Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon's Online Movie Service

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the friday's-right-for-fighting dept.

ebresie writes "According to the NYT, it looks as though Amazon is going to start competing with iTunes movie downloads." From the article: "So far, Paramount Pictures, Universal Studios and Warner Brothers are engaged in the talks, said one person close to the talks who, like the others, asked not to be identified because the negotiations are continuing. Although it is not clear when it might begin, an Amazon downloading service would be sure to send waves through both the media and retail worlds. Players in both industries are racing to offer new ways to give technology-savvy audiences instant access to their favorite shows and songs, in a field crowded with potential rivals using Internet and on-demand technologies. "

28 of 79 comments (clear)

  1. And some people express surpise... by zubinjdalal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... when box office sales keep declining!

    Others are realizing that it's just not worth the effort to rush, pay more and stand in line to watch a movie when they can just download it online or buy it on PPV and watch it in the comfort of their homes a couple of months later.

    1. Re:And some people express surpise... by DrXym · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Others are realizing that it's just not worth the effort to rush, pay more and stand in line to watch a movie when they can just download it online or buy it on PPV and watch it in the comfort of their homes a couple of months later.

      The problem is that to download at anything like cinema quality for home viewing, you're talking about files of many gigabytes. Even discounting bandwidth limits, that's still a lot of hours worth of downloading to grab all of that. And it's not just a problem for the consumer - Amazon or whoever would have to have the hardware to be pushing out tens of thousands of movies in parallel AND still make some money from the service after the studios have taken a cut. You hear the RIAA whinging about iTMS selling 4Mb tracks for .99. Now imagine trying to make money pushing 150x the data for for (say) $6.

      That's a tough proposition.

      So tough in fact that the first casuality of online movies is quality. Broadcast quality takes too much bandwidth. You'd be lucky to get something which was remotely comparable to a DVD or even satellite. You'd be lucky to get something that compares to your average DIVX encoded movie. And of course whatever you bought would also be DRM'd up the ass, ensuring that unless you had WMP with the proper rights, that your movie is as useful as a CD snapped in half.

    2. Re:And some people express surpise... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
      You'd be lucky to get something that compares to your average DIVX encoded movie.
      Actually, your "average DIVX encoded movie" is as close to DVD quality as makes no difference. I don't know what you've been watching, but a straight DVD to divx/xvid rip is almost identical, when done right. Your average CAM/TC/TS rip is obviously worse but you would expect that to be the case.

      As for file size, well that is directly related to final quality of course, but I get Battlestar Galactica (45 minutes) in excellent quality at around 350 MB. On a busy torrent, that takes sometimes less than 30 minutes to download. On a fast link, you could almost stream it ! I can rip a 2 hour movie DVD to xvid at a filesize of 1200MB and keep the ac3 sound and get excellent quality to boot.

      DRM is always an issue regardless of (legal form of) delivery.

    3. Re:And some people express surpise... by ncc74656 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I get Battlestar Galactica (45 minutes) in excellent quality at around 350 MB.

      I've had occasional problems with the MPEG encoder boards in my MythTV box. There was one episode (Scar) that I've had consistent trouble grabbing from cable, so I pulled it from alt.binaries.tv. NewsHosting has a web interface to the binaries groups that saves bandwidth (vs. downloading uuencoded or yEnc'd posts and decoding them). I normally encode video to MPEG-2 at about 6 Mbps (but I usually record at an even higher bitrate for Battlestar Galactica). The downloaded file looked about as good as the captures my MythTV box makes. They're even cropped to widescreen format and inverse-telecined before encoding. (The latter is an indication that whoever is doing the encoding has a clue, as I was half-expecting/half-fearing that the video would've been mangled with some half-assed deinterlacing that would've left the video at 29.97 fps. With inverse telecine, the framerate is reduced to 23.976 fps and the video is not interlaced. It restores the video to what was on the source film.)

      The short version of all of the above is that the parent post isn't kidding about the quality of what's getting posted to Usenet/P2P/etc.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
  2. Burnable DVDs? by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In the article they say that customers will be able to download the movies and burn them to DVD. I don't imagine they'll let us download full DVD5 or DVD9 ISOs of the movies. More likely, it will be some highly compressed MPEG-4 variant, along with some Amazon-branded "preparation/conversion" app that outputs a burnable DVD5 or 9 ISO image. Even this sounds like it'd be a bit much for the average computer user to get a handle on. They'd better make sure this whole process is fairly idiot-proof or it's doomed to failure.

