Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Portables (Apple) Hardware

iPod Video Coming to a Car Near You 823

_am99_ writes "In the "one more thing" media event today, an iPod that can play Video was announced. The initial content seems to be music videos that can be purchased from the iTunes Music Store." In related news aquachannel writes "Apple has just updated their iPodYourCar page to include a slew of new car companies. This means that there'll be a lot of cars that you can buy off the showroom floor and use your iPod with your car - right off the floor and out of the box."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

iPod Video Coming to a Car Near You

Comments Filter:
  • Erm...TV Shows? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by lxt ( 724570 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:28PM (#13775231) Journal
    I think the *biggest thing* is the fact you can now download TV shows, like Lost, for $1.99 an episode. I think that's pretty earth shattering...a 3 minute pop video, or a 45 minute TV show for the same price?
  • Re:Finally... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Golias ( 176380 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:30PM (#13775258)
    Music videos are commercials for albums. Yawn.

    Being able to download TV shows is a much bigger deal, especially shows which I otherwise would not have free access to, such as the new Doctor Who episodes from the BBC.
  • Re:Erm...TV Shows? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zookie ( 136959 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:30PM (#13775266)

    Even more than the price comparison, the big deal here is that Apple has gotten a big content provider to agree to a different distribution method than broadcast TV. Up until now, you were lucky to get the content providers to agree to video-on-demand for cable subscribers (only HBO and a few other cable outlets signed up). If ABC is going to offer shows for sale via Internet download, this could be a watershed event.
  • Re:Finally... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mysqlrocks ( 783488 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:32PM (#13775281) Homepage Journal
    Pixar is also making six short films available through the iTunes Music Store for the same $1.99 USD price.

    Yep, the $1.99 price point seems pretty nice. I think this is the beginning of the end for DVDs and services around DVDs (Blockbuster, NetFlix, etc). Putting Pixar content up there is a way to show the movie industry, "Hey, look what we can do here. Extremely low distribution costs, instant access for customers." Does anybody know if this video content is HD? If so, then the format wars for HD DVD will become meaningless pretty soon.
  • Re:From Engadget (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dancpsu ( 822623 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:33PM (#13775288) Journal
    Act III: iTunes. You know, we have distributed over 200 million copes of iTunes now in the world, and those are only the copies we know about. iTunes in the US has an 84 percent market share for all legally downloaded music. We released iTunes 5 just five weeks ago, but a lot has changed. And so today we're introducing iTunes 6. We've been busy!

          1. (1) Gifting. This has been the most requested feature. You can gift (i.e. buy) iTunes songs for someone else by song, album, or playlist.
          2. Customer reviews.
          3. Just for You. Personalized recommendations. We're going to be recommending albums and singles based on what you've bought before. It's going to be a beta, we'd like your feedback on it.
          4. Video. If we're going to be able to play video on the iPod we're going to need away to buy video. Starting today we have 2,000 music videos for sale.[Shows Madonna catalogue]

    What do they cost? $1.99 each. But we didn't stop there; we're adding some other videos you can buy. Pixar is putting up six of their award-winning short videos. $1.99 each. We are downloading videos 320 x 240, which is the native resolution of the iPod. They're about the size of six songs. All songs are governed by FairPlay. You can play them on up to five computers. They're not rentals. You own them -- they never time out. [Demo of gifting, customer reviews, Just for You, and videos including "Vogue," a U2 live exclusive. Demo of watching U2 video using Front Row on an iMac, playing photos and videos from an iPod on a big screen]

    One more thing...

    We have one more thing today, a pretty big thing. We're announcing one more thing that you can buy off the iTunes store today, and that is TV shows. What's the number one show on TV? What's the second? Lost. And who has these shows? ABC. And who owns ABC? [Disney logo on screen.] I know those guys!

    Lost, Desperate Housewives, Night Stalker, That's So Raven, The Suite Life.

    Yes, you can buy current episodes, and you can buy them the day after they are broadcast. They're ad free so you don't need to fast forward through the commercials, 320 x 240 again. An hour show is about the size of five albums. Depending on your speed it's about 10-20 minute to download an episode. What are they going to cost? $1.99 an episode for current season and past seasons. We have free previews on every episode.

