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!

Netflix and iTunes Rentals Aiming At Different Crowds

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the i-like-the-part-where-i'm-not-paying-for-24-hours-of-use dept.

Movies 166

Engadget notes an article in the New York Times discussing the substantially different markets that Netflix and Apple's movie rentals are aiming for. The site views the loosening of Netflix streaming restrictions as a reaction motivated entirely by the iTunes movie rental announcement, but beyond that the two services seem to have little connection. From Engadget's observations: "After speaking with Netflix's Reed Hastings, it was found that the vast majority of its streamable content was 'older,' and considering that users of this service can never look forward to brand new releases being available, the cost (i.e. free to most mail-in subscribers) makes sense. As for Apple, it's able to focus on crowds who are looking for a more robust, generally fresher selection, but of course, you'll pay the premium each time you indulge. Furthermore, Netflix has yet to make transferring video to any display / device other than your monitor easy, and while an LG set top box is indeed on the horizon, the differences in content selection are still likely to lure separate eyes."

cancel ×

166 comments

Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (4, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 6 years ago | (#22080952)

The problem with AppleTV and this revolutionary new service is that, for some time, I've already had a device that lets me rent new movies via the internet (even *gasp* HD movies) and watch them on my TV. It's called an "Xbox 360." It even comes with the bonus features of letting me play videogames and chat with my friends.

Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (2, Interesting)

Major Blud (789630) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081008)

I've been hoping that Netflix would release a "Watch Instantly" plug-in for the Xbox, or at least a module for Windows Media Center that my Xbox would use as an extender. Although Netflix Watch Instantly is very cool and works well, I still think they need to get more material available....but I really can't complain since it's free with my current plan.

Threadjack (1)

Corwn of Amber (802933) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082828)

Some day, a Chinese or Indian company will buy storage in monstrous quantities, convert all media available so far to digital, set up an all-you-can-watch non-DRMed service, and ask $5/month for it. It will be able to authenticate over a browser or a device. It will stream in the highest possible quality for everyone. Lack of bandwidth is a technical problem with the technical solution of "More Fiber" or "Mesh Network For Everyone", so that won't be an issue by the time someone with the money and balls to deliver ALL MEDIA UNRESTRICTED TO EVERYONE does Just That. It's impossible to set up as long as copyright exists, thus copyright will disappear. Because WE ALL WANT ALL MEDIA ALL FREE. At LEAST all media whose right holders either are dead or have been repaid their investment several times over.

Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (4, Informative)

p0tat03 (985078) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081114)

I've got a 360, and it really doesn't do it for me, the movie and messaging components that is. Movie selection is piss poor, the device is hellishly loud, and messaging is buggy and crashy. Just signing into Messenger causes my device to hang for up to a minute! Ludicrous. The movie and messaging components of Xbox 360 are merely functional, they are not easy to use.

Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (1)

EggyToast (858951) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081402)

It's also more expensive than an AppleTV. Maybe the social networking stuff is worth it to some people, but at least Apple TV is cross platform (via iTunes). Now they just need a linux release of iTunes.

Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (2, Insightful)

stefanlasiewski (63134) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081830)

Now they just need a linux release of iTunes.

They should remove the AppleTV dependency (lock-in) on iTunes, and let me browse my network folder via alternate method. I know this will never happen, because most of Apple's products try to direct people to the iTunes/iTMS revenue stream.

The AppleTV is a cool looking device, but I don't want to be dependent on iTunes, especially for $229. iTunes is a horrible music organizer.

Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (2, Informative)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082090)

So hack it. I currently have an XBMC, but I'm eyeing an AppleTV for my next rev of hardware (and maybe by then XBMC will even be stable on linux which runs on Apple TV)

http://wiki.awkwardtv.org/wiki/Mount_a_Remote_Drive_via_NFS [awkwardtv.org]
http://wiki.awkwardtv.org/wiki/Mount_a_Remote_Drive_via_SMBFS [awkwardtv.org]

Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22082082)

No they just need a web interface, then they can stop worrying about supporting minority OSes and disabled users.

Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (5, Informative)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081300)

Right now I'm using an Xbox 360 for exactly the same purpose. However, it only "works good enough" for me because I have the patience and know-how to get the most out of my Xbox. Aside from games and a built-in (but NOISY) DVD player, Apple TV has the following things going for it over Xbox 360:

-Your purchases get backed up to iTunes on your PC. It annoys me to no end that every other week or so I have to delete shows I've paid for because you can't back up programming to your computer.

-Your purchases are denominated in actual currency, not "Microsoft Points." Enough said on that point.

-Built-in video podcast browsing...once the software update hits Apple TV, of course. There is no straightforward way to watch these on Xbox 360. There is a lot of good, free, legal programming out there (Web Drifter, Diggnation, Stranger Things, NASA). With the 360, you need either the Zune software, Miro or iTunes to aggregate the podcasts. In the 2 latter cases, you then need a UPNP/DLNA server to serve the videos out to the 360.

-Better video support. The 360 plays H.264 videos (my DVD rips) just fine...however, Windows Media Player does not catalogue them into my library. I should not have to hack my registry to force it to do so. Importantly, I should not have to rely upon 3rd party software (TVersity) to serve out such videos. The other way to do it is to download Microsoft's Zune software, which natively catalogues H.264...one hell of a way to run a company, Microsoft, no consistency across the board and every step is taken to lock me in, which results in crippled hardware.

Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (1)

Tibor the Hun (143056) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081368)

Your purchases get backed up to iTunes on your PC. It annoys me to no end that every other week or so I have to delete shows I've paid for because you can't back up programming to your computer.
Seriously!?
Microsoft doesn't have the vision to connect the XBOX to the computer on the same network using their own software????
Holy crap, what kind of idiots are running their divisions?
3 Stooges on Schlitz?

Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22081834)

3 Stooges on Schlitz?
that's a good description of them.

other differences (1)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083476)

Apple offers the following
1) no subsciption fee, it's pay as you go
2) HD movies
3) Works with any TV not just the LG
4) works with your music collection too
5) But the big one is that apple could turn this into a peer to peer distribution model. The central point of distribution model works for a while but eventually it's going to saturate delivery (all those shared cable connections) and require massive server rooms. Peer to peer can work around the edges.