    --
    This guy's the limit!
    1. Re:Burnable DVDs? by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Almost certainly this will not be exactly what the NYT thinks it means.
      Possibilities include:
      1) Costs so high that people will decide that they'd rather just wait and buy the official DVD because it will have extras or else download it off a P2P network for free.
      2) Use of a lower resolution image that while technically DVD burnable, offers an inferior viewing experience for the consumer. One such option would be to make 352x240 NTSC or 352x286 PAL resolutions available, which are legal DVD resolutions. Such video, if a sufficiently low bitrate were used, would provide an inferior VCD-like viewing experience that would not really be able to compete with an official DVD release to stores later.
      3) They'll let you burn it to DVD, but not in DVD format. You'll have to burn it as a DVD data disc and it will have DRM that keep standalone DVD players from playing it and it will only be playable on a PC.

      I totally agree that if any burning process isn't fairly idiot-proof, it will definitely fail.

  3. so the business by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    , and by 'the business' I mean the industry, is finally moving to embrace online services.
    I think they may have been watching the music industry moves and market responses very closly and relized that is not the way to go.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  4. This could benfit some of their services... by Slipgrid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From TFA:
    If the advanced negotiations are successfully concluded, Amazon's service would position itself in the media world alongside rivals like Apple Computer's iTunes as a place where people go not just to order goods to be sent by mail, but to instantly enjoy digital wares as well.

    I think that Amazon competing with Apple iTunes or Google Video is a bad idea. It seems that Amazon's power is in it's large (physical, not digital) distribution system. But, I think they may be half way to something good. Maybe this would help them compete with the box stores. Say I want to buy a video from Amazon, because it's cheaper than Sprawlmart, but I want to watch the video that night, and not wait for the mail. That would be a great service and Amazon might be able to provide this. Let me stream it tonight, and get the dvd in the mail next week. Will Amazon move in this direction?

    1. Re:This could benfit some of their services... by clifyt · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "I think that Amazon competing with Apple iTunes or Google Video is a bad idea."

      Competing against Google Video is reason enough to get out of the business...if you have to even compare the service to Google's you've lost the game already. I've *NEVER* used a shittier interface and there was nothing that made me want to even think about putting a quarter in the snack machine because it looked like it'd just get stuck with the rest of the sugary items stuck behind the glass where no amount of shaking was going to get it out.

      iTMS is another story though -- I buy quite a bit of video through this site because I got rid of cable (well, I have 'sub-basic' -- the local channels + comedy central -- though if they knew that, they'd probably take that away too -- its around $10 a month and means I can get clear reception). The iTunes is great to buy from -- its actually far too easy. I've ended up buying a few things that I had been planning on getting physically because they've thrown a few goodies in that made the physical purchase less desirable -- and STILL went out and bought the physical purchase just to have it. What kinda crap is that!!! :-)

      To be honest, I could see Amazon having a better interface than Apple's solution -- the Video Store under iTMS is horrible -- its nothing like that of the music side. Ok, not horrible, but definitely needs to be rethought out. It seems like it was thrown together with the least amount of shoehorning they could do to get the items into the database and our interface. This MIGHT have to do with the fact Apple is rewarding their loyal content providers that served up the content first because its very studiocentric (then again, I wish the music store had a way to search via labels as there are a few independent labels that don't put out that much in the way of content, but what they do put out is consistent across the board -- for example, back in the 80s when I was a gothy industrial kid, I knew that almost anything I picked up from WaxTrax was going to be something that I'd at least listen to for a week or two before picking up the next purchase).

      Amazon's interface for their store is consistent -- its not the greatest, but I can find things without having to switch paradigms every time I want a different type of content. Between Apple and Amazon, this takes up 99% of my online purchases, so I'm pretty satisfied with both regardless.

      As for the suggestion of streamed video w/physical purchase -- I'd love to be able to do that. Amazon HAD been toying with the idea of selling elocker'd items where if you buy a physical book, you could get access to the digital one. I've gotten emails about this from them several times, but I've never found an item that this was possible with...probably the whole MP3.COM Streaming Jukebox thing where everyone sued the company even though they went out of their way to ensure that the listeners had physical access to the content they were streaming (even if you only had access for a few minutes to borrow your friends CDs to add them to your database, that same amount of time could have been spent ripping them and you are right back to where you started). But if they sold a 'rented' streaming video (rented in the terms on the subscription ideas based around online music stores vs. ownership ala iTunes) where the video could be viewed online X amount of times elapsing at time UPS / DHL / USPS tracking claim to have dropped the package off at your residence (or just an arbitrary time of maybe 2 weeks) -- I'd probably stop buying from iTunes and not even be pissed off about the lack of ownership / transferability of the file.

