Slashdot Mirror
Video iPod May Arrive in September
Fuzzball963 writes "MSNBC is reporting that Apple is in talks with major record labels to license and sell video content on the iTunes music store. The videos would sell for $1.99 and be playable on a video iPod, which Apple has reported may come out sometime in September." Update: 07/18 18:54 GMT by T : Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "Just to add to the previous Apple post, here's a free link to today's Wall Street Journal article upon which the MSNBC article was based."
Before everyone starts bitching about the screen, I'd like to mention that the strength of such a video iPod would be in its ability to output signal to a TV.
That way you can carry half a dozen, dozen movies with you on trips, to your friends houses, wherever, and view them on TV.
Think of it as your portable movie library.
(considering that that's what iPods already are for music purposes.)
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
Allegedly the current chip that's now being used for all ipods is capable of playing MPEG4 video. Will we see video support being released as a firmware upgrade or as a whole new ipod? I want to say new ipod but I really don't know if I'd be suprised if apple released it as a firmware upgrade.
Username taken, please choose another one.
I'd be more interested in a hacked version of this new ipod that can play ANY video I want.
For a few reasons, I have a hard time believing that video on an iPod (or any other device) will be nearly as popular as music. The main thing is that people have lots of time to _listen_ while they work/drive/exercise/stroll/relax/sleep, but very little time when they can dedicate their most important sense to recreation. DVD's sell well, it's true, but while in my own case I might listen to a CD 20 or 30 times (and sometimes way more), I only watch a movie a few times (and maybe up to 10 times). This is primarily because of the bandwidth of time and attention, not for lack of interest.
Helping with organizational effectiveness is our job.
Now they need to make a video camera iPod, so I can film all the video iPod owners running into light poles while trying to watch this thing on their morning jog.
I'm thinking the design of the video iPod might be slightly different than the audio version. At least that's what I'm hoping for, because you're right -- it will be horrific if it's the little stamp sized screen they have now. Maybe if they had something similar to the PSP's screen...
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn
I wonder if iTunes will have a built-in video player so I won't need a video iPod. At $3 a movie that's not a bad deal as long as it's at least 600kbps MPEG-4.
The future of video isn't HD, it's little portable devices with overpriced, DRM-encumbered media and small, low-res screens, like the PSP, cell phones, and the iPod.
I don't think this will be successful. People like to listen to music while they do other things. Video is immersive. You sit down and you watch it and you don't do anything else. Furthermore, there's no way to play a video on an iPod without the hard drive running constantly, and that will burn out the hard drive in no time and use up the battery in half that.
Does this mean Apple will now become the world's largest porn vendor???
They have? Apple being such an open company and all with their future products.
ETA of video iPod: September.
ETA of conspiracy theory explaining why the video iPod is the real reason that Apple switched to Intel: Any second now.
So, if a music video is $1.99 and the song is $0.99...then I don't get it. Does it really cost that much to make a song or does it really cost very little to make a video?
:).
Somehow, I don't see that it's only twice the cost to make a video unless the price of the song is hyper-inflated (which, of course, could never be the case
Just like how the DVD is ~$17 on release day at Wal-Mart but the soundtrack is $16.
:wq
Hehe. And this just hours after "Bill Gates Swears Vow Against 'Son of iPod'"
Too little too late? I thought you said it was a good size!
-Brodie and Gates.
Given a choice between free speech and free beer, most people will take the beer.
Now I can easily take my p0rn collection everywhere.
Evolution or ID?
Apple could easily pitch the success of their iTunes music store the the major motion picture companies and probably work out a reasonable DRM that's flexible enough for consumers to handle.
Personally, I don't care if some other company is first out the door and gets it right like Apple did with the iPod and iTunes, but I just hope that other company isn't Microsoft given a lot of the recent /. articles about Longhorn having DRM for monitors and EF by Intel.
... storage space. Movies are big and I don't think that jukeboxing movies and my 30 gigs of music on a 60gb iPod Video is going to be very practical -- I have a lot of DVDs I'd like to rip onto a video iPod. Can we expect a bump in the capacity then?
It's all about music videos, not movies. That makes a huge difference, IMNSHO.
The Raven
Now that's a bit short-sighted. I'll bet big money that the first peripheral/add-on is an A/V red-white-yellow output so you can connect it to your TV.