People were dissapointed with mac world cause the "air" seems kinda of a specialized offering for bussiness travelers with multiple computers. (no ethernet? just wi fi?) But the stealth big news was that appleTV which gained 1) HD 2) stand alone access to the Itunes store, 3) (soon) thousands of new releases available quickly. 4) priced less than tivo 5) as good as HBO/showtime/movie on demand but with no subscription fee.

Right now appleTV seems like "Less space than a nomad, LAme" like they said about the ipod, but a year from now people will be saying wow apple did it again my cracking a market that had stumped everyone with the right combination of hardware, software, and simplification. The only glitch I forsee is the studios may try to ask too high of a prices fearing an apple monopoly.

Re:Exactly what is new about AppleTV? (3, Insightful)

littleshadow (1221938) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082990)

Apples and Oranges... I have both.

I purchased the 360 the night it came out. In June, it was moved to the "game room" when I purchased an Elite and an HD-DVD drive. I then received an AppleTV as a gift in July (yes, life is hard). So far, I've downloaded (or rather attempted to download) two movies on the 360. The experience was frustrating to put it mildly. I honostly find downloading via P2P, converting and burning a less stressful way to go. I have purchased a few HD-DVDs but the volume of the fans on the 360 is absurd when your trying to watch a movie.

The AppleTV, on the other hand, easily competes with DirectTV for my eyeballs. As the cliche goes, "it just works". That said, I can definitely sympathize with people turned off by the iTunes requirement. But that's the absolute, if not understated, beauty of this update. Sure, the ability to rent movies will be nice but the real, and apparently much overlooked, change is that the AppleTV will now connect directly to the internet to obtain content. No more iTunes.

I still think the 360 is #1 for gaming but it's just not in the same game as the AppleTV for movies.

Netflix is different than Apple... (3, Insightful)

CF4L (1072112) | more than 6 years ago | (#22080976)

Netflix did an excellent job of separating themselves from Apple. They didn't punish their current subscribers by charging them extra for this service (as Apple did for iPod touch owners with the new apps).

Re:Netflix is different than Apple... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22081072)

Also, Netflix tends to focus more on the heterosexual market.

Re:Netflix is different than Apple... (2, Insightful)

porcupine8 (816071) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081084)

They only include it "for free" so that they don't have to give a discount to those of us who can't use the streaming service b/c we're not using Windows.

Re:Netflix is different than Apple... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22081152)

"They only include it "for free" so that they don't have to give a discount to those of us who can't use the streaming service b/c we're not using Windows."
Dumbest post ever. Congrats, you win. I suppose that if you could use the streaming service but your DVD player was broken, you'd get a discount, right?

Re:Netflix is different than Apple... (1)

porcupine8 (816071) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082830)

No, I wouldn't. Just like I don't get a discount this way. Any more easy questions?

Btw, it's not like I really begrudge them this fact. Obviously, I think the DVD-only service is worth what I pay for it, or I'd stop paying for it. But I do think that one of the reasons they've structured it the way they do is so that they don't have to deal with the question of whether or not a particular subscriber is "getting all the services they paid for."

Re:Netflix is different than Apple... (3, Insightful)

adamstew (909658) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082034)

there is FREE software going out to all current gen iPods (including the touch) to enable the rental ability with them.

What was not free was the additional apps (maps, stocks, weather, mail, etc.) Those are going to be included in future shipments for free, but current shipments they have to charge something because of accounting reasons...same reason they had to charge for the 802.11n in the macs that had the hardware but not the software to use the 802.11n standard.

iPhone and Apple TV get the software updates for free because they accounted the revenue for those devices differently than they do regular iPods and macs, so they are able to add additional features for free.

netflix didn't have to do this because netflix has no hardware (yet). They are just adding additional services to their subscription model in order to be more competitive.

Either way, it's not apple trying to screw customers out of money for updates...if they were, they would rather you bought a new iPod touch to get the additional features, rather than a moderately priced upgrade.

Re:Netflix is different than Apple... (2, Insightful)

mikeboone (163222) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082186)

Didn't they charge $2 for that 802.11n update? $20 is more like a for-profit venture than an accounting technicality. Since they're charging $20 to update iPod Touches (mine is like 3 weeks old for Pete's sake), I will be astonished if the forthcoming SDK is free or even remotely affordable for independent developers.

Re:Netflix is different than Apple... (1)

asilentthing (786630) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083202)

Didn't they charge $2 for that 802.11n update? $20 is more like a for-profit venture than an accounting technicality.

True. And for an update that costs them zero to put out. Those apps have worked for the iPod touch since its release - just ask everyone with a jailbroken touch. I would wager it more a strategic move, since those apps could've been included in the first place at no extra cost.

Re:Netflix is different than Apple... (1)

LotsOfPhil (982823) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082764)

but current shipments they have to charge something because of accounting reasons...same reason they had to charge for the 802.11n in the macs that had the hardware but not the software to use the 802.11n standard.

Riiight... because Apple is such a stickler for proper accounting. [reuters.com]

it's a joke, laugh

My Evil Plan of Convergence (2, Interesting)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 6 years ago | (#22080986)

Netflix for movies (ripped & streamed to Apple TV). iTunes for video podcasts & TV shows (which I'm more impulsive about). Although I'll probably try out some HD movies from iTunes, since I'm not ready to commit to BluRay or HDDVD at this point.

TV shows (3, Insightful)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#22080998)

As I've said before, the Netflix service isn't too great for new movies (as this article points out), but it is wonderful for older TV shows (and some newer ones). Now that they've lifted the time limits, I'll be sitting down and watching tons of old shows. Full seasons of Alfred Hitchcock Presents, Amazing Stories (well, the first season at least), and tons and tons of BBC stuff (Doctor Who and Red Dwarf, anyone?). I saw that they recently added Dexter Season 1. Hopefully they'll be putting up Season 2 of that soon, too. Perfect timing, too, since it's the middle of Winter and there's nothing new on TV due to the writers strike.