      But all in all, back to your main point -- I think regardless, Amazon could offer the best competition to Apple to date -- so long as they support OS X (and even Linux for the pasty faced kids -- though which variant and will they have to supply the source code along with the de-encryption keys because someone accidentally used GPL3 source!!!). I don't see Google doing anything d

  5. This is just a future IP lawsuit. by Spazntwich · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How long until Amazon decides to patent "an online movie distribution system" and sue Blockbuster and Netflix for infringing on their innovative business idea?

    Note: This post is half tongue in cheek, and half legitimate fear.

  6. What distribution tech? by rlp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Be interesting to see if they use BitTorrent or some other P2P swarming technology. If not, I doubt even Amazon has the bandwidth to handle large volumes of video downloads.

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
  7. iTunes movie downloads? by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ITMS doesn't really do movies yet, funny Amazon will be there competing against them.

    Hopefully they do better than Google. I think they have a better shot at putting together something decent though.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  8. People say by endrue · · Score: 4, Informative

    that this is why box office sales are delining. I disagree beacuse unless you have a wicked awesome home entertainment setup you are not going to rival seeing a film in a theater.

    Box offie sales are declining because 90% of the films suck. No one wants to pay see that in the theater or pay to download it from Amazon. - Andrew

    --
    I meta-moderate because I care.
    1. Re:People say by HairyCanary · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I disagree beacuse unless you have a wicked awesome home entertainment setup you are not going to rival seeing a film in a theater.

      I agree. To rival the movie theater experience I would have to pop some nasty smelling popcorn, pour cocacola on my floor, install uncomfortable seats, and let the movie continue to play while I take a bathroom break. Oh, and I have to charge myself a ridiculous surcharge for anything I eat or drink during the movie. And lest I forget, I have to invite smelly, noisy, rude people to join me in my living room to watch the flick.

      Maybe... maybe my screen isn't quite as cool as the big theater screen. But at 47" and 16x9, it comes close enough. And my surround setup, while not perfect, will indeed rattle my ribcage during the lobby scene of the Matrix, so it's good enough as well. When I figure in the comfy recliner, lack of rude annoying smelly people, food at cost, ability to stop the movie while I pee... well, I think I do not want to rival the movie theater experience after all.

      If you guessed that I do not watch movies in theaters any more, you'd be right. Even without the aforementioned irritations, paying nearly half the cost of a DVD just to watch a movie one time is not worth it.

  9. The winner will be: by Alex+P+Keaton+in+da · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Whomever creates the service that aloows people to watch the downloads easily from the couch, in the living rrom. There is only so long I can watch movies/shows on my computer screen or my little 2 inch iPod screen...

    --
    And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
    1. Re:The winner will be: by timeOday · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Mac Mini now includes a remote control, is that a good enough hint?

    2. Re:The winner will be: by generic-man · · Score: 2, Informative

      Comcast has an "on demand" feature that lets you stream movies and TV shows (some free, some for $) using just the cable box hooked up to the TV. Do they win?

      --
      For more information, click here.
    3. Re:The winner will be: by loolgeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In Europe, ISP offer what they call quad-play boxes. It is a set-top box, which is basically a DSL modem, running linux. This box is also a WiFi router. DSL in Europe allows 20Mb/sec bandwith. So, ISP offer through such boxes Internet, but also TV (more 180 channels) and telephone (usually free and unlimited, even for international calls, for fix and mobile phone, I know it is crazy). And now they offer also network access through power line.

      This allows the user to put his set-top box close to the TV (the set-top box have TV outpout), and keeps provide Internet access through either wifi or power line in the house. It is really great. The set-top box is also a media center that can display movies or play music from computers online in your home network.

      The set-top box is free, and the subscription for the service (Internet/TV/telephone) is 30 euros/month (~$40). It is naked DSL, so you don't even need to pay for a phone line. Now, in addition of the 180 channels, they offer Pay-Per-View movies. And with 20Mb/sec you can have DVD quality streaming video. So, it is possible. It already exists for quite long time. But unfortunately not in US.

