Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Apple Sells 1 Million Videos in Under 20 Days

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 8 years ago | from the more-reasons-not-to-leave-the-house dept.

Handhelds 478

olddotter writes "Apple has sold over 1 million videos through iTunes since the release of the Video iPod service. Personally I am surprised by this success, it raises many questions. Will this encourage more people to put their video content on the iTunes store? Is there a vast market for cheaper stuff at reduced prices? Why am I willing to pay more for music than I would for video?"

cancel ×

478 comments

videos have sound! (3, Insightful)

TimeSpeak (873865) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917637)

Well considering you don't have to acually watch the video. Why buy the song and video seperately?

Re:videos have sound! (5, Informative)

osssmkatz (734824) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917664)

To clarify, music videos include a seperate AAC file with just the song, as well as the video. Perhaps Apple's "Watch your music" campaign motivated some people? --Sam

Re:videos have sound! (1)

Coneasfast (690509) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917712)

i dont know what quality the video is, but i'm guessing video+audio has lossy audio?

Re:videos have sound! (4, Insightful)

nick_davison (217681) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917752)

$0.99 - Just the music.
$1.99 - Music and video.

For $30, given the choice between 30 great rock/metal tracks and 15 great ones with, yay, grungy guys running up and down a stage, I'd rather get twice the amount of music for my money and miss out on the bad videos. On the other hand, were Britney Spears more my thing, I'd likely want the videos, ideally without sound as, let's face it, her success was never about the music.

Plus there's the amount of drive space taken up. Granted videos aren't available for 80% of album tracks but I've already filled clear of 30mb with my own CD collection. Apple doesn't make an iPod big enough to rip an equivalent collection if videos were available too.

So, video's nice and all - espcially for some of the great music videos - but I'd rather save the drive space instead of having every last bland video.

Re:videos have sound! (1, Funny)

Gulthek (12570) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917767)

On the other hand, were Britney Spears more my thing, I'd likely want the videos, ideally without sound as, let's face it, her success was never about the music.

This is what happens when you recycle jokes from 1999.

Re:videos have sound! (4, Insightful)

silverkniveshotmail. (713965) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917764)

I think the one thing we can depend on when it comes to purchasing licenses is that the prices will never make sense.
like why is a full song on itunes that I can have on my computer, ipod, and CD player as long as i'd like (though only for a limited amount of burns) $0.99 while a 30-second clip on my cell phone (through spring) is $2.50 and deletes itself after 90-days

Re:videos have sound! (4, Insightful)

ankarbass (882629) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917848)

"while a 30-second clip on my cell phone (through spring) is $2.50 and deletes itself after 90-days"

Because that's what the market will bear! I just can't imagine what satisfaction one gets from buying a ring tone.

Re:videos have sound! (1)

silverkniveshotmail. (713965) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917906)

through SPRINT. sorry.

Re:videos have sound! (1)

wax66 (736535) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917859)

My personal reason... no cussing. I couldn't find a single video without censorship. Bah! If I can't hear the f-word a few times, what good is it? ;-)

More? (2, Insightful)

SavoWood (650474) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917639)

If they offered more than what they have, I imagine they would have made this point much faster. I would have bought stuff, but they didn't have any shows I actually wanted to see.

Re:More? (4, Interesting)

piecewise (169377) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917826)

I must tell you, I think iTunes is a great example of how it could change TV. I NEVER watched Lost (yes, I have cable -- digital cable with all the bells and whistles since it came with my apartment). But sure enough, I went on iTunes and for $1.99 I bought the premier... I was quickly sucked in, and my black 30gb iPod now has season one and all of what's available for season two. I'm hooked!

And frankly, I'm spending about the same as I would have for DVDs in the store. Season one of iTunes is $34.99 -- I saw it in Target for the same. And yes, per download I'm paying more for season two, but I'm also getting it instantly. Spread out over time, it's roughly the same.

I would have never gotten so into Lost without the iPod, so ABC is definitely right to say they're excited that this is a new way to reach a broader audience.

I'm just amazed how great that iPod video looks on a television. Granted, TVs are crap resolution, but even on my 32" Sony it looks great.

So if the iPod created a halo effect for the Mac, this iPod video will surely change the way we watch TV. It's already changed how I do.

Great! (4, Insightful)

SerpentMage (13390) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917642)

Now I wish that they would start selling the videos in stores OTHER THAN the US....