Re:TV shows (1)

darjen (879890) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081424)

As I've said before, the Netflix service isn't too great for new movies

I haven't found too much of a problem with newly released DVDs. Sometimes you have to wait a day or two, but it's not that big of a deal for me. I don't even bother with Cable TV anymore because Netflix is more than good enough for entertainment.

Re:TV shows (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081550)

I'm talking about the Netflix streaming service, not their standard by-mail service.

Re:TV shows (3, Insightful)

WinPimp2K (301497) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081738)

"there's nothing new on TV due to the writers strike"

Hmm.. and who is getting a residual payment from your downloads of those older shows?

I'm uncertain about what might be better, but if the writers are going to stick with some form of deferred compensation/revenue sharing model, you would think that they might have caught on to the idea of a more comprehensive contract in the past 30 years. One with a clause that just syas, when the studio (or whoever) gets money, the writers will get their piece of the action - rather than the currently lame half-baked mashup of clauses and conditions and explicitly defined distribution models.

Re:TV shows (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081792)

Hmm.. and who is getting a residual payment from your downloads of those older shows?

Ahhh, good point. Well, you've just convinced me to focus on watching the BBC stuff for the time being (which I was going to do anyways).

Re:TV shows (1)

asilentthing (786630) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083250)

And at the same time, AppleTV rentals are going to take 30 days from DVD release to show up. Given, I'm sure this deal Apple made will slow the building process of titles in Netflix's streaming service - if it doesn't put it to a halt completely.

Not my crowd. (1, Insightful)

ViX44 (893232) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081014)

They aren't aiming at my crowd, the Windows 2000 SP4 user. "Try again from a computer with Windows XP Service Pack 2 or Windows Vista." Try again? What is this, a scratch-off ticket? At least support Ubuntu since it will work on my laptop (which won't run 2000, or even XP without using Hacking 101 skills on it because of driver drama caused by ______, where blank is no good reason at all) and will probably become my OS for the future. A pity, I would like to stream movies for my personal interests (I.E., Futurama, SF B films) and use the mail service for family-friendly (comedy and action) films.

Re:Not my crowd. (2)

Cheezymadman (1083175) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081036)

Well what did you expect? Newsflash: Win2000 is nearly ten years old.

Re:Not my crowd. (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081956)

They aren't aiming at my crowd, the Windows 2000 SP4 user.

W2K had no penetration into the mass consumer market. You really need to move out of Granny's basement.

Re:Not my crowd. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22083596)


>>They aren't aiming at my crowd, the Windows 2000 SP4 user.

W2K had no penetration into the mass consumer market. You really need to move out of Granny's basement.


Or Granny's server closet, as the case may be.

More than just old movies (4, Informative)

peipas (809350) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081032)

Some of the most attractive offerings on Netflix's streaming service are television shows. There are lots of seasons and even complete series available through the service. I was able to watch the entire run of the British show "Coupling," the UK's raunchier version of Friends. They also have every Law and Order known to man, short-run series like "Dead Like Me," and even modern shows like Heroes and 3rd Rock.

Re:More than just old movies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22082000)

I watch heros on netflix and they actually have several current series that are shown on TV that I can stream. For nothing extra this is a great feature.

Public Libraries (4, Informative)

PIPBoy3000 (619296) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081040)

I always wonder why these sort of discussions leave out public libraries. Our local library has an amazing DVD selection (much of it purchased from a failed video store). Sure, the new stuff is often hard to get (Hot Fuzz had 66 holds on it, last I checked), but there's tons of classics, Anime, and other things I missed in the theater.

It's become a weekly tradition for me to head out to the library after Saturday breakfast and return with my booty of media. Like Santa, I open my sack and hand out books and movies to my kids and occasionally my wife (depending on whether or not she's on the naughty list).

Re:Public Libraries (4, Funny)

krakelohm (830589) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081178)

Having the wife on the naughty list is not a bad thing...

Re:Public Libraries (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22082596)

I'll be sure to tell yours you said that when I see her later!

Re:Public Libraries (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22082794)

...unless she'd rather just watch a movie.

Re:Public Libraries (1)

cbart387 (1192883) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081218)

About a 2 miles away from my house is a mom & pop video store. If you wait 9-12 months the 'new release' movies go to gallery. I can rent, for a week, three gallery movies @ 3 dollars. Granted you have to wait a while but that's not a big concern for me. I agree with the parent. Until they (apple/netflix/etc) come down to that price it's not worth it to me. Besides, you do not have to worry about the internet crapping out.

Re:Public Libraries (2, Informative)

Critical Facilities (850111) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081458)

. If you wait 9-12 months the 'new release' movies go to gallery. I can rent, for a week, three gallery movies @ 3 dollars.


Dude, have you even looked at Netflix pricing [netflix.com] ? You can get unlimited rentals per month (2 movies at a time) for $13.99/month and you can EASILY get first run new releases. I used to be into the Blockbuster thing, but the newer titles were never in stock, and I hated having to wait in line to check in/out movies. Netflix ships them to you and you ship them back. I can send movies back on Wednesday and have new ones by Friday, and I don't have to wait 9-12 months for new releases.

I know the article's about the "download" service, but if you're going to compare it to the mom&pop video store, you should be comparing to the "standard" Netflix options, which I'm sorry, destroys video stores IMO.

Re:Public Libraries (1)

cbart387 (1192883) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081730)

I'm aware of what netflix offers and agree with you that it is a good deal. However at 13.99 I'd have to watch (about) 14 movies in a month to break even with my video store. Even if I watched one movie every 3 days my 'mom & pop' store comes out on top. I'm just not a voracious enough of a movie (or TV show) watcher for it to make sense for me.

Just curious, how many discs do you go through (on average) in a month?

Re:Public Libraries (1)

Critical Facilities (850111) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082126)

We're not exactly voracious movie watchers either. We usually average 2 per week, so 2 per week times 4 weeks equals 8 per month. Now while your $1 per movie is admittedly cheaper, $13.99/8 movies = $1.75 per disc, and for us, that extra $0.75 per disc is pretty nominal given that in exchange we get first run movies, and never have to go into the store, wait in line, etc.

