Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Battle of the Media Ecosystems: Amazon, Apple, Google and Microsoft

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the my-money-is-on-whichever-makes-streaming-live-sports-not-suck dept.

Media 79

bsk_cw writes "This article takes a long look at four major consumer tech ecosystems — Amazon, Apple, Google and Microsoft — and examine how well (or badly) they're serving up their media. The authors talk about how each company approaches gaming, music, video, books, etc., and how each integrates all its parts into some kind of whole. The conclusion? That none of the four can be said to be the best in all things, but they're certainly trying."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Subj (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458715)

What's an ecosystem? Another marketing term to having one company providing you a set of services?

Re:Subj (3, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#44458875)

Mod this guy up.

Screw ecosystems. Just use well documented open standards and let everyone cooperate. Just because someone has a phone from company B does not mean they should not be able to play media from company C.

Re:Subj (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44459413)

Yes! I try to only buy from apps or services that are available on at least PC, Android and ios without a big headache. This usually means Amazon for mp3, netflix/hulu for video and bittorrent, I mean "various other providers" for books.

Re:Subj (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44460527)

Here's an idea, go back to work and quit living on /.
You've made at least 15 comments today alone!

Re:Subj (3, Insightful)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | about a year ago | (#44458997)

Apparently it means "a garden with walls slowly being built around it"

Re:Subj (3, Insightful)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#44459029)

The walls are quite well-established in all of those, they're just not done making them a thousand feet tall, covered in grease, topped with spikes and surrounded by lava moats.

Re:Subj (1)

RJFerret (1279530) | about a year ago | (#44460109)

The walls are quite well-established in all of those, they're just not done making them a thousand feet tall, covered in grease, topped with spikes and surrounded by lava moats.

So...you're saying a Mario Bros game then?

Re:Subj (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#44461101)

They are all easily cracked. In fact my preferred ecosystem, BitTorrent, provides "webrips" which are videos originating from these DRM encumbered services and fixed so I can watch them.

The wall is more like a low row of stones you might occasionally trip over.

Re:Subj (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#44462141)

Oh the wall is absolute shit at keeping content in. It's really meant to keep users in.

Re:Subj (2)

timeOday (582209) | about a year ago | (#44459217)

What's an ecosystem? Another marketing term to having one company providing you a set of services?

Nope. Every one of these ecosystems is defined by hardware devices as well as services/information. The restrictions on the hardware are integral to defining the boundaries of the "ecosystem."

Re:Subj (1)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#44459263)

an ecosystem is itunes and google play. where the media you buy only work on the devices and OS of the companies that sell it to you

unlike say Amazon Kindle where you can read a kindle book on almost every device out in the market today from a PC to a blackberry

Apple has no central place for payment info??? (4, Interesting)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#44458839)

"However, while Amazon has its Amazon account and Google has Google Wallet, Apple has no central place you can go to put in your identity and credit card information,"

Apple has iTunes. Perhaps you've heard of it?

You enter a card one time and you then can buy any media or apps you like with it, anywhere.

The whole list struck me a really vapid and lazily assembled, that was just one example. It would have been far more interesting to compare QUALITY of libraries, and to include companies like Netflix in the mix. Yes Amazon has a growing video library for example, but it sucks horribly compared to Netflix (I have prime and Netflix stream so I can use either).

Re:Apple has no central place for payment info??? (1, Informative)

dlingman (1757250) | about a year ago | (#44459635)

If you actually read the article, they are saying things like google wallet lets you shop at many retailers. Itunes lets you shop at Apple. I can't use the fact that my card info is in itunes to shop elsewhere online.

Re:Apple has no central place for payment info??? (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#44459831)

Yes I read the article, that point is nonsense in an article talking about how the companies are doing in the MEDIA MARKET.

In practice I have an Amazon payment account set up, and also an Apple payment account. For stuff purchased frequently that either sell it works the same to me.

Re:Apple has no central place for payment info??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44460337)

If you actually read the article, they are saying things like google wallet lets you shop at many retailers. Itunes lets you shop at Apple. I can't use the fact that my card info is in itunes to shop elsewhere online.

The itunes account lets you buy (A) itunes music and movies (B) ios and macos applications and (C) hardware and accessories from the Apple online store. I think that covers pretty much Apple's entire "media ecosystem."