<paranoia>(Or, will Apple balk at this, considering how easy that would make it to circumvent the inevitable DRM on the movies?)</paranoia>
There's been a few comments on /. lately about how portable video devices won't take off because noone wants to watch video on a small screen. But I've been thinking about this, and the regular iPod line has been inspiring high-end custom electronics manufacturers to integrate the iPod into nice home audio systems. The more I think about it, the purpose of the Video iPod wouldn't necessarily be to watch video wherever you go, although that would be an extra bonus, but to bring video wherever you want to, and easily watch it on whatever decent-size display you want. I'm sure it wouldn't have DVI or component out, so it wouldn't be a source for super-awesome hi-def video, but it would be great for home movies, music videos, funny videos downloaded from the Internet, and a lot of other things.
I seem to recall Steve Jobs mentioning that video was never meant to be portable. If memory serves, that was only one or two years ago.
Fast forward and any technology statement can and will be proven wrong by technology advances, customer demand, or the latter despite the lack of the former followed by several years of beta testing that people will call 1G.
Regardless, I'm still looking forward to what Apple can bring to the less than booming world of portable video players. And does anyone know when Microsoft is supposed to release a contender to this possible product?
Perfecting Discordia
www.stevenvansickle.com
So much for Bill Gates' recent proclamations about the Son of iPod. Apple is one step ahead again.
Now my Aunt can carry around hours of her crappy home videos anywhere she wants for instant torture.
I do beleive they already have the A/V out on the iPod photo.
but wait though.
the files are DRMd, not the output. suppose they pump it throug the analog RCA (red, white, yellow).
sure you could rip the movie, but you'd have to wait 1.5 hours for each movie, and it wouldn't make much sense. just as you can rip the audio off the iPod, i don't think there would be much worry over it.
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
It'll be called iPrOn
Before everyone starts bitching about the screen, I'd like to mention that the strength of such a video iPod would be in its ability to output signal to a TV.
That way you can carry half a dozen, dozen movies with you on trips, to your friends houses, wherever, and view them on TV.
I can already do that, though, provided a computer with DVI-output (eg: any new Mac), and a TV with HDMI-input (eg: pretty much any new TV worth owning) is available for use at the house I'm going to.
Just rip the DVD's to the iPod with Mac the Ripper, as I would with any other hard drive, and open them using the DVD Player on the Mac at the house I go to.
Think of it as your portable movie library.
(considering that that's what iPods already are for music purposes.)
No, iPods are for listening to music on the go. Are you actually suggesting that their main function is to allow you to take your music to a friends house and play on their stereo?
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
As far as the screen goes, I would assume Apple would redesign the iPod's form factor and use a larger screen, fitting the mainboard and hard drive behind it like other portable video player manufacturers have done.
.mp4 movies) and not allow the more open formats like XviD.
Also, video output to TV would certainly be included. Imagine being able to cart around movies with you and plug them into anyone's TV. This would be a big seller.
My only fear would be that Apple would only allow certain formats (ie. DRM'ed
Actually, If you try out a modern phone, it has a resolution of about 240x320, which is approximately one quarter of the resolution of a normal tv. I have watched quite a lot of content on it, and it works surprisingly well.
Most people I meet laugh at the idea of watching video from something as small as a mobile phone, but it is already quite enjoyable, and after being shown a video they are always eager to accept being wrong. (As an anecdote I've had some of my friends sit around my phone looking at the video of Satisfaction, and noone complained about the screen size being small)
I can only imagine that if Apple puts some effort into their video iPod, they'll be able to have the same resolution as a regular TV.
The idea that we need to watch video on large screens (tv/cinema) is what I think is mostly convention, a small screen (at a closer distance to your eyes) occupies the same percentage of your retina as a big one at a distance.
To me, such criticism is just like people said "who would ever want to walk and listen to music at the same time?".
Small screens are usable already. And of course, should you prefer the relaxation of looking at something in the distance, you can always hook the iPod to the TV, just as the parent poster suggested.
If I could buy them and burn them to DVD using iTunes, then hell yeah I'd pay $1.99 per video. However, if they expect me to have to watch them on a tiny iPod screen or on my laptop then forget it. I have about 6-7 DVDs of music videos that I've downloaded online. If I can't watch them on my TV using VCDs or DVDs, then this isn't a good reason for me to give up on downloading music videos.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
...at least it does to me. I don't know who else was following along with the claims of "As Seen on TV" of being a big shot at apple but here he pretty much states there will never be a video ipod from apple. I'm guessing most people already had their suspicions about the guy but for me this confirms mine.
Before everyone starts bitching...
Stop right there. I know it's cliche, but you must be new here.
Help me take back Slashdot. When did 'News for Nerds' become 'FUD and Conspiracy Theories for Extremist Nutjobs'?