They have plans with fewer movies too. They've got one that's $8.99/mo where you can get DVDs 1 at a time, unlimited for the month. So that might work out cheaper for you, you'd only have to get 9 per month to be cheaper than your current arrangement. They also have a plan for $4.99/mo, but there's a 2 DVD per month limit.

Re:Public Libraries (1)

thomas.galvin (551471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082744)

I used to be into the Blockbuster thing, but the newer titles were never in stock, and I hated having to wait in line to check in/out movies. Netflix ships them to you and you ship them back. I can send movies back on Wednesday and have new ones by Friday, and I don't have to wait 9-12 months for new releases.
Netflix put a serious dent in my Blockbuster patronage, but I still go there every now and then, when I've watched all of my Netflix disks, will have to wait a day or more for new ones to be mailed, and want to kill a couple of hours.

Apple's service, compared to Blockbuster, is:

  • More convenient; I don't have to drive anywhere to load up iTunes,or take the movies back
  • Cheaper, by at least a dollar per movie
  • More complete; the catalog will be much better than Blockbuster's brick-n-mortar


Steve Jobs just killed Blockbuster.

Re:Public Libraries (1)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083224)

It seems like you would be better off with Blockbuster's service than Netflix. My wife and I use Blockbuster because there's one right down the street and if we really want another movie after watching our mailed ones, we can bring them to the store and exchange them each for free for one movie. Since you're already going to Blockbuster sometimes, this seems like it would make sense for you too.

Re:Public Libraries (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081226)

I always wonder why these sort of discussions leave out public libraries.

Possibly because a LOT of public libraries have a piss poor selection of DVD's. Like mine.

Re:Public Libraries (1)

Joe Tie. (567096) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082550)

Heck, the video selection at our library is primarily still VHS.

Re:Public Libraries (1)

Gothic_Walrus (692125) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081264)

The only issue I've had with libraries is getting a movie in poor shape. When it starts skipping halfway through and you can't make it to the end, that isn't much fun.

That said, the library nearest my house has a good selection, and has a lot of TV shows too. They're the reason why I watched and loved Firefly. They've got all of Monty Python's Flying Circus. They've even got the Animaniacs and Pinky and the Brain sets if I want to relive some childhood memories.

Re:Public Libraries (3, Insightful)

PhoenixFlare (319467) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081352)

I always wonder why these sort of discussions leave out public libraries. Our local library has an amazing DVD selection (much of it purchased from a failed video store)

Because most people's libraries weren't lucky enough to have a failed video store to acquire a collection from - Netflix's selection is so much wider than any public library (or video store, for that matter) i've ever been in or heard of, there's almost no point making a comparison.

Re:Public Libraries (1)

kharchenko (303729) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082462)

>Because most people's libraries weren't lucky enough to have a failed video store to acquire a collection from
Oh, but they will very soon. These businesses are doomed. Just in my neighborhood one closed a month ago, and another just put up going-out-of-business sale signs. That's progress!

Re:Public Libraries (1)

ChrisA90278 (905188) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082134)

Our public library too is very good. They buy most of the new videos as soon as they come out. You can reserve the DVD on-line and they will place it in a special holding area and put a note on it with your name. They have better sevice then the video rental stores.

Next up in the New York Times . . . (2, Funny)

LMacG (118321) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081140)

Dogs and cats are not the same.

creators taking aim @ unprecedented evile's hired (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22081166)

goons. better days ahead, guaranteed. let yOUR conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071229/ap_on_sc/ye_climate_records;_ylt=A0WTcVgednZHP2gB9wms0NUE [yahoo.com]
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080108/ts_alt_afp/ushealthfrancemortality;_ylt=A9G_RngbRIVHsYAAfCas0NUE [yahoo.com]
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A [nytimes.com]

is it time to get real yet? A LOT of energy is being squandered in attempts to keep US in the dark. in the end (give or take a few 1000 years), the creators will prevail (world without end, etc...), as it has always been. the process of gaining yOUR release from the current hostage situation may not be what you might think it is. butt of course, most of US don't know, or care what a precarious/fatal situation we're in. for example; the insidious attempts by the felonious corepirate nazi execrable to block the suns' light, interfering with a requirement (sunlight) for us to stay healthy/alive. it's likely not good for yOUR health/memories 'else they'd be bragging about it? we're intending for the whoreabully deceptive (they'll do ANYTHING for a bit more monIE/power) felons to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather', as well as a # of other things/events.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying [google.com]

dictator style micro management has never worked (for very long). it's an illness. tie that with life0cidal aggression & softwar gangster style bullying, & what do we have? a greed/fear/ego based recipe for disaster. meanwhile, you can help to stop the bleeding (loss of life & limb);

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/28/vermont.banning.bush.ap/index.html [cnn.com]

the bleeding must be stopped before any healing can begin. jailing a couple of corepirate nazi hired goons would send a clear message to the rest of the world from US. any truthful look at the 'scorecard' would reveal that we are a society in decline/deep doo-doo, despite all of the scriptdead pr ?firm? generated drum beating & flag waving propaganda that we are constantly bombarded with. is it time to get real yet? please consider carefully ALL of yOUR other 'options'. the creators will prevail. as it has always been.

corepirate nazi execrable costs outweigh benefits
(Score:-)mynuts won, the king is a fink)
by ourselves on everyday 24/7

as there are no benefits, just more&more death/debt & disruption. fortunately there's an 'army' of light bringers, coming yOUR way. the little ones/innocents must/will be protected. after the big flash, ALL of yOUR imaginary 'borders' may blur a bit? for each of the creators' innocents harmed in any way, there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile, will not be available. 'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet, & by your behaviors. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi glowbull warmongering execrable. some of US should consider ourselves somewhat fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate. it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc.... as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis. concern about the course of events that will occur should the life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order. 'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

meanwhile, the life0cidal philistines continue on their path of death, debt, & disruption for most of US. gov. bush denies health care for the little ones;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/03/bush.veto/index.html [cnn.com]

whilst demanding/extorting billions to paint more targets on the bigger kids;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.war.funding/index.html [cnn.com]