    Thanks everyone!
  • This is ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:33PM (#13775290)
    This is ridiculous. I'm sure I'm not the only one of the several thousands who must have submitted all the OTHER news [stuffmag.co.uk]:

    -iTunes 6
    -New iMac with built-in Firewire camera
    -New app called FrontRow for playing media from your sofa, 6 button iPod-like remote -compared to Microsoft Media Center's 40 buttons
    -New PhotoBooth app for taking pictures that actually uses iMac's screen as a flash
    -Television shows and music videos for sale through iTunes at $1.99.


    Instead, we get "Yeah, they mentioned iPod video today, and here's a lame car link. Disregard all the other news, like Apple taking Microsoft on directly in the living room..."
  • Of course you can (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Wesley Felter ( 138342 ) <wesley@felter.org> on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:35PM (#13775310) Homepage
    Don't forget iMovie; Apple is big on people creating their own video.

    Looks like Handbrake [m0k.org] just got a lot more popular.
  • by green pizza ( 159161 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:37PM (#13775326) Homepage
    I think the coolest part are the somewhat reasonable prices on the new iMacs.

    For $1299 you get 17" LCD, built in good quality webcam, 1.9 GHz G5, 512 MB, 160 GB, dual layer slot load DVD writer, Radeon X600 Pro, 802.11g, bluetooth, a wired funky MightyMouse, a remote control, and a bunch of preinstalled software.
  • Re:Finally... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:38PM (#13775348)
    Uh, is anyone kind of wondering why Slashdot didn't also mention iTunes 6 (five weeks after iTunes 5), Apple releasing a living room media center app called FrontRow with an iPod-like remote (which has 6 buttons compared to Microsoft Media Center's 40 buttons), a new iMac with built-in iSight cam, television shows for sale from ABC, etc.?

    Instead, it's kind of like..."Yeah, it looks like they released video-based iPods and some other stuff. Hey, here's stuff about cars. Ho-hum."
  • by fracai ( 796392 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:39PM (#13775356)
    The difference here is that there was an existing market of home ripping MP3 users. There isn't anything like that for home TV ripping (well, fine maybe a small one). The majority of DivX TV files are illegally procured. Well, they're at best not gained through authorized means and that's hazy enough to be illegall under current conditions.

    I expected Apple to come out with ripping software at this event. Something that would rip DVDs to iPod compatible files. I still do expect that actually. I suspect the biggest hurdle is that they have to get the MPAA on board because the DVDs are encrypted and Apple won't want to create DRMed files from your physically owned DVDs.

    I wonder if it at least plays non-FairPlay h.264 files... Off to the iPod site to check.
  • by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:42PM (#13775393)
    Don't forget the best reason to use iTunes 6--they softened the sharp window corners. :)

    Seriously though, they smoothed out the sharp corners of the whole interface. It was actually bugging me in version 5, as trivial as that is. I didn't like the really sharp corners at all, and I know a lot of people were complaining about that. When you're using an app all the time like iTunes, it helps to have it look and feel nice.
  • by antifoidulus ( 807088 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:42PM (#13775396) Homepage Journal
    Uh, on the apple main page it shows how you can put your home movies on the new iPod... Also, the iPod supported mp3 and non-drm AAC since day 1, why wouldn't they support the same with the video iPod....
  • by Danathar ( 267989 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:44PM (#13775416) Journal
    So far I feel like I've ben gut punched....NO powerbook upgrades? I don't give a rats ass about watching music videos on a 320x200 screen for 2 bucks each! Apple! PLEASE! Do something with the powerbooks!
  • by reptilicus ( 605251 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:46PM (#13775433)
    Okay, the new iPods and such are nice, and you should understand that I'm a bit biased, as I'm typing this on a 500 Mhz TiBook that desperately needs replacing:

    Where are the upgraded PowerBooks and PowerMacs? We seem to get a new iPod model every two weeks, but no new PowerBooks for over 10 months?

