos, trailers, short films, news bulletins, pesonal video messages (imagine an answering machine in iChat AV), commercials, etc. Video podcasts could also become popular; my favourite example yet is Tiki Bar TV so check it out on the Podcast Directory for a good laugh.
MDN Take:
“We hate TV ads as much as anybody and the TV executives just keep piling more and more ads on us as they struggle with increasingly fragmented viewership.”
Older MDN Take:
“Apple really needs to start advertising on TV.”
The iPod (with video) is a Trojan Horse. People drag it into their lives to enjoy the spacious hard drive storage, easy to use interface and the simple way in which songs can be loaded from CDs and purchased from iTMS. Right now the video playback capability is just another feature to help distinguish the more expensive (and larger) iPods from Flash based models. The fact that you can grab videos from iTMS is interesting but the content available is pretty limited and the resolution is a little worse than Standard Definition NTSC although it can scale to fit almost any 4×3 screen size. Personally I don’t think that’s a problem since the majority of the consuming public has little regard for quality, otherwise, reduced bitrate formats like AAC and MP3 would have fallen by the wayside in favor of full-bit rate audio CDs.
MW: Analysis, as in we’re all over analyzing
OK…let’s clarify some things.
1. Yes the screen is small but with a cable you can watch it on a larger screen. Have you SEEN it? Or are you guessing? I’ve seen it. You’d be quite surprised how good it looks even at that low rez.
2. Resolution isn’t the whole story. That could change VERY quickly. Have you ever recorded something on a VCR using the 6 hour setting? Hey…it works. Apple could up the resolution and make those files available pretty fast. End of argument.
3. Movies are a wonderful form of entertainment but are driven by a different kind of formatting. They are usually driven by visuals, and a larger story. Episodic television is driven by characters and longer story arcs. Some story elements can take a full season to play out. The very structure of episodic television is better for a more portable device. Watch for a lot of other content providers to begin offering content on ITMS. Six Feet Under, Sopranos, Deadwood…even older shows like The Prisoner or the Twilight Zone…shows with cult followings that have outstanding individual shows are all great for this format.
4.What takes precedence for you personally? It’s different for different people of course. If you think movies and hand held video games are the number one thing you want to do while riding the bus…then by all means get a PSP or a PocketDish. For those who would prefer to listen to music or an audiobook or a podcast while they walk or run or bike (or ride the bus) those devices don’t work as well as an iPod. As Jobs keeps saying…”video is along for the ride” it’s not the dominant function. It’s not hard to see however a simple change in the software,
and resolution of files to make it hold “only” 34 hours of video in a higher resolution. Would the critics be happy if it stored 17 hours of high definition video? The device can certainly do that but maintaining control over DRM gets much harder. How many pirated movies are out there right now?
5. The next generation iPod, with video could easily turn the screen sideways to accomodate a wider format, have slightly smaller click wheel, offer far higher resolution, and other features…and sell millions. All this after the current version sells millions while people then finally praise Jobs for “getting it right” as if the first gen success somehow didn’t happen. Funny.
Macs King Says
“Personally I don’t think that’s a problem since the majority of the consuming public has little regard for quality, otherwise, reduced bitrate formats like AAC and MP3 would have fallen by the wayside in favor of full-bit rate audio CDs.”
I disagree, the difference is that AAC and MP3 formats still sound good and 9 out of 10 people couldn’t tell the difference. Video at 320×240 does not look good and just about anyone can see that…
PR says: “Apple could up the resolution and make those files available pretty fast. End of argument.”
Not if they plan to sell it for using on the iPod which is where the problem lies. The iPod is incapable of playing anything other than 320×240 as it becomes to processor and battery intensive for the iPod. Even with such small files, you only get 2-3 hours of video playback.
Commercial television is dead. The video iPod is just the first of death throes.
Apple is all about selling hardware.
Push a button in an iTV app and record & archive news, sports, drama, comedy or movies in a format that will work on your iPod and the world will beat an even bigger path to your door.
If they want to sell hardware and the content makers won’t cooperate with saleable downloads, just create and release the iTV app. As long as the content is broadcast over the airwaves, it is legal.
Network Television is 330 lines of resolution..That’s standard NTSC video.
A VHS tape is 240 lines of resolution. We are not measuring PIXELS and raster graphics in the same way here. Television monitors…standard televsion sets…don’t display images in the same way as computer monitors.
Have you SEEN the video from ITMS from 10 feet away on a television?