Re:Great! (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917709)

I've purchased videos and i'm in canada, so its not exclusive to the US, though some countries may be out of the loop. What store do you use?

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917710)

Like they are in the UK store, perchance?

Re:Great! (4, Insightful)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917786)

Now I wish that they would start selling the videos in stores OTHER THAN the US....

I actually think this is a good illustration of the fact that the copyright system is very broken. The theory of copyright is an author, band, producer, or artist creates a work and is granted exclusive rights to republish it. They generate money from selling copies, which encourages them to produce more works to make more money. One would then assume, if someone like Apple wanted to resell a song or TV show they would go to said band or producer, buy a license to redistribute it, and start offering it. This does not happen.

The reality of the situation is the producers of work almost inevitably have to give up that copyright to numerous parties in numerous countries since various organizations and cartels have monopolized all the popular distribution and advertising venues in a given territory. In order to distribute a work in multiple countries Apple (or any other retailer) has to contact hundreds of organizations, negotiate hundreds of licenses and evaluate hundreds of separate business cases. This leads to most works only being distributed in one given country and a very segregated market. It also leads to most artists making very little compared to the middle men with the cartel. How could the system have gotten this fucked up? This is exactly what the drafters of the original copyright laws in the U.S. were trying to avoid, since the printing house cartels were so detrimental in Europe. I guess greed and money eventually will corrupt any legal system.

Because... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917644)

"Why am I willing to pay more for music than I would for video?"

Shelf life - even the greatest video will probably only be played a few times at most, while you might listen to a song hundreds of times over the years.

Only if (1)

Gr8Apes (679165) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917820)

those songs are worth listening to, and not the fad hit of the day, or the target of ClearChannel as a new "hit".

Hot Damn (5, Interesting)

broody (171983) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917646)

Imagine if they had some content besides a few television shows and videos...

Re:Hot Damn (5, Interesting)

mysqlrocks (783488) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917713)

Imagine if they had some content besides a few television shows and videos...

That's exactly what they're trying to prove to the movie industry. Apple is demonstrating that it's possible to do the same thing it did with Music to Movies. And the movie industry will have the added benefit of being apple to skip right past the bulk of pirating (if they get they're heads out of the sand).

Re:Hot Damn (1)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917877)

I don't see this as making a major dent in "piracy", either amongst professionals or amongst your typical college student or other person with little money (but a computer and a fat pipe) casually downloading material.

However, what Apple is demonstrating and has demonstrated is that it is possible to reclaim millions and millions of dollars that would have been otherwise lost to casual downloading. They have been able to do this because they're savvy enough to understand that people download media for a variety of reasons and motivations, and they've honed in on convenience as a motivation (or desire) they can address. (Convenience = ease of use.)

Regardless, if the movie industry can get it's head out of it's (I think you misspelled ASS), it stands to add many millions to its bottom line. They can still (and probably will) go after "pirates" large and small, but it's in their own best interest to give the customer what the customer wants. I hope they wake up and smell the coffee.

first post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917648)

first post

troll (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917650)

troll

yeah but... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917652)


goatse.mov is hardly highbrow entertainment.

Perhaps... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917653)

Because music generally has more replay value than videos?

Oh the insanity! (4, Interesting)

LilGuy (150110) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917654)

I would DEFINATELY download TV episodes and movies for $1.99 ANYDAY over music tracks for $.99

Even when iTunes first came out I thought that was a bit pricey and that the price would eventually drop. Doesn't appear to be the case. But $1.99 for tv shows seems to be a good deal as long as they cut the commercials out, or at least most of them.

This could usher in a whole new era for TV, and I wouldn't miss cable or satellite one bit.

Re:Oh the insanity! (5, Insightful)

op12 (830015) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917693)

This could usher in a whole new era for TV, and I wouldn't miss cable or satellite one bit.

Which is exactly why it's only a matter of time before there's a huge backlash from these content distributors, much like the music industry is already against iTunes. Now, cable and satellite companies will be joining the fight. It's in their best interest to beat down this new method of content distribution for TV.

Re:Oh the insanity! (0, Troll)

garcia (6573) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917801)

Now, cable and satellite companies will be joining the fight. It's in their best interest to beat down this new method of content distribution for TV.

But the content providers and distributers are the same thing in the music industry. I don't see Radio and XM fighting with iTMS. I can't see Cable and Sat networks doing it either. The content providers (the Networks) have the say on what happens. What? Comcast and DirecTV are going to say "no, we won't show your content?" Give me a break, that's suicide.