  • by sulli ( 195030 ) * on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:48PM (#13775460) Journal
    As long as I can put my own videos (e.g. recorded with a TV capture card) on the iPod, this is awesome. If it's for the store only, forget it.
  • 1984 (Score:2, Insightful)

    by 101percent ( 589072 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @02:49PM (#13775469)
    Does anyone else see the camera in the imac as a little bit like 1984?
  • Re:Finally... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Golias ( 176380 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:06PM (#13775642)
    When I'm on the road, whether for business or for tourism, I like to travel with a laptop, a case of DVD's, and an RF adapter for hacking my way into the TV sets typically found in hotel rooms.

    I might still travel with the laptop sometimes, but for 90% of the non-business trips I take, this new iPod looks like it could be the ideal replacement. The small size makes it easier to carry around, and much easier to watch in a coach seat on a plane. With the AV cable, I'll also be able to use it on hotel TV sets, though with a slightly lower resolution.

    Even with an external battery pack to extend run-time (such as the ones Belkin already sells for the current iPod), It will still occupy considerably less space than a carry-on bag than a laptop or portable DVD player, making it the perfect companion for a flight I'll be taking across the Pacific next Spring.

    I've been pretty happy with my trusty old 3G 20GB iPod so far, but this new one, combined with the ability to download video content, really has me thinking seriously about upgrading.
  • Re:Finally... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:06PM (#13775643)
    It should also be noted that Apple is a member of the Blu-ray group, so expect to see those drives in next year's Macs. I thought it was obvious six months ago that HD-DVD was dead in the water, and now with Dell, HP, a ton of movie studios, Apple, and others backing Blu-ray and H.264 over HD-DVD and VC-1 (WMV9), the writing's on the wall.

    Right now, Apple's videos are at 320x240, probably for bandwidth reasons as well as the fact that HD H.264 decoding requires a powerful machine that most don't have yet. But this is a start--Apple is quickly becoming the forerunner of "digital media" (finally, a use for that buzzword that actually applies).
  • by interiot ( 50685 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:07PM (#13775659) Homepage
    Apple is making tons of money on iPod, because they're apparently better than anyone else at making MP3 players that people want.

    Making laptops that are better than the competition? Certainly there are a number of people who feel that way, but Apple isn't such a far-and-away leader at laptops as they are at iPods. So it makes sense they should spend more time developing new iPods. (from an "invisible hand" kind of perspective)

    (furthermore, since they're the market leader at mp3 players, and it's not hard for other companies to emulate Apple, it's imperative that they capitalize on this lead right now and solidify themselves as a solid, long-term leader)

  • by reptilicus ( 605251 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:08PM (#13775675)
    ---Well, they are in the middle of a massive shift to intel x86 based processors. That might have something to do with it.---

    If that's the case, then why upgrade the iMac now, the Mini a few weeks ago, the Xserve last month, and the iBook in July? None of these feature x86 processors yet, and they seem to have managed to increase performance for them.

    And whatever happened to those dual core and low power G5 chips that IBM claimed to have?
  • by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:09PM (#13775685)
    It's also a way for the new management to kiss up to Steve Jobs, who happens to be the CEO of the successful animation company that walked away from Disney recently because of the old management...
  • Re:Amazing... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by yabos ( 719499 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:12PM (#13775721)
    THAT would be insane. To compete with piracy they're going to have to charge a lot less than $5-$10 per episode. I mean, you can download an HDTV quality TV show usually the day after it's on TV for free.

    Sometimes I HAVE to do this because there are 3 or 4 shows that I watch on at the same time. So I can't even watch them all, I have to download at least 2 of them otherwise I miss it.
  • by lpangelrob ( 714473 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:22PM (#13775814)
    Well, that's a pleasant surprise. Here I was thinking "Why would we really want to download music videos?" and Apple comes out and gets ABC in on the deal. For $10, suddenly people can have 2 1/2 hours or more of video on their hard drives to keep them occupied while waiting in line at the airport.

    I wonder if those videos will have commercials? Not that you couldn't skip those either now...

  • Re:Amazing... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Brock Lee ( 648954 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:25PM (#13775842)

    Yes, it's a tiny video screen, but you can attach the iPod to a monitor using S-Video plus audio cabling.

    Sure, but realize that it won't increase the resolution beyond what is viewable on the iPod's display.