Macs King has a point here. People LOVE high quality but they willingly accept lower quality. In the early days of photography they used giant negatives and took photos with phenomenal detail. George Eastman realized that it wasn’t the quality that drove people’s interest. It’s the content and control. He invented a whole series of cameras that allowed people to easily take pictures. The quality was not very good. Certainly not anywhere close to what had come before. It didn’t matter. In fact the quality got WORSE after that. Instamatic cameras were TERRIBLE with plastic lenses, grainy film and weak little flash cubes.
People ARE getting more conditioned to better quality with digital photography recently but have you ever seen a cell phone photo?
It’s the content and control…That’s what Jobs realized too..Provide the right content, give the user the control (and no ads) and it’s a winning combination.
Mike says
“he iPod is incapable of playing anything other than 320×240 as it becomes to processor and battery intensive for the iPod. Even with such small files, you only get 2-3 hours of video playback.”
Yes Mike but that’s THIS generation of player. The chip they use comes from Sharp and faster chips are in the pipeline. All Jobs has to do is demonstrate that people are willing to buy the video. If he makes an announcment next June that says something like “We’ve sold half a million iPod videos in 6 months” do you honestly believe that at that time when he announces higher res, a bigger screen, longer battery life and a full library of videos for download that Apple will have failed?
No, I didn’t say Apple was failing and/or would not release a next gen iPod with better playing capabilities. I was simply explaining that at this point in time, there is a reason that iTunes is selling videos at 320×240 and it has nothing to do with file size or download times, it is because the current iPod can not handle anything more. Apple could make a more capable player right now, but it would not cost $299 and it would be a lot bulkier than the current model.
Apple also needs to be cautious about how and when the upgrade the content available. If they sell half a million or more iPod videos and then suddenly upgrade to a higher resolution for the same price, there are gonna be a lot of pissed of people.
I’m not saying it can’t or won’t happen, but I don’t think it’s gonna be in six months time…
“One is that studios are not rushing to make their most popular movies and shows available for the video iPod”
Interesting comment for NYT to make less than a week since the launch of the product!!!
Macaday, I think they were referring to the fact that studios other than ABC did not have their content available for the launch. But who knows, they may or may not have been asked.
Hey, I like the ‘do you want to watch a 2.5 incher for 2 hours’ discussion.
No worries there..Apple will have a bulb in the iPod before long so you can project onto an iPod screen that will be built into the back of every airplane/car/train seat; or maybe a plugin cable connection to those screens.
Ho hoh ho what fun this is turning into. WHERE IS that company called Microsoft. Where did they go after that Windows flash-in-the-pan phenomenon??
Mike, don’t you think the whole thing was kept firmly under wraps and well away from them? Apple had all they needed to launch with ABC/Disney and Pixar on-board and didn’t need to risk opening it up before the event so to speak..
As I said, They may or may not have been asked.. I don’t know.
I agree, as currently conceived, the iPod is not ready for TV/movie primetime. The video quality from iPod to TV is crummy. I’d rather do bitTorrent then spend a Jefferson on a download.
However, as time goes on, I’m pretty confident Apple will nail it down great. It’ a decent first step, though.
Mike,
We DO know–Jobs said they decided to only invite Disney because they wanted to keep this quiet until the announcement. Unless you think Jobs is straight out lying, we know. Now, we’ll see how other providers react. My bet is they’ll have several more within 1-2 months, and all the big players within 3-6.
ron – No ads on MDN???
Are you blind? Look at the top, right, in-between and bottom of your MDN page – those things are ads, not pretty pictures to keep you entertained.
realist: “The ads here on MDN, unlike TV, are only here on the sidelines.” Yeah, so you would like your tv if they put the ads on the sides of the screen like MDN???
TruthDetector: “Perhaps you’d like for MDN to turn off the ads and charge $3.99 or whatever per month?”
Hey, Truthdeflector, perhaps you would like NBC, CBS, etal to charge you $5.99 a month per channel, plus your cable bill to watch ad free TV???
You guys all work for MDN, right? If MDN charged, no one -repeat- no one would pay. You can get all this news at Google news. The thing that drives people to MDN is to anonymously add their 2 cents over and over and over.
————–
MDN is being its usual hypocritcal self – they complain about ads on TV, but cram as many as they can on their website.
MDN complains about ads on TV and then complain that Apple doesn´t put enough ads on TV.
Tony,
That was actually my point. I forgot to add the quotation marks, so the bold part was actually someone else’s quote. I’m on your side on this matter.