True, you can't use it to buy a refrigerator or a winter coat, but what do those have to do with a "media ecosystem?"

Re:Apple has no central place for payment info??? (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#44461139)

Apple's reliance on iTunes really hurts them. If you search for video the results will have links to the Amazon and Google Play web sites where you can buy and stream/download it directly. If you even get a link to the iTunes website all it does is tell you to download and install the application to view it. Even the malware guys mostly gave up on the "download an app to view this site" gambit years ago.

They really limit their market by requiring iTunes. You can't even buy DRM-free MP3s from them without it.

Apple not limiting anyone (1, Informative)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#44461819)

They really limit their market by requiring iTunes. You can't even buy DRM-free MP3s from them without it.

I would suggest they have only limited themselves from Linux only users - hardly a large enough market segment to get really concerned. They have more credit cards of file than even Amazon (and sell VASTLY more online music/video than Amazon) so obviously Apple is doing something right.

Yes you can buy video from Amazon and stream it in a browser but with more limited control than iTunes offers over playing video and all of the perils you get by running in a browser plugin - sluggish performance, risk of using the back button and so on.

In order to argue what Apple is doing is hurting them you'd have to show how any competitor is doing anything better...

Amazon is great at buying physical stuff. It's absolutely horrible when used for digital materials, I know because I have prime so I get access to some things for free. Free is hardly even worth it for the pain that is using Amazon to find video.

Re:Apple not limiting anyone (1)

sixsixtysix (1110135) | about a year ago | (#44462155)

Yes you can buy video from Amazon and stream it in a browser, ios/android app, roku player, and any number of smart tvs and blu-ray players with less limited control than iTunes offers over playing video

FTFY

Re:Apple not limiting anyone (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#44462309)

Yes, I know, I watch Amazon video on a PS3 myself.

It's kind of stupid to bring that up when the original point was Amazon video was great because you didn't need a dedicated plater like iTunes... then you come and say "look at all the dedicated players!!" :-)

My point was not that you need a browser to play Amazon video, my points (not well isolated to be sure) were:

1) Amazon video playback in the browser stinks (as does any browser based video playback).

2) The Amazon video service itself stinks - you can use the dedicated clients all day long as they make playback more tolerable, but that doesn't help things like the awful search mechanism or the drastic lack of content compared to Netflix.

Again, I am a Prime subscriber so I *can* get some things for free on Amazon video. But it's really so awful to use and there's so little there I pretty much don't bother.

I have also purchased a TV season or two on Amazon because it was dirt cheap. But in the end the much wider possible use I get out of buying TV shows on iTunes means that even if it costs more I'll probably buy there because of the added convenience.

Re:Apple not limiting anyone (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#44464221)

How do I buy something from iTunes without having iTunes installed?

Re:Apple not limiting anyone (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year ago | (#44465563)

How do I buy something from iTunes without having iTunes installed?

It may not count in your terms, but you you can buy stuff from iTunes on any iOS device, or an Apple TV.

I'm not sure why it's a problem that you have to have iTunes installed on a PC to purchase, it hasn't mattered for the vast majority of humanity.

Re:Apple not limiting anyone (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#44465757)

iTunes is bloated crapware on Windows, and I can't be bothered to ridiculously long EULA.

Re:Apple has no central place for payment info??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44462127)

agreed. nothing worse then getting a link to itunes, then them asking you to install it. no. i do not. it is installed on my other pc. just let me buy the stuff from the site. fucking assholes.

FP (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458859)

Ecosystems schmecosystems already.

Microsoft's idea of ecosystem (5, Funny)

jkrise (535370) | about a year ago | (#44458879)

A desktop is a large tablet that you often touch.

A tablet is a device that runs an operating system and apps developed with desktops in mind

Windows RT is a Windows operating system that does not run programs built for Windows; even those developed on Windows by Microsoft

On a desktop operating system you can close the desktop and that is the normal mode of operating the desktop computer

As clear and delineated as Ballmer's press mutterings and utterings.

Rist Post (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458887)

yup it's me!

Ecosystem (3, Interesting)

Archangel Michael (180766) | about a year ago | (#44458935)

I'll will purchase from the ecosystem that gives me portable and universal access. MP3s

Re:Ecosystem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44458995)

So, Amazon.

Re:Ecosystem (0)

barlevg (2111272) | about a year ago | (#44459185)

Google Music lets you download your content as mp3 as well.