    How can an organization like the RIAA justify wanting more than 99 cents per song when you can purchase 44 minutes of audio and video for two dollars?

    The answer to that is simple. Music has high replayability. You can listen to a song hundreds of times over the course of a year. But video media, such as movies and television programs, loses its appeal very quickly. I find it difficult to watch most movies a second time, let alone a third or fourth.

    Plus, music is something you can listen to while doing other things, such as walking down the street or working on your computer. Videos are not well-suited to that, and that makes them somewhat less useful. Yes, sometimes less is more!

  • Ummm... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Fusen ( 841730 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:27PM (#13775856)
    Maybe it's because this article is quite new but why hasn't anyone actually said anything about the fact this is just a normal ipod with a 2.5"(!!) screen that can play video? If you want to watch videos on the move then why not go for a real PMP like anything from www.archos.com as they at least have a 3+" screen so you can actually see what you are trying to watch... I mean seriously a 2.5" screen and one video codec supported(?). This isn't exactly a great PMP, but ho hum, this is apple so I'm not surprised no one has critisized it
  • Re:Finally... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bnenning ( 58349 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:31PM (#13775901)
    Hell... I'd pay 4.99 per episode for the new Doctor Who

    Yeah, there are some great opportunities here. Imagine new Firefly episodes as iTunes exclusives. Being able to vote with our wallets instead of our Neilsen boxes can correct the fundamental flaws of existing ratings methods that force nearly everything to the lowest common denominator.
  • by bombadillo ( 706765 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:35PM (#13775927)
    The real story is content distribution. Apple just broke into the video distribution market in a huge way. Add this video itunes service with the new iMac remote control and you can guess were apple is headed. They are headed straight to your living room. MicroSoft has the same strategy to dominate the living room. MS has chosen another route with their Media Center version of Windows. I would say Apple just took a huge lead. It will be interesting how this play out...
  • What an idea (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ChrisF79 ( 829953 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:40PM (#13775966) Homepage
    Just what everyone needs on our highways... video while driving. This is almost as good as drive through liquor stores!
  • Re:Finally... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by ghukov ( 854181 ) * on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @03:56PM (#13776108) Journal
    I think this is the beginning of the end for DVDs and services around DVDs (Blockbuster, NetFlix, etc).
    Riiiiight. Not everyone is enraptured with iThings. I doubt people will toss out their dvd players and buy an iPod, video or not, since broadband is not available everywhere (yet). The overall cost associated w/ downloading content might be more than a lot of consumers are willing to pay to watch movies at home.
  • Re:Finally... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @04:02PM (#13776167)
    Based on the survey SF gate used to compare the cost per thousand impressions is $35 for the big stations in San Francisco. That is local not national of course, but it gets a figure. This equates to about $0.50-$0.60 per viewer in advertising revenues, butthe studio does not get the $5 from an iTunes download. Apple takes a cut, which is probably 30% or so if margins from music are any guide. At $2 per episode the tradeoff is considerably smaller and you loose the great scale that broadcast has (an extra viewer costs almost nothing to the station). National rate cards are likely to be higher (on a per viewer basis) than local SF, but I've no idea how much higher.
  • Re:Not just videos (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tgibbs ( 83782 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @04:03PM (#13776180)
    Except the videos are at QVGA resolution (320x240). That's substantially less than even analog TV, much less DVD or HDTV. Don't count on a lot of people ditching their Tivos just yet. Or ditching bittorrent, for that matter.

    I'm not ditching my HDTiVo. On the other hand, if I somehow manage to miss a show, or decide to pick up watching a show midseason, at $2 a pop, I'd be more likely to go to iTunes than to Bittorrent.

    This looks like a good foot-in-the-door move for Apple. At that resolution, it's not all that threatening for the TV studios. But if it turns out to be a big source of revenue, the studios might be willing to consider higher resolution.