Re:Oh the insanity! (2, Insightful)

peragrin (659227) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917856)

Apparently you didn't read the earlier article about the SBC exec. You should go read it. He is pissed about VOIP and other such things because it hurts his sense of money.

Or something to that effect.

Re:Oh the insanity! (1)

Kyeetza (927172) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917817)

"I would DEFINATELY download TV episodes and movies for $1.99 ANYDAY...."

I would DEFINATELY download TV episodes and movies that are much better resolution (better than ITMS's standard of 320x240) AND in formats other than ITMS's .H264 and MPEG-4 ANYDAY.... the catch is they would be for free ;)

Good deal? (1)

TrekkieGod (627867) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917847)

$1.99 for tv shows seems to be a good deal as long as they cut the commercials out, or at least most of them.

How is it a good deal? DVD for the complete first season of Lost: at Amazon [amazon.com] . According to the details for the DVD, that's 24 episodes. 24 * $1.99 = $47.76. So you're paying more for the privilege of downloading episodes the day after they air, instead of waiting for the DVD to come out.

Not only that, but the episodes you download are 320x200, much less than DVD res. Plus, you don't get all the extras like the commentaries.

I think it's great that they're offering the episodes to download, but no way that's a "good deal." I'd be all over it if it cost me $0.50 or less, but $1.99 is way, waaay too much.

Re:Oh the insanity! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917870)


This could usher in a whole new era for TV.


Not really. (self goes and looks at the TV shows avaialble through Apple) Just as I thought. $1.99 and nothing's on.

Christopher Walken Effect (5, Funny)

tbone1 (309237) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917655)

And the #1 music video for practically every day was Fatboy Slim's "Weapon of Choice", featuring Chirstopher Walken. "I'm a hoofah at heart!"

Something tells me that Kevin Pollak is owed a royalty somewhere.

Re:Christopher Walken Effect (5, Funny)

Elwood P Dowd (16933) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917795)

Dunno why Kevin Pollak is particularly responsible for Christopher Walken's dancing celebrity. Christopher Walken has been doing excellent Christopher Walken impersonations for most of his career.

Re:Christopher Walken Effect (1)

tbone1 (309237) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917882)

Dunno why Kevin Pollak is particularly responsible for Christopher Walken's dancing celebrity.

Once when Pollak was on The Bob and Tom Show, [bobandtom.com] he did a dead-on Christopher Walken that is 1) hysterical and 2) re-played with regularity. Pollak is hilarious and dead-on with this imitation, and having heard it, you don't forget it. Also, Bob and Tom can have a slashdot-like effect since they are a national radio show with a big audience.

Now lets get some real videos (3, Insightful)

rouge86 (608370) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917659)

I think that Apple may be using this to show that the MPAA can make some real money on selling videos from iTunes. Now, I just want all the videos that I would usually buy on DVD to be sold from iTunes.

Re:Now lets get some real videos (1)

shotfeel (235240) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917730)

For TV shows, I can see it. For videos I would usually buy on DVD? Not with that video quality. As mentioned on arstechnica.com, Apple could possibly make a bundle with some of the older TV shows. I'm sure just about everyone can think of a series or two that's no longer airing and not available on DVD that they'd love to see once again.

Re:Now lets get some real videos (1)

malchus842 (741252) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917768)

I think that Apple may be using this to show that the MPAA can make some real money on selling videos from iTunes.

And the MPAA will, like the RIAA before it, along with the content providers, begin demanding larger and larger cuts and higher and higher prices.

They can't imagine a world where they can't rape the consumer.

Front Row integration? (5, Interesting)

mccalli (323026) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917667)

A question for anyone with a new iMac G5 who has also bought a video from the music store. Do these videos integrate with Front Row [apple.com] at all?

It's my (utterly unsubstantiated) belief that Front Row will appear in iLife 06, and that then a Mac Mini playing these videos on a TV will start to make quite a lot of sense.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Front Row integration? (1)

fribhey (731586) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917743)

i don't have front row but yes they do integrate with it. Jobs showed a demonstration of it in his announcement of the video store and front row.

Re:Front Row integration? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917755)

The resolution for the TV shows is currently very low. It'll be crap on a real TV.