Didn't he just say the opposite, oh yeah.
Mr. Jobs addressed the issue of video on iPods when asked by Mike Wendland of the Detroit Free Press whether or not Apple was looking to add features to the iPod. "We want it to make toast," replied Mr. Jobs. "We're toying with refrigeration, too."
While intended to get a laugh, which it did, Mr. Jobs also offered a more substantive answer as to why Apple had heretofore not added too many features to the iPod. "One of the things we say around Apple, and I paraphrase Bill Clinton from the 1992 presidential race, is 'It's about the music, stupid.'"
Mr. Jobs says that there is a big difference between the way people listen to music and other activities like watching videos. Specifically, he said, you can listen to music in the background, while movies require that you actually watch them. "You can't watch a video and drive a car," he said. "We're focused on music."
Sources: one
two
you have a point.
adding video to iPod (which does one thing and does it well, except now it can do two things -- photos) makes it perhaps too complicated.
however, what i am suggesting is that Apple would now have a tool to dominate the online video market the way they do music.
think about it. we're all waiting for movies for download. who's gonna do it and how? Apple is the only company that can even try. All they need are the contracts, bandwidth, and video iPods.
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
I wasn't clear I guess. The device disables the external output when the files are DRMd thus you cannot view it on anything except the tiny screen unless you are playing a non-DRM file.
For a small(ish) screen and earbuds, you don't need surround sound audio tracks and high resolution HD video feeds. A compressed video stream at a reduced screen size and bitrate can hold a movie in under a gigabyte of space. You're not going to have breathtaking quality anyway, so it's not as if you're going to severely miss something.
So, now your 60Gb iPod holds 30 Gb of music and 30-60 movies or a bunch more TV programs.
(I'm not debating whether or not it's an idea that's really worth much. I like my iPod but can't think of a reason why I'd need a video one. But I'm sure someone else might have a very good reason. I'm just saying that it's feasible from a current storage perspective.)
Ever watched a movie on a PSP? It's actually not too bad (I was surprised too). If the video-iPod had a cable to hook up to a normal TV (or computer) that would be amazing... but even with PSP-style video size/resolution, it's good enough for watching the morning news on the bus, or perhaps watching an episode of the "Family Guy" (or other TV that doesn't require awesome resolution)... It's even reasonable for watching normal TV and movies in situations where you don't have access to a normal TV screen.
And of course, if the pixel density is high enough, there's not much difference between watching a 4-inch screen at 2ft distance versus watching a 52-inch screen at 15ft.
With all the trash on TV these days I would guess that if people would pay $2-5 per episode of a TV show with NO commercials then subscription based video might take off. Apple already has the subscription service for music. Why not extend it to TV shows or movies? There are three shows I watch and three my girlfriend watches. I would pay $12-30 per week for commercial free shows legally acquired. That would allow me to get rid of DirecTV. DirecTV is MPEG-4 now for some channels so the quality would be comparable. Most people don't see a quality difference between digital cable, satellite and DVDs. I think this is a great direction for Apple to be heading into. Would I buy one? Sure I would if the video content were interesting and at the right price.
Nothing is impossible. It just hasn't been figured out yet.
Hasn't history taught us that in the long run battery life is tertiary (or lower) to color and features?
I mean, can you even buy a B&W PDA or cellphone anymore?
Problem with video tech so far is that you have to settle in to watch it: fire up the home theater, point & click several times on your laptop, open & hold the awkward portable DVD player ... watching videos requires setup time and awkward movement-unfriendly positions. The technology forces you to not move, coupled with set-up/down time.
... perfect for intermediate "dead time", especially when commuting.
Contrast that with a video iPod:
iPod audio is right there - in pocket, instant on/off.
iPod video will likewise be right there - in-hand and running practically instantly
Spending 10 minutes on a bus? Waiting for an airplane? 5 minutes early for a meeting? Unexpectedly waiting an hour for someone? No time to watch that movie, but have 15 minutes a day to kill?
One second flat from bored to watching something interesting. Enough storage to actually store several interesting things.
Yeah, the screen will be small - but it's right there, unlike your laptop which has to be hauled out of your backpack, or your >15" TV which is in your living room and definitely not on the bus or in the elevator with you.
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
Looking forward to new three-color iPod ads on TV showing someone wearing an iPod, dancing down the street watching the screen, and smashing into a nearby lamppost.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Yeah! Just like I can't listen to DRM-less MP3s on my iPod now! Oh, wait...