& pretending that it isn't happening here;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3086937.ece [timesonline.co.uk]
all is not lost/forgotten/forgiven

(yOUR elected) president al gore (deciding not to wait for the much anticipated 'lonesome al answers yOUR questions' interview here on /.) continues to attempt to shed some light on yOUR foibles. talk about reverse polarity;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3046116.ece [timesonline.co.uk]

Netflix Is A RipOff (1, Insightful)

curmudgeon99 (1040054) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081214)

I used Netflix for a few years but the problem was my spreadsheet. I kept track of when I sent back movies and the time when I received new ones and I noticed that they began to increase the length of time it took for me to receive my next DVD, thereby negating the value of their allegedly "unlimited" monthly service. They lost a class action suit on that precise point years later. I have more faith in Apple to not screw me just because they can.

Re:Netflix Is A RipOff (1)

boris111 (837756) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081338)

I do suspect that they intentionally delay your shipment, but it was no more than a day extra for me. I've noticed if I go a month without returning soon as I do I get a new movie faster than when I have a steady cipher going for a month. Nonetheless even with the delay I feel like it's still worth it. Consider how much you'd pay for back in the good 'ol days of driving to the video store.

Re:Netflix Is A RipOff (1)

initdeep (1073290) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081538)

funny, i hear people say this all the time...

Yet i have the five at a time unlimited plan, and routinely send back FIVE DVD's the EXACT same day i receive them, and get my next set of five two days later......

So lets do the math.

receive on monday +5
receive on wednesday +5
receive on friday +5

hmmmm

thats 15 movies a week
base on 4 weeks every month and i get 60 movies a month for $30.00

hmmmmmm
plus, i got to watch heroes season 2 (streaming)the day after they aired on network tv.

and I do this just about every week.....

and have been doing this for a few years now......

Re:Netflix Is A RipOff (1)

curmudgeon99 (1040054) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081596)

So, you're saying AFTER they lost the class action lawsuit, they have reformed somewhat. Well, too late for my trust

Re:Netflix Is A RipOff (2, Interesting)

God'sDuck (837829) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081548)

Netflix is not a ripoff financially, though they are t3h evil in not being transparent. Basically, you will have trouble renting DVDs for less than $2 each. On a 2-at-a-time plan ($14) you will get immediate service if you rent each movie for an average of one week (7-8 per month). Average more than that and they rather obviously delay your shipments to draw you down to that average.

I find that "evil" for transparency (they are lying about being unlimited), but I am quite content financially with $2 1-week rentals.

Re:Netflix Is A RipOff (1)

Firehed (942385) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081676)

I'd say $2 rentals is more than reasonable. Apple's downloads range from $3-5 for one day, and while I can't speak for blockbuster, most small independent stores are at least $4 for a few days.

Sure, unlimited might be throttled a bit if you're clearly just ripping and returning, but they have these crazy things called operating costs that they have to cover: postage on both directions and buying the movies (and replacing stuff that becomes damaged, though I'd assume the person doing the damage is charged) in addition to the standard costs of doing business (employees, utilities, legal, etc).

While they definitely have bulk deals set up with the post office, that's still going to be a good chunk of the two bucks. Then knock off the price of the disc per rental (40c maybe? Figure it's bought for around $12 and gets rented out to 30 people before it needs replacing). That doesn't leave much room for bill-paying revenue.

Re:Netflix Is A RipOff (1)

bloodstains (676306) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082368)

I was content with this as well, until I noticed my dedication to getting movies watched and returned even in what Netfilx deems to be a reasonable time frame wained. I've had my last two movies for 2 weeks now. Maybe even more. I think paying per rental will suit my movie watching habits better.

Re:Netflix Is A RipOff (3, Insightful)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081754)

No, they have not. The law suit that they lost was had nothing to do with 'throttling', as keeps getting repeated. What they were sued for was for immediately sending high usage subscribers a movie lower on their list instead of the top one if they had to choose between sending a high usage subscriber the last copy, or a low usage subscriber. They have since updated their TOS to reflect this.

You should rally have been looking at your post office as the culprit. Netflix has way to many people to be individually targeting people for delayed shipments. The only way that they could realistically get any benefit from it would be if they had a system to automatically flag accounts. There are way to many people like me that have spent years (over 5 for me) returning just about every single movie the day after they receive it for Netflix to have an automated system to throttle.

Re:Netflix Is A RipOff (1)

Joe Tie. (567096) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082710)

Just to add some backup to your statement, that happened to me as well. Stayed that way for about a year, and then went back to normal. Can't really say definitively why it started, if it was the post office or netflix. But it was invariable enough before and after to remove it from possibility of just being a subjective bias I used to interpret it.

Biggest Difference (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081266)

The biggest difference between the two markets is that Netflix Watch Now runs on XP/Vista(?), and Apple iTunes runs on Apple h/w. It's the Grand Canyon of all divides.

Re:Biggest Difference (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081432)

??? iTunes has been available for Windows & OS X for a long time now.

A few things that Netflix still does better (2, Informative)

Tibor the Hun (143056) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081278)

I know this is mostly regarding the streamable Netflix movies, but I'd like to point out that their Que is worth the price.
I haven't seen anything like that on Apple's service, but I may be mistaken.

One other thing that Netflix has over Apple, is no 30 day wait after a new release. Sure, there may be a few days wait in some cases, but it's not 30.
(Piratebay also has no such restrictions. The movie studios probably wanted to strike a good deal with those jolly rogers. Great move studios, nothing like waiting 30 days after a region-encrusted release...)

On the other side, Apple has a convenient way to transfer movies to my iPod touch, which is excellent.

I'm a Netflix subscriber, and I'm pretty sure I'll stay with them, but I think Apple may get some of my money here and there too.