Re:Front Row integration? (2, Informative)

Ravnsgaard (878623) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917790)

According to Steve's demo: Yes, absolutely

I don't think it will last (3, Insightful)

P3NIS_CLEAVER (860022) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917672)

once the gadget whores have filled their video ipods up, they will move onto something else

Re:I don't think it will last (5, Funny)

meatflower (830472) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917811)

Oh yeah...just like those MP3 player things. What a fad! Once those "gadget whores" filled em up they just tossed em aside...good thing they're not around anymore!

Re:I don't think it will last (0, Troll)

P3NIS_CLEAVER (860022) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917869)

I have an mp3 player but then again I am not a gadget whore. I have hundreds of CDs so an mp3 player was a good investment. Video ipod would be cool if you could suck video out of your tivo, but your pretty much stuck with whatever apple provides for you. And you have to pay for it.

Could we possibly ask any more questions? (4, Funny)

matt me (850665) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917674)

Will it be possible for comments to continue this decaying monologue of uncertainty and doubt? Will I be surprised? Should all comments not related to the article but the amusing questioning dialogue be posted herein?

Re:Could we possibly ask any more questions? (1)

cbreaker (561297) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917776)

Yea, I know it. A lot of the article-posts these days end with something like that. "Is this the end of the automobile?" "Is my dream of reaching space going to come true?" It's pretty annoying.

Please educate me, iTunes video buyers (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917677)

Why would you want to watch a music video or a TV show on a tiny screen? Is it really that enjoyable? I just don't get it.

Re:Please educate me, iTunes video buyers (5, Insightful)

jmelloy (460671) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917705)

Because most tv shows are 90% dialog.

Because you can use it on a train or airplane.

Because when you connect it to a TV it's fine.

Because you can pull something out of your pocket and show it to your friends.

Re:Please educate me, iTunes video buyers (2, Funny)

perdelucena (455667) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917720)

Small video screen, less space than nomad, lame!

Re:Please educate me, iTunes video buyers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917887)

I think what most are missing here is that you don't need a video iPod for these. I keep a few shows on the laptop for long car rides with the kids. It hooks up to the TV for family viewing. I'll pay for hard to find shows or missed episodes. Heck, Apple should go one step further and hook serialized videos into iTunes postcasting subscriptions ... bulk discount anyone? I'd pay for that instead of subsidising 99% of the other crap on cable these days.

vintage videos (4, Informative)

rkhalloran (136467) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917680)

somebody posted this [mp3newswire.net] last week about making old 50s shows available for cheap. Sounds promising to me as a way of preserving the early days of TV. Heck, I'd pay a buck for old Zachary creature features.

Re:vintage videos (2, Interesting)

tgibbs (83782) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917783)

somebody posted this [mp3newswire.net] last week about making old 50s shows available for cheap. Sounds promising to me as a way of preserving the early days of TV. Heck, I'd pay a buck for old Zachary creature features.

I think that this is an ideal use of the medium. When you watch Lost or Desperate Housewives on iTunes or iPod, you are giving up the beautiful HD of the broadcast (or the torrent, if you prefer). But these old TV shows will lose little on the tiny screen. For some, it might even bring back fond memories of sitting across the room from a small-screen TV.

Re:vintage videos (3, Interesting)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917901)

somebody posted this last week about making old 50s shows available for cheap.

It will happen eventually. I don't know if you've seen them yet, but many stores are now carrying the $1.00 DVDs of many old shows. Everything from episodes of Laurel and Hardy to Rocky Jones Space Ranger (you've got to see this show, even just for the comedic effect) are now appearing on the shelves.

However, I have a feeling that it will be a while before they show up on iTunes. Jobs doesn't want to make the same mistake as MovieLink [movielink.com] and find himself in the position of *only* selling old shows. Once iTunes is established a way of distributing new content, only then will Jobs allow for virtual reruns.

But.... (1)

Lurk3r (786010) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917681)

Is it availiable in China?

Re:But.... (1)

josephdrivein (924831) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917836)

No, and it's not because of the Great Chinese firewall, since, guess what, there's no Apple music store in China. I wonder, would they filter it if it was available? Probably they would becouse of its "anti-socialist" culture.

Doesn't Seem Like Alot (4, Insightful)

OctoberSky (888619) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917682)

Is this alot of videos? I mean, is this more or less than the number of video iPods sold. If its alot less than thats no great feat, if its double, well thats not a great feat either. Even if Apple was pocketing the whole $1.99 thats only 1.99 million dollars. That's not news by Apples standards.

Also, anyone know the number of songs sold that week?

Re:Doesn't Seem Like Alot (1)

OctoberSky (888619) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917718)

I said "that week" I meant "that 20 days"

Sorry.