Re:Ecosystem (1)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#44459285)

its easier with itunes and amazon. google has some convoluted process to download music and movies that's not worth the trouble

Re:Ecosystem (2)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year ago | (#44459335)

In itunes you still have to convert to Mp3 from AAC

Re:Ecosystem (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year ago | (#44459439)

Unless your player plays AAC like many modern players do.

Re:Ecosystem (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#44461185)

Why lock yourself into a less free/open format? It's like arguing that MS Office files aren't that bad because lots of software supports it... True but .txt is likely to outlast them and is universally supported by everything.

Personally I only accept FLAC/WAV.

Re:Ecosystem (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year ago | (#44462785)

Please explain how the successor to MP3 (also designated as both ISO and IEC standards) is less free and open than MP3. From what I know the licensing for AAC is more permissive than MP3. Also in your analogy there is a free alternative to Office which is used by many. The only open source alternative to MP3 is Ogg Vorbis which few media players handle. FLAC and WAV are poor alternatives if you don't have unlimited space.

Re:Ecosystem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44460651)

In itunes you still have to convert to Mp3 from AAC

Why would you convert to a lower-fidelity format? Everything plays AAC these days.

Hell, the old Motorola RAZR dumbphone I used before I got my first smartphone played AACs.

Re:Ecosystem (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year ago | (#44462231)

Mp3 players > AAC players

Re:Ecosystem (1, Informative)

barlevg (2111272) | about a year ago | (#44459479)

Convoluted? http://i41.tinypic.com/npnyx3.png [tinypic.com]

Re:Ecosystem (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44460137)

I'm down-modding you for the use of tinypic.

Re:Ecosystem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44460241)

its easier with itunes and amazon. google has some convoluted process to download music and movies that's not worth the trouble

I can't speak to movies, but when I buy mp3s from Google I run Google Music Manager on my Ubuntu box at home and download the (DRM-free) files.

Re:Ecosystem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44459453)

"I will will purchase" is what you wrote.

Re:Ecosystem (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year ago | (#44459497)

Why only MP3s?

Re:Ecosystem (2)

cascadingstylesheet (140919) | about a year ago | (#44459687)

So, Amazon then. (I wasn't logged in before ...)

Not if your an american or part of the FIVE EYES. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44459007)

No one should use any of the companies. They sold out... the only way they will learn is to hit their wallets. Boycott these companies.

Amazon still does not offer an android app (3, Informative)

TerminaMorte (729622) | about a year ago | (#44459079)

As far as I'm concerned, as long as they don't have an Amazon instant video app for android they've already lost.

Re:Amazon still does not offer an android app (3, Interesting)

barlevg (2111272) | about a year ago | (#44459163)

I suspect this is a "feature" not a "bug," since instant video is basically your only incentive to get a Kindle Fire. It's actually kind of a royal "fuck you" to Google to say, "Hey, thanks for doing all the heavy lifting making this Android OS. We're just gonna take it, remove your app store in favor of our own, and develop an app that only works INSIDE our walled garden. Thanks!"

Alibaba (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44459229)

We're just gonna take it, remove your app store in favor of our own, and develop an app that only works INSIDE our walled garden.

Just like Alibaba is doing?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/16/alibaba_os_amos_android_china/ [theregister.co.uk]

Re:Amazon still does not offer an android app (2)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#44459307)

android is open source

the whole point is you take the code, do whatever you want with it and only give back your code changes. the whole point of open source is that you and your competitors both contribute to the code base and either make commodity cheapo stuff or somehow make your product stand out from the others with the same code base

Re:Amazon still does not offer an android app (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44462345)

That is not the reason. It is because Google didn't let Kindle Fire have youtube app. So Kindle just returned the favor.

What about Netflix? (5, Interesting)

EmperorOfCanada (1332175) | about a year ago | (#44459165)

I cut our cable cord a while back to go to netflix. This saved around $60 per month (I had about the cheapest cable possible). This was a massive savings with a huge boost in quality. While Netflix does not have everything neither did my cable package. Not one of the 4 people in my household have complained even once about losing cable.