Re:A few things that Netflix still does better (1)

ContractualObligatio (850987) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081630)

"One other thing that Netflix has over Apple, is no 30 day wait after a new release"

Yes, it's great isn't it? In fact, not only do they not impose a 30 day wait, they don't even offer brand new releases at all...

Re:A few things that Netflix still does better (1)

Tibor the Hun (143056) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081840)

Yes they do,
He Was a Quiet Man, Suburban Girl, Already Dead, Wedding Daze and 3:10 to Yuma for example, are all available, as are many other movies that got released this Tuesday.

If by brand new release you consider a DVD screener or a crappy telesync, then you're right. But new DVD releases they do offer.

new releases? (1)

sucati (611768) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081304)

Are they ever going to offer anything besides b-movies? I'm fine with whatever delivery method but offer new releases and movies people actually want to see.

Re:new releases? (1)

sucati (611768) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081340)

I'd like to retract my comment. next time I'll read the excerpt. thanks

I'm definitely not Apple's target market, but... (4, Insightful)

blueZ3 (744446) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081328)

I think that $3 for a movie "rental" is way too expensive, which is the very reason I dropped Blockbuster for Netflix in the first place. I don't care if it is a new release, recent T.V. episode, or whatever--three dollars is half the cost of a matinée on the big screen.

We don't have cable or satellite T.V. and I can't see spending money on the antenna we'd need for broadcast digital--five hundred channels of nothing is still nothing. So we have Netflix. While I don't watch much, my wife watches about one episode of a T.V. series each day. Perhaps every other week we get a movie, and occasionally we'll watch episodes some old series together. So we run through maybe 10-15 DVDs worth of content each month. That type of viewing pattern would be significantly more than the $18 a month we currently pay Netflix, say around $45 if you had to get all the TV episodes as individual "rentals"

It will be interesting to see if Apple can do to video viewing what it did to music (make the music player ubiquitous, or nearly so). The main issues I see are cost (per video) and cost (for a device to play the content).

Re:I'm definitely not Apple's target market, but.. (1)

ContractualObligatio (850987) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081690)

"I think that $3 for a movie "rental" is way too expensive"

"Way" too expensive!? Rest assured, Apple is not interested in you anyway.

Re:I'm definitely not Apple's target market, but.. (2, Informative)

STrinity (723872) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081732)

I think that $3 for a movie "rental" is way too expensive,
I watch primarily older films, and I always check DVD Price Search [dvdpricesearch.com] before making a purchase. The upshot is I pay on average $7 per film (often as part of a box set), and I can watch it any time I like. I don't understand why anyone still rents.

Re:I'm definitely not Apple's target market, but.. (2, Informative)

nsayer (86181) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081762)

We don't have cable or satellite T.V. and I can't see spending money on the antenna we'd need for broadcast digital--five hundred channels of nothing is still nothing.
That makes no sense.

1. Broadcast digital uses the same antenna that your wife is using right now to pick up analog TV.

2. Next year you're at least going to have to buy a converter box (government subsidized, though) in order to keep doing that. But your same antenna should still work.

3. Broadcast digital is probably the same selection of content as analog for you. In some places, there are broadcasters offering multiplexed streams, but not many, and the alternate streams are often nothing more than weather or traffic or whatnot. So if you're in a big city it's probably 15 channels instead of 10, 3 of which are redundant.

Re:I'm definitely not Apple's target market, but.. (1)

_14k4 (5085) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082526)

Did you re-read his post? He does not watch broadcast television; I read it as any antenna he utilizes would be a _new_ antenna. Any television his wife watches (one a day) is via Netflix.

In that case, he should stick with netflix. Hell, I am personally thinking of dumping cable, getting the cheapest high speed inter-tubes I can find and just going with that; using netflix for everything else. My wife is a Law and Order addict and I love the Simpsons. That works.

Re:I'm definitely not Apple's target market, but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22081854)

I agree. With Apple's movie rentals at a multiple of what you pay to BUY a song from the same service, their pricing doesn't make sense within their own world. When you then compare it to the price of Netflix, waiting for the next DVD in the mail doesn't seem that bad. The streaming isn't even significant in the comparison. $4.99 for two movies a month which is about all we seem to find time to watch seems pretty good to me.

And don't even get me started on the extra $1 for HD. I refuse to pay the cable company $8/month for HD and I am not interested in paying extra when I rent a movie online or through the mail.

Re:I'm definitely not Apple's target market, but.. (2, Insightful)

jaysones (138378) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081992)

THREE dollars is too expensive for a movie?! This blows my mind! What, in your opinion, is a movie worth? Movie rentals at Blockbuster in the 80s were $3 and it amazes me that now, you can get movies without leaving home for the same price. We're talking about half an hour of work at minimum wage. This plan may not make sense for someone like you but if you think 3 bucks for a movie rental is "way" out of line for this service, I believe the market would disagree with you there.

Re:I'm definitely not Apple's target market, but.. (1)

T-Bone-T (1048702) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082176)

The Red Box just a 5 minute walk away is only $1/day.

Re:I'm definitely not Apple's target market, but.. (1)

RalphBNumbers (655475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082708)

How much is a movie rental worth?

Lets ask the free market (even if calling it free is a joke in a market where every product is granted a government enforced monoploy):
Blockbuster online and Netflix subscriptions put the per-disc rental cost in the $1-$2 range.
So, that's how much a movie rental is worth.

I might be willing to pay a little more for the convenience and low latency of an online system, but not double or more what a discs-in-the-mail subscription would cost me for the same content.

This isn't even Apple's fault, everyone else doing online delivery has similar drawbacks, it's the movie industry trying to raise prices and tighten controls as people shift from physical media to online delivery. They want to make all online delivery conform to the terms of old fashioned pay-per-view or on-demand cable: lousy selection because titles are only available in a limited window (from a month after DVD release until they find a cable or TV network willing to pay for an exclusive airing, and then maybe again later once the movie is a catalog title), high prices to capitalize on convenience and milk early adopters and those with money to spend, restrictive terms because the industry has individual control of every viewing rather than just the first sale of the disc (you have to finish watching within 24 hours of starting, you can only have the movie on one device at a time, etc), etc...