Re:Doesn't Seem Like Alot (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917864)

Selling a million of almost ANYTHING in twenty days is pretty damn good.

Re:Doesn't Seem Like Alot (2, Informative)

aDSF762 (865834) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917892)

$99,500 a minute ain't too shabby.

Well, duh... (4, Insightful)

Pope (17780) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917683)

Why am I willing to pay more for music than I would for video?

Because music has far more inherent replay value than video.

Everytime some slashdork bitches about how a CD costs $20 for 60 minutes while a DVD costs $20 for 120 minutes or more and what a ripoff a CD is, I want to slap them silly; the two things have nothing in common other than size and shape. Unless you're some obsessive weirdo, I doubt you'll watch the same movie a couple of times a week right after buying it like most people do with an album.

Re:Well, duh... (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917895)

Because music has far more inherent replay value than video.

The opportunity isn't there. Maybe if my car had a DVD player that let me listen to the audio without being distracted by the video I'd give it more replay time. Give me the audio and I can remember the video. There isn't as much socially acceptable time to have one's eyes directed to a video screen showing entertainment than there is for one's ears.

Some people have way too much $$$ to waste... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917684)

I'm let down that so many people have paid $1.99 for horribly DRM crippled low res content that just a short while ago, was free. (Pixar shorts and music vids)

I guess the old saying is right, there's a sucker born...

I'd pay $1.99 for 2 files, one that was iPod friendly and a 2nd I could burn to DVD (higher res, less DRM crap) via iMovie and iDVD. Until then, not going to be an Apple Video customer. Period.

A season of Lost on iTMS is just slightly less than a DVD set... Give me a fscking break!

I'm depressed about this.. I wanted this to flop so that Apple and the studios would be forced to give us more content, higher res, and less DRM... And I'm an Apple shareholder!

Never underestimate the power of stupid people in groups.

About 500,00 suckers have ruined it for the rest of us I think.

Re:Some people have way too much $$$ to waste... (1)

MrAndrews (456547) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917842)

I wasn't convinced that you'd be able to find enough people to buy videos at $1.99 each, especially at that low resolution. I figured the fact that Apple hadn't announced any stats for two weeks meant that they'd failed miserably and would be re-thinking the pricing/quality issues. And now this.

It probably won't make CBS, Fox, NBC or the other networks join in, but this kind of response will help fiendish web videographers get financing for their projects. Everything you could possibly imagine will be produced, just to cash in on the hopefully-will-be craze.

I apologize in advance for the further decay of Western Civilization.

Re:Some people have way too much $$$ to waste... (1)

blackmonday (607916) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917894)

I'm a Lost fan, but I missed last week's episode because I moved and my Tivo was offline. How do I catch-up? This is perfect for me. I don't need to buy or rent the DVDs for 1 measly episode. And, I'd have to wait for the end of the season to get that anyway. Bittorent? Never seems to work for me, and hey this iTunes method is legal. I'm so tired of the "It doesn't work for ME! It's not good enough!" posts. It *is* good enough. They sold a million in less than a month. They don't need to go out of their way to please a minority of customers.

Hmm... (5, Insightful)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917896)

I'm depressed about this.. I wanted this to flop so that Apple and the studios would be forced to give us more content, higher res, and less DRM... And I'm an Apple shareholder!

Because, up until now, the studios had given us so much full-quality digital non-DRM encumbered content?

Please.

When they were already providing essentially *no* content, how would the first major commercial offering of such a service flopping "force" them to provide *more* content?

Further, you think that they'll provide content with "less" DRM? (Are you implying you'll accept DRM, if there's "less" of it? Or do you really mean no DRM? Because if that's what you mean, you'll NEVER get it.)

As to higher res, there's a problem here other than the content providers or Apple. And it's just a little one called "bandwidth". Before you go off telling me that you want to download your 1080i movies, even H.264 compressed, please explain how, even on the highest bandwidth home broadband connections generally available in the US, a 6 hour download jibes with Apple's strategy.

Never underestimate of the power of stupid anonymous coward posts on Slashdot.

Surprised? (1)

Da3vid (926771) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917685)

The iPod has become trendy, even fashionable. The company and the individual product have a large following. Were you surprised that the X-Box was successful? Granted, the surprise is caused by short term success. I guess the term I would give is impressive. I live near a college campus and I've heard a good bit of buzz from the students about the video iPod. I think Apple will fair much better with portable video than Sony did with its PSP. (Come on, 40 dollars for some of the UMD movies?!?)