But using an apple TV I was looking at the prices and saw that access to some TV season would cost me $34. That is bonkers. The whole idea of cutting the cord was not only to stop paying my cable company but to break the ridiculous model that Hollywood has been forcing on us for years. If you watch a TV show on some form of broadcast or cable the producer makes around $0.10 to $0.25 per household for the first showing from the advertisers. So a TV series for download (which effectively is a rerun) is somehow expecting to make double or triple that? Even renting an entire series physically was cheaper than that.

So I don't know why the article focused on the 4 systems that seem set on bringing back a variation of a model that has had its neck snapped by Netflix. About the only feature they offer that is newish is the "Downloading is so convenient." A short while ago I was talking with a mid-level movie exec who said a model people were getting excited about was to have new releases available for download for a huge huge price. The idea was that some people had lots of money and huge screens. So they would have their friends over and it would all be exciting. The exec was gleeful about the idea of screwing not only the viewer but the theatres too.

My guess is that all these execs forget about piracy as an ever present competitor. So they dream up spreadsheets that compare their prices to the prices paid to traditional media. Many people are paying well in excess of $100 per month in Cable. So they say "If we can get them to come to our service we could nail them for at least $80!" What they are forgetting is that people are resistant to change. They will hold on and on to their existing package and then when they make the leap it will be a big one.

Quite simply people are getting more and more really cheap and really good options. Also with iTunes I don't know how much I am going to be paying. At $2 minimum per show it would take a lazy rainy Saturday in this house to blow by my monthly fee for Netflix. I could see a household that didn't really monitor its iTunes to blow past $1000 in a month.

A great line I read recently went something like this. "I'm not sure who will change faster, Netflix becoming more like HBO or HBO becoming more like Netflix." I don't think anyone sane will be saying, "How long before Netflix becomes more like Warner?"

I am not saying that Netflix is the be all and end all; it is just that it crosses a critical threshold in that it makes piracy not worth anyone's time. So maybe Netflix won't be the winner. But the winner will be more like Netflix than iTunes.

Re:What about Netflix? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44459297)

Get an appleTV and jailbreak it. Its not a bad media device once you "free" it from its shackles.

I agree with you thought, its kinda crap as-is. Their price/show or price/season is too high relative to other offerings. More often then not I can pick up a bluray for less then apple's "season pass". With the bluray i at least "own" something other then a rental agreement subject to change.

Re:What about Netflix? (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year ago | (#44459359)

I have 3 apple TVs. Just go buy a chinese media player instead of hacking the Apple TV. Or a WD Live or jsut about anything other then something you have to hack into to make it work as it should.

Re:What about Netflix? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44459521)

Original AC here.

Agree with you, there are better alternatives. The OP mentioned it and the cost and so i was agreeing with them.

For what its worth, I have a few ATV's and a number of alternatives (some even do 1080P and cost a lot less).

The ATV does have a few advantages:
-Decent form factor
- Overall "fit and finish" is higher then most comparable products.

Only real downsides are the time spent hacking it, Apple breaking your hack work with an update, and the number of times i misplace the stupid remote.

I dont like the model thought. If i bought it why cant i do what i want with it? If you want to lock it down to your TV rental service then rent me the box instead of selling it to me.

Car analogy, imagine buying a car and being told you cant replace the tires unless its done by the manufacturer or can only drive on certain roads....

Re:What about Netflix? (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year ago | (#44459599)

The only reason i got them is that i also have an ipad2 and I assumed i would be able to stream ANYTHING from the ipad to the AppleTV. I was PISSED the first time an app said it doesnt allow that (amazon i think). Those sort of controls on the content should not even exist in the hardware interaction. That was when i decided my Apple experiment was over.

Re:What about Netflix? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44460275)

OK, but why did you buy THREE, you nonce?

Re:What about Netflix? (1)

sessamoid (165542) | about a year ago | (#44461827)

Wait. So your Apple experiment is over because some third-party ecosystem wouldn't let Apple send the video stream to your TV? That makes perfect sense. That's like blaming Apple for the DRM in iTunes music that the record companies imposed on them, which a lot of people here did as well.

Re:What about Netflix? (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year ago | (#44462219)

It wasnt Amazon per se, it was that it can be arbitrarily decided how my hardware will function. IM not starting an anti-Apple crusade, i merely am going to stop buying their product due to my unmet, but pretty realistic expectations. I'm logged into the ipad, im logged into the Apple TV, what is the problem with letting me screen mirror? It jsut exposed the fact that its never going to behave like the discrete hardware i expect it to and its time for me to move on to other solutions that allow me the level of freedom im looking for.