The thing is, in the end, I expect Apple to be pretty successful selling video and video devices despite all of this; they're damn good at selling users that extra little bit of convenience and simplicity. In the long run, it's the movie industry itself that's going to suffer for their efforts to keep the customer from getting what they want (convenient access to high quality video, immediately available anywhere and any time, for no more than they're paying now), when physical media sales start falling off, and online sales don't pick up quickly enough to make up the difference (much like they did in the music industry, for similar reasons).

Re:I'm definitely not Apple's target market, but.. (1)

Afterimage (44695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082422)

Three dollars is half the cost of a matinee on the big screen for one person. Have a bunch of friends over? That three dollars amortizes pretty quickly. The other factor is convenience. If you know you want to watch movie X two or three days in advance and you remember to put it at the top of your queue, yeah, Netflix is better. But, and this is where I see myself using it, if you have a spontaneous gathering over (or even if you don't) and you don't like the options you have on hand, getting a widescreen HD movie for $4 or $5 beats getting everyone down to Blockbuster or Hollywood. That, I think, is where iTunes Movie Rentals is going to capture territory. it's worth money for me not having to make time in my errand schedule to go _back_ and return the damn thing.

Blockbuster. (1)

eoeoe (555939) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081428)

If anything, the iTunes rental store will attack Blockbusters more than Netflix. The iTunes rental system is for the impulsive 'I want a rental now, and I probably only want to watch something that's been released in the last 2 months'. Rather than peruse the New Releases aisles of Blockbuster for 45 minutes, you can just peruse iTunes and have it in a few minutes.

NetFlix download isn't a serious business (4, Interesting)

ContractualObligatio (850987) | more than 6 years ago | (#22081848)

The big difference between the two is that Apple is making a genuine try at starting a business: they've revamped the Apple TV after the first attempt didn't get a great reaction, they've cut deals with all the movie studios, they let people do the obvious thing with movies, namely watch them on the TV.

NetFlix, on the other hand, may be smart enough to realise that internet access to movies is inevitable, but only came up with some shitty "on your computer only" service, with bandwidth restrictions. It's a little experiment without serious backing. My bet is that whoever within NetFlix has responsibility for the online service has little power within the company, and is probably seen as competition to the main DVDs-by-post business. Apple's announcement probably gave that person a rare bit of clout to argue to the rest of the company that unless the NetFlix streaming service improves, it will simply become a laughing stock.

All that said - if they deliver on easy access via the TV, their model of "classic" and hard-to-find material plus their que idea is a great one. Hope the online person now gets the respect and funding they deserve. They've got to prepare for the future where the postal service just ain't necessary for their business model.

Re:NetFlix download isn't a serious business (1)

cdh (6170) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082414)

It's a little experiment without serious backing
Um...Netflix has spent $40 million [insidebayarea.com] over the last year setting up their streaming service.

Opps, I forgot, this is Slashdot, facts are optional here.

Re:NetFlix download isn't a serious business (1)

Zebra_X (13249) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082638)

they've revamped the Apple TV after the first attempt didn't get a great reaction, they've cut deals with all the movie studios, they let people do the obvious thing with movies, namely watch them on the TV.

yeah, for 24 from start or 30 days after which time you are SOL. There is no reason for them to expire but they do. Someone had to do extra work to make it that way.

second, your "rentals" are no good anywhere but your TV or your iPlod.

Finally the rentals are 720p which speaks for itself if you have a 1080p set.

I'm also not a fan of the 300 dollar investment for a device that is half as capable as the HD-DVD player i own.

Re:NetFlix download isn't a serious business (1)

quickbrownfox (900989) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083058)

$229 != $300

What? (1)

dj245 (732906) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083192)

NetFlix, on the other hand, may be smart enough to realise that internet access to movies is inevitable, but only came up with some shitty "on your computer only" service, with bandwidth restrictions.

Your computer monitor isn't the biggest screen you own?

Your geek card must be returned to the issuing agency by the end of the week.

Indie movies and CD rentals (1)

AlpineR (32307) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082020)

I use Netflix/snail mail to catch up on older popular movies and indie movies. The problems with Netflix/streaming are:

1) Doesn't work on my Mac unless I boot into Windows.
2) Doesn't display on my HDTV unless I drag out the big HDMI cable and audio cable and tether down my laptop.
3) With only 6,000 titles, classic and indie movies are unavailable. Apparently so are recent blockbusters.

I have Comcast On Demand but the selection is miniscule and the interface is slow and inefficient. So I'm tempted to try something like Amazon Unbox through an X-Box or iTunes rentals through an AppleTV (neither of which I own yet). Does the Playstation 3 do movie downloads too? A Blu-Ray player would be nice.

I also have some videos that I download to my laptop, like podcasts, and would like to watch them conveniently on my TV. It sounds like AppleTV would work smoothly. Are any of the other systems good for that? Is there any other source of indie movies besides Netflix/snail mail? (Brick & mortar video rentals used to be an option, but all the ones in my neighborhood went out of business.)

And another question: How do video stores and now Netflix get their business cleared with the publishers? Do they just buy one disc at retail price and rent it to a hundred people? Or do they have to pay a royalty for each rental? Could a business do the same thing with music through the mail? Netunes?

Re:Indie movies and CD rentals (1)

jamesoutlaw (87295) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082206)

And another question: How do video stores and now Netflix get their business cleared with the publishers? Do they just buy one disc at retail price and rent it to a hundred people? Or do they have to pay a royalty for each rental? Could a business do the same thing with music through the mail? Netunes?

Movie rental places have to buy DVDs that are "licensed" to be rented. They pay 3 or 4 times the consumer cost of the equivalent DVD. If I remember correctly, their cost is in the neighborhood of $90 or so per disk.

Why still no DVR on AppleTV? (1)

GigG (887839) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082278)

WHat I can't understand is why Apple still doesn't put any DVR in AppleTV. I have two Tivos with a total a 3 tuners. I can download movies and TV shows from Amazon and should I desire have both Music Videos and Rhapsody music service streamed into them. I can also watch audio and select video Podcasts. That said I would have bought an AppleTV at the new price point if they had just added the ability to record TV. I just don't get it.