Its a strong company with a strong following. When a decent device is offered in an area that hasn't yet had a good device to take the spotlight, I think this kind of response, though large, is reasonable.

-Da3vid-

Re:Surprised? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917853)

Ah typical Sony stab from /. Can Video iPod play games? as for $40 dollar UMD, Where do you live? here in Canada they are half that price. That also doesn't change the fact there is still a market for UMD movies, it's not for everyone but if you travel or have kids it's not a bad deal. If UMD movies fail it has no bearing on the handheld what so ever, it's not like any other handheld doesn't use it's own proprietary media (Where else will you get 1.8gb of data for cheap besides a $200 2gig flash), but it does serve as a good Bitch outlet for antis.. And to be fair the PSP has video capabilities, it's not the main selling feature. But it might be more of an option with Sony bundling 1 gig flash this christmas season.

You're surprised? (5, Insightful)

American AC in Paris (230456) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917686)

How can you be surprised by the success of the video iPod when there are enough people out there willing to pay money to change how their telephone sounds when it rings that it has become a $300 million-a-year business?

In the world of wasting yer money on stupid, ephemeral stuff for digital gizmos, video on iPod doesn't even make it to the semifinals; at least you get to watch a 40-minute, commercial-free TV show for your cash.

Be surprised that we're so happy to part with our money for valueless things, perhaps--but don't be surprised that the iPod video is successful at this game...

Re:You're surprised? (4, Informative)

fiddlesticks (457600) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917797)

>it has become a $300 million-a-year business

Go higher, and try between $1 and $3.3 Billion - worldwide.

Music (0, Redundant)

rampant mac (561036) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917689)

"Why am I willing to pay more for music than I would for video?"

Just my opinion, but music has a MUCH higher replay value than videos or movies. I *love* the movie Se7en, but I only watch it once every 2 or 3 months. I listen to a bunch of the music I bought from the iTMS every day on my way to and from work.

pay more for music (4, Informative)

frovingslosh (582462) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917691)

Why am I willing to pay more for music than I would for video?

I guess pretty much for the same reason that you are willing to pay more for a movie sound track CD than for the DVD of the movie itself. The RIAA has kept the prices artifically high and you go along with it.

Quality (1)

kevin_conaway (585204) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917695)

How is the quality of these things? Would one be able to watch these episodes on a normal television?

Please take my money. (3, Interesting)

QuantumPion (805098) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917702)

Well now that a company is offering a completely legal and conveniant service, I am perfectly willing to pay for it. When there is nothing on TV, I would love nothing more then to be able to quickly download an episode for a past show that I havn't seen before without having to go through the various bit torrent sites.

Price of video vs. music (1)

tgibbs (83782) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917707)

Why am I willing to pay more for music than I would for video?

I don't find this at all surprising. Perhaps a better way to think about it is the cost per hour, averaged over the entire period of ownership. People may watch a video a few times if they really like it, but listen to a favorite album dozens or even hundreds of times.

Because (3, Funny)

Digital Vomit (891734) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917711)

Why am I willing to pay more for music than I would for video?"

Because you're an idiot. Next question?

sure why not (2, Insightful)

FadedTimes (581715) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917715)

Will this encourage more people to put their video content on the iTunes store?
Of course it will. There is a market for video content; people will see this is another avenue of making money, getting more exposure, etc.
Why am I willing to pay more for music than I would for video?
People will listen to a popular song many times a day. People don't do the same with TV/movies. The entertainment value of most TV shows and movies is gone after 1 viewing. The entertainment value of music seems to carry on much longer.

Comparing song sales vs. video sales (5, Interesting)

rsborg (111459) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917721)

  1. iTMS store opening sold 1 million songs in a week, not 20 days.
  2. However, video selection is MUCH more limtied than song selection when iTMS opened.
  3. Also, video probably assumes the purchase of a newer (video) iPod, since I doubt many people are downloading these to watch on their computer/tv.

So what does this mean? Who knows, but it seems as if the videos are really damn popular. I'd kill, however, to see which ones were more popular than others...

I think what'd be the real killer app for mobile video would be shorts like comedy, commercials, trailers, etc.

Apple are you listening? Use what you have already, most movies push trailers, and most commercial creators would DIE to get their bits on the iPod, and there're some totally awesome commercials that are pieces of art in their own right! Imagine a vid-cast of bits from The Daily Show, or a 5 minute part of a standup routine, too.. great for showing people at lunch/etc.