Re:What about Netflix? (1)

jedidiah (1196) | about a year ago | (#44461129)

> The ATV does have a few advantages:
> -Decent form factor

        Everyone has this.

> - Overall "fit and finish" is higher then most comparable products.

        The ATV is nothing special in this regard. Once you get beyond using the ATV as an iTunes purchase enabler, it starts to fall down pretty quickly and pretty badly.

        That's why people like to jailbreak the things.

       

Re:What about Netflix? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44461349)

You mean like how i said I've jailbroken mine?

trust me, i am no apple fan but some people are totally "anti-apple" they are blind to the benefits. ATV with XBMC works well, including the remote control. you can even use a logitech harmony to get page up/down working to address the stupid scroll issue.

Who else has a decent form factor? Most of the competition i have looked at look like crap.

Re:What about Netflix? (1)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#44459629)

blu rays come out months later
i bought a season pass to a reality show my wife wanted to see because the episodes come out the next day

Re:What about Netflix? (1)

swb (14022) | about a year ago | (#44459353)

The problem with Netflix is in many cases you don't have access to current season TV shows, and streaming has a pretty crappy movie selection (don't blink, the movie you want may be available for a limited time and then you'll miss it...) DVDs are great, but now you're waiting. Two at a time is OK, but two movies isn't much for a long holiday weekend.

And then there's offline viewing -- why can't I watch Netflix instant offline? Surely there's some DRM they could apply similar to rentals from Amazon and Apple.

Re:What about Netflix? (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year ago | (#44459387)

For me neither is a replacement for another. Netflix is great if they have the title you want. If they don't (as they don't always have new releases or certain titles), you have to use iTunes or Amazon or something else. Case in point: Doctor Who Season 7 Parts 1 and 2. Part 1 started Sept 2012 and Part 2 January 2013. Neither are on Netflix and a new doctor will be unveiled for Season 8 in several weeks.

Re:What about Netflix? (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#44459733)

I just wait for the DVDs in that case.

I am pretty resistant to paying for anything that also has advertising. Which is why I will not pay for hulu plus.

Re:What about Netflix? (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | about a year ago | (#44460279)

But using an apple TV I was looking at the prices and saw that access to some TV season would cost me $34. That is bonkers. The whole idea of cutting the cord was not only to stop paying my cable company but to break the ridiculous model that Hollywood has been forcing on us for years. If you watch a TV show on some form of broadcast or cable the producer makes around $0.10 to $0.25 per household for the first showing from the advertisers. So a TV series for download (which effectively is a rerun) is somehow expecting to make double or triple that? Even renting an entire series physically was cheaper than that.

No, cutting the cord means no cable, satellite or other subscription TV service. It doesn't mean "free TV", it just means you're watching OTA and purchasing your TV content some other method (DVDs, streaming, whatever).

In this case, $35 for a TV season, which unless you're watching a LOT of TV shows that aren't OTA, you'd probably save in the long run - $60 x 12 months for cable is $720/year. Or 20 TV series you can't get via an antenna.

If you watch just 10, you're still saving over cable. And that's the point of cutting the cord - because cable providers have gotten so greedy that it costs hundreds of dollars a month when all you want can be had purchased for much less. Many TV shows can be had the day after on iTunes (get a season pass and iTunes makes it ready for you when it's available - I think it even syncs it over if you desire). Some, like Game of Thrones, require patience but if it saves you $15/month ($180/year) just for that when you can buy it for $35, you're still ahead.

If you want to break the Hollywood model - quit watching TV. Read a book, surf the web, play some games, whatever.

Effectively, cutting the cord is realizing most TV is crap, cable/satellite/whatever is too expensive, and getting the TV you really want for a lot less money through iTunes, Amazon, Google, Netflix, Hulu, etc.

Re:What about Netflix? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44461193)

But using an apple TV I was looking at the prices and saw that access to some TV season would cost me $34. That is bonkers. The whole idea of cutting the cord was not only to stop paying my cable company but to break the ridiculous model that Hollywood has been forcing on us for years. If you watch a TV show on some form of broadcast or cable the producer makes around $0.10 to $0.25 per household for the first showing from the advertisers. So a TV series for download (which effectively is a rerun) is somehow expecting to make double or triple that? Even renting an entire series physically was cheaper than that.