And customers are so "pissed off" that Apple just passed the 500 million song mark at the iTMS.
Give me a break.
And how does QuickTime or DRM take up "way more space than it needs too[sic]"?
I would expect Apple to use H.264, which stands up to any other codec in the quality per bitrate fight. Assuming they are actually doing a vPod, and that they can get a cheap custom processor for H.264 decoding, etc.
It'd be nice if they supported XViD, but if they don't support Ogg Snigfa or whatever the video codec is called, I don't think anyone will care. "Anyone" meaning "anyone who would be a paying customer" for a vPod. :-)
No grandparent poster is right. No one wants to use a computer to serve video from an iPod to a TV. Too many components. These small cables are much easier.
On the other side I doubt this is what apple wants people to use the iPod for. P2PNet has a good post listing why this isn't what you think. Apple knows a video iPod would get hacked to play nearly anything (though any mpeg4 video like xvid/divx is probably too cpu intensive to work) to play on it. This functionality will be for crap quality
The quality will be crap so that no one feeds it to a TV, so you don't need a fast processesor to run it, and so file downloads and transfers to iPod don't take forever. Uploading higher resolution video won't play, not because of codecs, but because there won't be enough cpu cycles.
I have been messing around with HandBreak http://handbrake.m0k.org/ and have been able to use that snazzy new H.264 codec and compressed NapoleonDynomite to 652mb with no noticable quality loss at all. My 60 gig iPod should hold at least 60 movies and still a bit of music.
Small screen? Sure its small. But as said elsewhere in this thread, plug it into your tv. Bam. portable movies.
Sync it with your new Apple DVR system and... oh wait. not yet.
go apple
They can be so much more than music on the go. I perform using mine. I can DJ 2,000 songs, in addition I record songs using garageband on my G5 iMac, a FOSTEX 8 track digital recorder and a mixing board. I then play them back over the PA while I sing and play the guitar. It works like a charm! I will probably use a laptop sometime in the future. But for now the ipod works great! Before I do a show I edit the play lists for each set. The great thing is when I DJ, I don't have to carry all my CD's and I'm no longer burning cd back ups all the time. CD's tend to get scratched too easy.
I can already do that, though, provided a computer with DVI-output (eg: any new Mac), and a TV with HDMI-input (eg: pretty much any new TV worth owning) is available for use at the house I'm going to.
... but how about the ability to plug an RCA or S-Video jack directly from your very portable iPod into a TV and calling it a day?
Your method requires not only a Mac, but a relatively new Mac, a high definition TV, and a short enough distance between the two to hook up a rather expensive cable.
Any bets on how many target users actually have a setup like that? It's not practical...
Are you actually suggesting that their main function is to allow you to take your music to a friends house and play on their stereo?
Although I'm not the parent poster, I can attest that many users purchase iPods to plug into their stereos at work. It happens here constantly, and I highly doubt we're the only ones. The point of an iPod is to have ridiculous amounts of music with you in your pocket that you can access anywhere. How would this not translate well with movies? What is the fundamental difference between hooking it up to earphones or to speakers?
I find it odd why everyone jumps to the conclusion that iTunes is only an outlet to supply content for iPods. What is to prevent Apple from coming out with an "Airport Express Video" product that lets you stream video you purchased from iTunes to your TV? This seems a lot more likely. Maybe even a rental system to bypass or teamup with Netflix.
No, iPods are for listening to music on the go. Are you actually suggesting that their main function is to allow you to take your music to a friends house and play on their stereo?
I do it all the time, actually. I bought a 40gig iPod Photo. It came with a dock, carrying case, and a/v out cables to connect to a home entertainment system. I use it at home all the time and I often take it to my friend's house. I've also co-hosted a radio show and have hooked up my iPod to the system and streamed a short (2 - 3 song) playlist over the air. What's so crazy about that?
Reading on this board, it seems to me that everybody's thinking that the iPod will be the primary means of digesting movies sold through iTunes. It strikes me that this is totally geared towards mac mini's (struck me the day after it's release, actually)... The way I see it, the iPod's integration into all of this (other than TV Out for the video, much like the iPod photo already has) is for previewing chapters and scene selections. IE - build in some video and a bit of bluetooth and control your mac mini from your sofa using your fnacy shmancy iPod remote.
You get the idea. There's a ton of dead time in which such a thing could be useful, in addition to the fact that you can STILL use it to play music the rest of the time.
As to battery life, that's an unknown assumption. But really, all it needs to do is exceed the current 3-4 hours you get spinning a DVD in existing players and/or notebooks.
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.