Re:Comparing song sales vs. video sales (1)

oberondarksoul (723118) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917789)

Apple are you listening?

No doubt Apple are already in discussions to get all sorts of content up on the iTMS - it all depends on whether the various movie/television/etc. companies are willing to give the nod. Unless they can rope more distributors on board, they're relatively stuck. It all rests with the distributors.

Here's what would help it be even more successful: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917728)

One of the things I loved when MP3s became popular was to rediscover older songs. Not just the new stuff, but stuff from my childhood. The pop songs that were big when I was growing up, the theme music to the TV shows I loved as a kid. The kind of stuff you couldn't buy because no one was selling it.

Well, let's get all the classic TV shows up in iTunes and I'll definitely buy some videos. I'd love to have a few Get Smart, Gilligan Island, and the like. Have the Best Of... type of collections. When the studios release their library of stuff that isn't on syndication any more, or even Nick at Nite, it'll open up a big market for nostalgia buys.

Heres Why (2, Insightful)

Gotung (571984) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917732)

"Why am I willing to pay more for music than I would for video?"

Because video is typically only viewed a few times. Music has much more longevity. You get much more in the long run out of a $1 song then you do a $1 video.

It's a show horse (1)

Swift2001 (874553) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917737)

There's a lot of independent producers who want to market limited-market videos, but they can't use the store yet. There's a lot of podcasters and the like offering free video. This, however, is a demo for the other studios: See, Sony, Universal, etc.? Watch the cash flow, and get in on the ground floor with Disney. I think it's a crappy format for all but a few movies. A romantic comedy, maybe. A TV drama shot largely in closeup, okay. But try to watch a spectacular on this screen. Yuck. No, my bet is that shows up to an hour will sell well.

This is what I've been waiting for (4, Interesting)

JudgeFurious (455868) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917748)

Once the content gets in there I'll be buying video from iTunes. That is assuming of course that the prices stay close to what I'm seeing right now. This fits in good with my desire to buy seasons worth of some shows on DVD but only a handful of episodes where other shows are concerned.

  I look at South Park, Dead Like Me, and my Battlestar Galactica fix and I say "Buy the season on DVD". My wife wants Buffy the Vampire Slayer seasons 1-6 and DVD is the way to go.

  I look at Star Trek Deep Space 9 and I say "Got to get me some DVD's.....HOLY SHIT CAN YOU BELIEVE WHAT PARAMOUNT WANTS FOR THAT? MIGHTY PROUD OF THE STAR TREK AREN'T WE GUYS?"

  Then I think about it and there probably weren't 10 episodes of DS9 I really want anyway. Maybe 10 if I push it. 20 bucks for those 10 episodes and screw the rest of it because it wasn't all that good anyway? I'm in.

  Of course IF Paramount ever lets them sell episodes of Star Trek (and flavor) on iTunes they'll probably demand that they sell for $9.99 each or some insane amount of money that will screw the whole deal up anyway.

SBC CEO Edward Witacre will want a piece (-1, Offtopic)

metoc (224422) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917757)

of this action as well.

Video iPods? (0, Flamebait)

Trogre (513942) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917758)

But how many of those downloads are going to video iPods?

I wonder if most of those downloads are actually going on iRivers...

Not surprised at all (2, Insightful)

CrazyTalk (662055) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917760)

This is such a new technology/distribution medium, and iPods have such a big market share, that I'm sure they could find a million people to spend 2 bucks just to try the thing out and see what it is like. I dont even have a video iPod, but was thinking of buying an episode of "Lost" to watch on my Mac since 1. I've never seen it on regular TV and 2. was curious about download speed, picture quality etc.

prices (1)

PresidentEnder (849024) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917792)

I paid $40 for Firefly on DVD after seeing Serenity. Granted, the stuff available for the iPod video is no Firefly, but consider: people are willing to shell out a hundred bucks a season for the Star Trek DVD sets, perhaps $40 for That 70s Show or something similar. That works out to a bit more than $1.99 an episode, especially for Star Trek and Firefly. The DVDs have special features, but I don't care about them; they have DRM, of course, and that does bother me. The portability, price, and not having to drive to the store make the iPod video seem worthwhile to me.

If only I was willing to buy an apple product and be a clone of everyone else.

Why don't they partner with MTV networks? (1)

British (51765) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917796)

MTV has been sitting on a mountain of music videos for ages that haven't been played.