    What strikes me as most interesting, though, is the potential for selling not merely current shows, but the huge backlist of old TV shows. These weren't HD to begin with, so the low resolution would be less of a sacrifice. And I'll bet that they'll find that they can sell individual shows to people who would not be likely to go to a video shop and pick up a DVD collection.
  • by DECS ( 891519 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @04:05PM (#13776190) Homepage Journal
    How is an encumbered DVD, with its CSS DRM that you can bypass with DeCSS, different from Apple's AVC (H.264) with FairPlay DRM, which can be similarly bypassed?

    With a DVD, you'd have to rip it, then reencode it into DIVIX or something appropriate for a portable, which takes a LONG time. Apple's solution seems rather smart, and looks like a very natural extension of the iTMS.

    I like options:

    If you want high quality media, you continue buying CDs and DVDs, and rip them yourself at whatever bitrate makes you happy.

    If you want the convenience of an online store (the new "Just for you - Beta" looks pretty cool) and instant access to lots of pop content, you can pay a small fee and download smallish, ready to go files.

    Apple is offering both options to fit the desires of a broad swath of people.

    Compare this to Microsoft's WMP, which sought to kill MP3s entirely, and replace them with locked up WMA files with brutal restrictions, and very limited playback options.

  • by endersdouble ( 719120 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @04:08PM (#13776217)
    This looks damn cool. But I've seen similar things before--friends have had mp3 players with video screens, and so on, and in all cases, video had to be reencoded to be watched. Is that still true? Because I've got a couple hundred gigabytes of...ahem...perfectly legal video data ripped off DVDs I own as backups...and while it'd be awesome to be able to just seamlessly drop my Scrubs/Buffy/NIN videos onto a new iPod and watch it (2 inch screen isn't great, but better than nothing) if I have to reencode it for a couple hours first, then count me out...
  • Re:Finally... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by SeattleGameboy ( 641456 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @04:11PM (#13776232) Journal
    Yeah! I LOVE watching 320 by 240 images on my 100" projection screen!!! Who needs HDTV when you can download crap from i-Tunes??? Me? I will stick to my Windows Media Center with Fusion5 HDTV tuner watching 1920 by 1080 broadcast on my wall. Poor me...
  • by MetaPhyzx ( 212830 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @04:14PM (#13776258)
    Keep in mind they may also see the way the RIAA companies are acting now about the 99 cent price point ITMS has. This time, the content providers have hindsight. I suspect there will be a serious effort to keep Apple from entrenching themselves in this media market as well as they did music. Personally, I hope those efforts fail :)
  • Re:Finally... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by stephentyrone ( 664894 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @04:36PM (#13776439)
    "very surprised" doesn't begin to touch on it. even assuming 720p HD content, you're talking about moving a sustained 83Mb/sec of data over the bus (the decoded video), never mind the issue of needing to read *in* the compressed data, or the actual process of decoding it.
  • Re:Finally... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Golias ( 176380 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @05:07PM (#13776711)
    Please note the assumption of 100 episodes of Dr. Who. While there may be numerous people on Slashdot who know the precise number, based on average human knowledge of actually relevant information, the number of 100 will be used to keep the math simple.

    The number is 13 so far for the new series.

    13x5 = $65

    When you consider that ABC and Fox makes a fortune selling 26-episode boxed sets of their biggest shows on DVD for about $40 each, it's obvious that $65 for downloading low-res rips of a 13-episode series (Bring Your Own Storage Media), is downright extravagant. Even at $26 for the season, they would make a killing.

    Consider this: Let's say that, of the 300 Million people in America, only 0.1% would be willing to pay for Doctor Who episodes. That's still 300,000 x $26, which would be an extra $7,800,000.00 made on a show which has already paid for itself via distribution in other markets!

    Yeah... Just under 8 million dollars... hardly worth the trouble, eh?
  • by misterpies ( 632880 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @05:50PM (#13777016)

    The genius move with the video iPod is that it's not a separate range. From now on, the regular iPod plays video too. That means that millions of people who would have just bought an iPod are now getting a video iPod. Millions will by a video player almost by default.

    Up until now, no-one has managed to shift portable video players because the customer doesn't see a need for them. But some time someone will work out how to make video on the move work, whether it's as a mobile movie library or some watch-on-the-move content. When that time comes, Apple will be in an unassailable position because they will have a virtual stranglehold on the videoplayer market already.