If you could rent it physically, then DO THAT. Or it's probably on Netflix, or will be. What's your problem, you got what you asked for, a la carte entertainment. No you don't get what you want AND when you want it AND at the price you want to pay, nothing works like that because you don't hold all the cards. You can pick one maybe two of those.

I use all of Apple TV, Netflix, RedBox, and go to theaters often, no Amazon or Hulu experience unfortunately.

For movies, you are not escaping Hollywood with any of these, you are just experiencing different levels of service designed by Hollywood. It's more complex than it used to be with theater->video. Now it's something like theater, physical purchase, online purchase, online rental, online streaming, all with different release dates and difference license costs to pass on. You have a ton of choice there, Netflix + RedBox will get you a lot for dirt cheap.

For network shows, I guess I still don't understand your complaint in regards to Apple TV, it is what it is, a la cart TV shows from the current season (mostly, not HBO for example), day after airing, no ads!!!, no subscription, it is not the cheapest option and doesn't want to be. You can wait till your show ends up on a cheaper service, wait till the whole season is in the bargain isle at retail for all I care.

My guess is that all these execs forget about piracy as an ever present competitor. So they dream up spreadsheets that compare their prices to the prices paid to traditional media. Many people are paying well in excess of $100 per month in Cable. So they say "If we can get them to come to our service we could nail them for at least $80!" What they are forgetting is that people are resistant to change. They will hold on and on to their existing package and then when they make the leap it will be a big one.

Yah, piracy is TODAY's showing, for the price of NOTHING.

Everyone is in this for the money, you understand right, they are not entertaining you for good will so get that out of your head. This isn't about rights, freedom, social/economic equality, whatever, it's _entertainment_.

We've never had this much choice in multimedia delivery before. The moral high ground for bootlegging has never been so weak.
You are not entitled to multimedia entertainment, and you sure as shit are not entitled to FRESH entertainment. There's so many good -!!!complete!!!- series from the last few years waiting to be cracked open on Netflix for $7/mo to give any sympathy for bootlegging the latest season of whatever, sorry guys. And if you think RedBox is too expensive GTFO the Internet.

Re:What about Netflix? (1)

peteMG (87639) | about a year ago | (#44461715)

Also with iTunes I don't know how much I am going to be paying. At $2 minimum per show it would take a lazy rainy Saturday in this house to blow by my monthly fee for Netflix. I could see a household that didn't really monitor its iTunes to blow past $1000 in a month.

Wait a sec. $1000 in a month at $34/season is 29 complete seasons of TV. You're going to watch that much in 31 days?

Re:What about Netflix? (1)

EmperorOfCanada (1332175) | about a year ago | (#44464675)

4 people each choosing different things and then not watching the whole season. That is going to add up.

They left out some other sites (3, Interesting)

bobstreo (1320787) | about a year ago | (#44459259)

No DRM:

eBooks:
www.gutenberg.org

Texts, Movies, Audio, Education:
www.archive.org

Re:They left out some other sites (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44459347)

Those don't require a fee, its even in the summary "...and for our dollars".

No one's making money off them so why promote them?
Once a few more rounds of retroactive extensions are passed Sun Tzu's "the art of war" (written in 206 BC) will no longer be public domain anyhow.

Re:They left out some other sites (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year ago | (#44459371)

I show people that site all the time and they are 'meh'. They would much rather be advertised to and sold something then seek it out for themselves.

Re:They left out some other sites (1)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#44459645)

you can get good kindle ebooks very cheap. sites like ereaderiq track books and authors and alert you for price drops. i bought ender's game for $5 last week. then it dropped to $3.

the only expensive books are the new releases people want to read NOW when they come out

Who will do for video what Google did for music? (4, Interesting)

barlevg (2111272) | about a year ago | (#44459433)

Like probably most people, I started with iTunes (originally, I was even using it with a non-iPod mp3 player, burning tracks to a CD-RW 20 at a time, then ripping them back). I stuck with it for a good long while, even going to the trouble of maintaining an old iMac G4 (beautiful art piece of a computer, btw) just to run it and to allow me to sync my iPod, even after switching all my Windows computers to Linux (this was back in the day when iTunes support in Wine was a fevered dream).