VH1 Classic sure seems to have a lot of videos. Why don't you encode & sell them? I would have been more than happy to have paid for Josie Cotton's "Jimmy loves marianne" instead of requesting it & waiting to tape it(I eventually got it from p2p networks).

Let me guess, tied up in royalties and such?

Fine then, I'll just scoot around it by going back to Soulseek.

Re:Why don't they partner with MTV networks? (1)

Tankko (911999) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917838)

MTV and VH1 don't own those videos. They just have the rights to broadcast them. The record label (or in some rare cases the artist) owns the rights. That is who will have to license them to iTunes.

Obligatory (1)

Orrin Bloquy (898571) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917798)

...but does it play pr0n?

Suckers wanted! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917800)


Apple zealots and their money part easily.

Video (0, Redundant)

certel (849946) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917808)

You can bet that they will increase prices.

-1 Sour Grapes (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917844)

Since I personally do not identify with this product, I can't see it as anything but a fad type of thing. Anything Apple sells is an instant initial success... [aboyandhiscomputer.com] especially lately. But at least iPod, just like all portable music players, have long had an established market... it's just newer technology to deliver the same end. Video is something relatively new. We have actually had the ability to create and use portable video devices for a very long time. Most of the smaller Mini-DV camcorders have a large enough screen to work to that end. It hasn't had enough market demand to drive the creation of such devices. And portable TVs are largely the same -- remember those "Bentley" branded miniature TVs that ended up as give-aways in sales promotions? How about the plethora of similar devices once for sale at Radio Shack?

This is not a product they should have made. If it is largely successful for longer than a month or two after Christmas, I will be VERY surprised. iPods are good. The video thing is a fad that won't last long... that's my prediction anyway.

As sung before... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13917865)

The Internet Is Good (For Porn)

Sales (2, Informative)

JonN (895435) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917866)

Really, there is no downside with the way Apple has handled the beginning of a transition into video. It seems unlikely that anyone planning to purchase an iPod would say, "wait a minute, I get a bigger, much better screen, larger storage, and thinner iPod for the same money as the old iPod--no way, I don't want that." Even if you exclude video capability, the new iPod has other features alone which might have ticked up the numbers. So, its hardly a surprise that Apple is happy with the results. I hope Apple is able to announce, before Thanksgiving, some big deal with at least one studio, for more content (e.g. Warner Bros., Paramount, etc.) which will include real movies. That will be the kicker for outstanding sales of the video iPod for Christmas.

Shiny new toy... (4, Funny)

thesandbender (911391) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917874)

I'd say a full half of the gadgets I buy are shiny, new and fun... for the first month. Then they're relegated to "eBay" pile. I'll be more interested in seeing how their sales fare in six months when having the latest teenage singer shaking her bottom in your hand is no longer enough to make you the "cool guy/gal" in school. I tried video on my iPAQ and trust me, there are better, more entertaining ways to go blind. Speaking which, time to go shave my palms.

What it actually will make happen (3, Insightful)

Dexter77 (442723) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917880)

It's very common these days that good series are cancelled in middle of a season. iTunes TV-series sales will make a change to that. When new series launches in the USA, it only has about 300 million potential viewers, but when the same show launces on iTunes, it has about two billion potential viewers.

Many people don't yet even realize what this might do to the industry. There will become more and more scifi series, because TV-companies don't have to rely on US Scifi fans only. And that's just the beginning. Soon you'll able to order tv-series like you order magazines now. Fans might even start to have their own tailored episodes or even whole series.

I'll sincerely welcome iTunes. It will change the industry - mark my words. Difference to other Video-on-demand services is that iTunes is 'the standard'. It's safe to buy there and you don't have to worry about having to deal with some strange proprietary DRM software.

That's why! (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917890)

Why am I willing to pay more for music than I would for video? I suspect if you were willing to put up with several interruptions in the middle of each song for commercials, the music would be cheaper too.

Music $ Video $ (2, Insightful)

jhouserizer (616566) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917904)


Why am I willing to pay more for music than I would for video?

Because most of us can only stand to watch the best of videos three times at the most, but can listen to the best of songs hundreds of times.

Old shows (1)

Paradise Pete (33184) | more than 8 years ago | (#13917905)

I think what will really take off are old TV shows. A lot of content that had no viable market can now be dusted off and made available at a low price. It might even lead to a resurgence, and give shows that were good but never found an audience a chance to bloom.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...