    You have to hand to Steve.
  • by Inoshiro ( 71693 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @09:02PM (#13778312) Homepage
    As I posted 4 days ago [slashdot.org], Steve Jobs said in the keynote last year that he had some reasons to not release a video iPod.

    Size -- other poratables are too big.
    Weight -- they also also too heavy.
    Content -- there is no content to put on it. Copyright issues are everywhere!
    Output screens -- they are simply too small for video.

    "So how could that change?" I asked.


    The iPod video is smaller than the previous iPod photo; it is also lighter.

    In terms of content, Steve Jobs has managed to secure a couple of deals to get music videos and TV shows into the iTunes store, and has provided home-grown content in the form of video pod casts. To help facilitate the production of video podcasts, he has included the iSight into every new iMac.

    Watching the video is also as he wanted -- you can watch it on your computer in a unified interface via front row (with remote!), watch it directly on the iPod, or even watch it on a TV-out cable they have for the iPod video.

    I think it also hints at where he'll be going in a few years. Now that you can get a nice H.264 movie trailer on your TV via front row, who's to say you won't be able to buy a complete movide for 6-8$? I'd love to be able to get a high quality, digital movie online. New release movies on DVD are about 20-30$ CAD -- too much for what you get. Hell, I could go to the theatre for less even with watery drink!

    But if I could get movies that just came out for 6-8$ and watch them on my wonderful home theatre, I think I'd do it. I'm not too into 2$ music videos, but 2$ for a TV show isn't too bad. Why should I spend 80-100$ on a DVD box set of a TV show, when I'd much rather have a digital version of it for 20-30$.

    With no manufacturing costs, the content providers get all the money -- no more middle men in China making all the DVDs and shipping them back and forth across the ocean!
  • by skiflyer ( 716312 ) on Wednesday October 12, 2005 @10:53PM (#13778820)
    Help me out, because I'm genuinelly curious. For four more dollars you get the DVD with no DRM, which you can rip with free software down to a portable format, which comes on its own physical media in case you ever have to free up some harddrive space, which has all the extras (if you care). So in other words, you spend an extra 4 dollars and you get both versions.

    I don't get why you'd even consider the download. I see the value added in buying tonights episode of Lost if you missed it and want to watch it on the train tomorrow, but once it's out on DVD I'd need a much better price break than 11%... personally I would've expected pay per view kind of prices, 3-5 bucks for a movie, maybe 10 bucks for a season of Lost, I dunno if that would even cover cost of bandwidth, but it's about what it's worth IMO.

    Now, the real nice gadget is the Tivo (or whatever DVR) to IPod dock, so people who already have a DVR can take their TV shows on public transit and airplanes and such without paying again.
  • Clever (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Doyle ( 620849 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @12:14AM (#13779227)
    Apple have been pretty smart with this new iPod. The old mantra is "no-one wants to watch a movie on a portable player". Might be true - but Apple have sidestepped that issue by selling TV shows, not movies, at launch. TV shows are shorter (less tiring to watch on a small screen, quicker to download) and more profitable (TV shows already make money through advertising - this is just extra cash for them); and they don't compete so directly with DVDs like downloadable movies do (most of these shows will be offered for download before they're even available on DVD).

    Very smart.
  • by Total_Wimp ( 564548 ) on Thursday October 13, 2005 @12:54AM (#13779404)
    I'm sure that even with Eisner out Disney is gonna have to pony up with a better contract. My understanding of the current one is:

    Disney's responsibility:
    -Loan money to produce movie
    -Distribute movie through established distribution channels

    Disneys reward:
    Keep 50% of revenue

    Pixar's responsibility:
    -Make 100% of the movie
    -Pay 100% of the cost to produce the movie (pay back loan)

    Pixar's reward:
    Keep 50% of what's left

    If I'm misunderstanding this, let me know. But if this is the deal it'll take a lot more than ditching Eisner to put a signature on a contract.

    BTW, as a twist of fate it's interesting to note the roles are reversed for the iTunes venture. Disney makes the content and Apple is distributing it. You gotta wonder if Apple is keeping 50% of revenue for selling a hit show like "Lost".


Things equal to nothing else are equal to each other.