      Sometimes, I wish we could have such thing here in US (or at least in the bay area!). But I doubt that SBC-ATT-BellSouth-? is willing to provide such service, or let anybody else provides such service. So, we will stay with our 3Mb/sec DSL line... no naked DSL... no set-top box... no power line private network... and cry...

  10. It's about the media AND the hardware by chia_monkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It will be interesting to see how this pans out. One of the reasons all the other music download services have failed to make a dent in iTMS' market share is because iTunes downloads load right into iTunes (duh) and load quite easily onto the iPods. Now since the iPods own the mp3 market by a landslide, it's no wonder people use iTunes to get their music. Add in the ease of use, simple interface, and decent (ie, acceptabel) DRM and you've got a winner.

    Amazon does a damn good job at selling "stuff". Can they distribute the digital media to the masses in the same way? Which hardware are they going to aim it all at? If Apple is able to get a foothold in the video market also, then why would anyone download video if it's a pain to load onto their iPod Videos? It's all about ease for most of the users out there. Amazon may have a bazillion videos and a decent model, but if the people find it a hassle to put on their favorite player, it's not gonna rock.

    --

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
    1. Re:It's about the media AND the hardware by chia_monkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      By allowing movies to be burned to DVD (unlike Apple's current offerings), Amazon is allowing you to watch movies:...

      You bring up a VERY good point about how this differs from Apple's iTunes offerings. The point of my comment was based on the original article of how "Amazon is going to start competing with iTunes movie downloads." You helped illustrate how Amazon's offering could potentially be a leader in downloads destined to be burned onto DVDs. Who knows if Apple will offer something similar. Right now, these two are vastly different offerings. Amazon's service should be compared to Netflix and Blockbuster instead. I wonder how they will react, and how (if) Apple will react.

      --

      "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
  11. Cool Amazon digital delivery by jaysones · · Score: 5, Informative

    I ordered a cd 2 weeks ago that was released this past Tuesday. After I pre-ordered it, Amazon let me stream it from my "digital locker" a full week before the physical cd was available. I thought that was really cool and would encourage me to pre-order from them again. I don't know of any service that has a comparable pre-release listening policy.

  12. Apple? by tktk · · Score: 2, Insightful
    So why is article this under the Apple section? It's interesting the Apple's "Movie Store" is the one to beat considering that it doesn't yet have one open.

    Amazon shows up enough on /. on its own merits without needing to tied into Apple.

  13. Sensationalism by generic-man · · Score: 4, Insightful
    1. iTunes doesn't sell movies.
    2. The New York Times headline: "Amazon Considering Downloads" (emphasis added)

    So according to Slashdot's Apple section, Amazon.com is considering starting a service that would compete with a service Apple doesn't offer. All we need is some Google speculation ("Google's Online Movie Service in JavaScript") and we've got a trifecta!

    --
    For more information, click here.
  14. And the winner is... by Warg!+The+Orcs!! · · Score: 2, Funny

    The first one to offer Jenna Jameson films

    ;o)

    --
    Travelling forward in time at a rate of 1 second per second.
  15. Re:Online video delivery a crowded field? by timeOday · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, I happen to have personal experience in the matter. My homebrew PVR captured at 320x240 for a couple years because I was using an 800 mhz computer to do software encoding. Then I got a faster PC and now capture at 640x480. I have to say it is an improvement, even on a TV from couch-viewing distance. If Apple offered 640x480 downloads, I doubt there would be any debate that it's significantly better.

  16. Competing, as in, competition? Easy! by babbling · · Score: 4, Funny

    There's a simple way for Amazon to win this battle.

    - 640x480 videos
    - xvid/MPEG-4 files that DON'T have DRM
    - Reasonable prices (matching iTunes will do - I'd buy from iTunes if it weren't for the DRM)

  17. The Rest of the World by SteveX · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd like to be able to subscribe to TV shows through any service, in Canada. Why is it so difficult to bring content available digitally in the US to other countries?

  18. 2006: "NetFlix" transfers movies via Mail carrier by GodWasAnAlien · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's quite sad that DRM and "fear of the consumer" has put us in a place that the best way to buy video information uses the postal service as a transport.

    There is a large industry waiting to happen. Waiting for the media industry to loosen its grip and allow consumers to download unencumbered media from official sources at reasonable prices/advertisement. The vast majority of people would not bother with saving a couple cents to avoid paying for audio and video, especially if it's hard/slow to find. Just let the consumer loose a little.