Re:Why still no DVR on AppleTV? (1)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082326)

The first stumble (AppleTV v.1.0) was the lack of HD and Surround sound. They fixed that. Now I'm griping that there is no built in DVR...but...my cable company's HD-DVR box has a "send to vcr" function. I wonder if there is a product out there that will let me *easily* send my DVR contents to an AppleTV. Please, please, PLEASE send links if anyone has them! It would be nice to send from DVR to AppleTV to wirelessly connected Macs throughout my house.

Re:Why still no DVR on AppleTV? (1)

Blackforge (8018) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083666)

Like you said, the main selling point for Amazon Unbox, is the ability to download it straight to my Tivo. However, they also seem to get new releases within the same week or week after. Plus, their little weekend specials they have. You can sometimes rent a new release for $0.99-2.99. For a buck I'll try most movies. Even though I do have an HD setup, for $0.99 I don't care. Plus if I really wanted to see most movies in HD, I'd just go buy the Blu-Ray anyways. I just really like those Unbox specials though, which have caused me to use the service even more than I expected. It's also allowed me to watch some decent movies I wouldn't normally go out of my way to see.

I do use the Xbox 360 rental system every so often, but I hate having to deal with Microsoft Points. Plus one HD movie can easily fill up a quarter of that 20GB hard drive. My biggest movie download was probably about 6GB. We'll see what Sony does with their PS3 downloads, as I may be more willing to deal with them since they deal in cash. Though pre-purchased blocks of money, currently. If Apple or Netflix allow me to stream to one of my consoles or Tivos, then I'll probably consider them.

Closed Captioning (2, Informative)

hansoloaf (668609) | more than 6 years ago | (#22082954)

My concern with Netflix and iTunes rental is closed captioning.

I contacted both and it seems the movies are not captioned and they do not know if it'll be in the near future.

Arghhh.. back to the drawing board.

Customer wants more support (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22082976)

As a NetFlix customer I have to say I love the Dvd-By-Mail thing it's great and is saving me tons of money over rentals.

However, I won't be using streaming because my girlfriend has a Mac and I have Linux(Ubuntu). Until we can get movies on those Operating Systems and on FireFox we won't be using it. It really makes me kinda of sad...

Thanks for punishing your customers for their choices. Especially when those choices have nothing to do with movies.

Redbox? (1)

iconhelp (1076519) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083036)

Anyone out there checked out Redbox? It is is not bad. Buck a night. You can get the new releases the same day they come out on Tuesdays. They even offer free rentals fairly often. I just run down to the local Walgreens and return it the next night.

iTunes Movie Rentals (1)

kellyb9 (954229) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083060)

Don't know how I let the previous article slip by me. But I had predicted this maybe a year or so ago. I'm curious whether I can put rented movies on my iPod video. I sometimes buy movies for this purpose just so I can watch them on a long flight or at a hotel. I think it would be substantially better if I could rent them.

horrible solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22083334)

A $300 product that only works with one vendor is a stupid idea. If I'm paying $300 for a box, I better be able to rent from anyone on the internet, not just Apple.

iTunes Music Store, Rentals + Wifi at the AirPort (1)

Ohio Calvinist (895750) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083594)

If I were Apple, I'd create free Wi-Fi APs at the gates in major airports that did something like "jail" the session to a advertisement page for their download service, on the first page load, then function as a free wifi point.

When the users buy items from the iTMS, music and items would be downloaded from the Internet, but have a local-cache in the airport of large movie files that are commonly downloaded (new releases, popular TV series) so the download speeds would be do-able in a normal layover. iTunes would notify them of the ETA for the download to make sure they can swing it before takeoff (based on server load, 802.11x standard used), using the local-cache so it is highly predictable.

Apple could do a push to the local-caches at the Airport from the central iTMS on DVD Tuesday or something like that.

I think the service would be a great source of free advertising, with notices by the gate "Free WiFi provided by Apple" and the landing page like they have at Panera bread would drive them to impulse buys during a long layover.

I mean, you can already buy an iPod at the airport out of a vending machine, having a link to the iTMS at the gate seems highly logical especially since they could get buyers who wouldn't normally use the service.

iPhones already can access the iTMS, but it is the Free WiFi provided by Apple to get the first advertisement for people that don't know, or never thought about it, and the local-cache that would make the downloads feasible are the lynchpins for a successful service.

Inventory (1)

Rethcir (680121) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083608)

It's pretty clear to me that Netflix is primarily digitizing their less-demanded (WKRP in Cincinatti, Peter Davison Dr. Who episodes, etc) titles so as to clear the physical media of those titles out of inventory. That way they can focus their labor and capital on acquiring ,maintaining and distributing the titles that are in much higher demand (transformers, pirates of the carribean, eccleston Dr. Who episodes, etc). Regardless, if they can come out with a $100-150 streaming set top box, I'll be the first in line to get it.

Streaming service (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083670)

What makes them think Apple's new release movie rentals are going to compete with Netflix's older, free, streaming service?

Netflix is likely to lose the same business as Blockbuster, which just happens to be the services they charge for.

$229 for an Apple TV? (1)

OxFF52 (1126819) | more than 6 years ago | (#22083804)

What are they thinking? Apple needs to give away an Apple TV for FREE as a subscription service for iTunes (with 2-year commitment). If NetFlix was smart they'd be looking pretty hard for a good set-top box to bundle with a 2-year commitment as well. Does anyone have a redbox in their neighborhood? movie rentals for a buck... you just can't beat that!

Also, all of my hopes and dreams surround DLNA... imagine a device that attaches to your home network instead of a single TV. Now imagine TVs with built in DLNA support. Cable companies could price devices that can stream 1, 2, or more channels over your home network. Satellite companies... same thing. IPTV such as u-verse... already done. Movie rentals from ANY service provider (NetFlix, iTunes, Amazon, Blockbuster)... OK... now I'm just dreaming.

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...