Then Google Music came along. At first, I thought the idea of storing all my music in the cloud was ludicrous (Google will seriously let you store tens of GB of music NOT purchased from them FOR FREE? Gotta be a catch), but when the headphone jack in my Gen 1 iPod Touch gave out, I decided to give it a shot and make my Android phone my primary audio device. It was brilliant--namely the ability to cache music offline; they really won me over, and since then, my poor iMac has been relegated to the role of multimedia server (got a bunch of external Firewire HDs hooked up to it), and I don't think I've spent a dime on iTunes in years.

So now what I'm wondering is whether there will ever be a service that does for video what Google did for music, in the sense that you can take your DVDs and other video content and upload them to the cloud, for access anywhere, any time. Of course, DVD encryption means that *in theory* you shouldn't be able to rip a DVD like you can a CD, and I actually know of not one legal source of non-DRM purchasable video content, so I suspect the answer is that there will NEVER be a service that allows you to store your existing, "physical" video library in the cloud. But if such a service existed, and it allowed me to cache offline, I think they'd "win."

"Google Movies" (but not from Google) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44462609)

So now what I'm wondering is whether there will ever be a service that does for video what Google did for music, in the sense that you can take your DVDs and other video content and upload them to the cloud, for access anywhere, any time.

There's been a service that offers that for awhile now, http://www.vudu.com/in_home_disc_to_digital.html [vudu.com] . A fair number of smart TVs and BluRay players support the service along with, of course, apps for Android and iOS.

"The Disc to Digital service is a new feature added to the VUDU To Go application. It lets you convert your Blu-ray discs and DVDs to digital copies at home and store them in the cloud so you can watch them anywhere."

Like Google Music, this service only lets you backup content from content distributors with whom the service has signed a license. Unlike Google Music, there is a charge (one-time fee per-DVD) for backing up content.

Re:"Google Movies" (but not from Google) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44477993)

What the previous AC said. VUDU (thanks to our Wal-Mart overlords) is currently the only real game in town for video "uploading". The VUDU To Go app makes it easy enough (or you can still just walk into a Wal-Mart with a bundle of DVDs in your arms and do it there).

There's even a reasonably cheap DVD to "HDX" (streaming at near Blu-Ray quality) upgrade path ($2 more, for a total of $4/disc).

Another nice thing about VUDU however is that the service is an Ultraviolet peer, so unlocks go into your Ultraviolet collection as well and if for some reason your device doesn't have a VUDU app (which is increasingly rare, again thanks to Wal-Mart) there are other Ultraviolet apps like Flixster that can play your movies.

I'm still not convinced that Ultraviolet DRM is the best option, but its certainly becoming the most convenient option.

The Vertical Web & Saturated Markets (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44459787)

Heres my analysis of the vertical integration of consumer-based IT

http://nodemy.jit.su/post/VerticalStack

"The classic example is the American car industry which consolidated from 1500 companies since 1896 to today's Big Three (and the occasional glitch like Tesla). If we assume the IT industry is post-inflection, than we might also assume that vertical integration is occurring. The following spreadsheet is two hours of my time researching the Vertical Web, which I define as a set of categories from power production for data centers, to data centers, etc, up to consumer devices and software"

chromecast (0)

DragonTHC (208439) | about a year ago | (#44460551)

Now, with chromecast, you can play back your media on any display with an HDMI port.

ecosystems are becoming a thing of the past.

Re:chromecast (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44460615)

Now, with chromecast, you can play back your media on any display with an HDMI port.

ecosystems are becoming a thing of the past.

Google is still the ecosystem as you must have Chrome to utilize...

Re:chromecast (1)

non0score (890022) | about a year ago | (#44468297)

Uh, no? You have to use Chrome because not a lot of people support this device. That's way different from "locking you to Chrome". In other words, once people write programs to support it, then you don't need to rely on Google anymore (other than buying the device in the first place, of course).

microsoft is dead. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44460741)

microsoft is dead.

Amazon who? (1)

dkre (1115367) | about a year ago | (#44464435)

Amazon?

This really isn't in the picture for a lot people outside the US. And that's important in a discussion like this. Sure it may dominate a lot of the world, in so many places it is a brand we are aware of, we understand it's dominance, but we don't buy from it/use it's services.

An ecosystem can not live off the US and a small group of markets alone.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?