Apple Adds New TV Shows To iTunes 394
Phaedo00 writes "Ars Technica is reporting that Apple has added eleven new and classic television shows from NBC, the Sci-Fi network, and USA. The new shows include Alfred Hitchcock, Battlestar Galactica, Monk, Surface, Conan O'Brien, Jay Leno, Dragnet, Law & Order, The Office and most importantly: Knight Rider!" From the article: "Steve Jobs took the opportunity to toot Apple's horn, stating that since the inception of video downloads on the iTMS, they'd sold nearly three million individual items. In addition to the sales figures, the PR from Apple stated that their current offering of video stands at approximately 300 episodes. All in all this looks like a slam dunk for Apple as they're rounding up their distribution deals and diversifying their suppliers. If the rumored deals with FOX and CBS are true then Apple will have a dominating lead in this market, much like their current domination in the digital music distribution arena."
When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:2)
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:4, Informative)
"In the United Kingdom, these fees are set by Parliament and go directly to the funding of the BBC, enabling it to run without the need for market competition. The licence fee, initially for radio sets (exempt since 1971), was mandated by the 1904 Wireless Telegraphy Act. The fee was originally 10 shillings (£0.50) and in 2005 was £126.50 for colour TV and £42 for monochrome TV. There are concessions for the elderly (free for over 75s) and blind people (50% off). Only one licence is required per household. It is believed that approximately 5% of TVs are unlicensed. With the BBC's increased worldwide output (including its online services) there has been a debate as to the abolition of the TV licence, which has been denounced as a violation of the freedom to receive information without inteference. Generally, competing television companies favour the licence fee since it means the BBC will not compete with them for advertising or subscriptions. Proper debate of the licence fee is consistently suppressed by the BBC from its own airwaves. Numerous polls show significant public opposition to the fee.
According to the definition of TV receiving apparatus [1], a licence must be obtained for any device which is "installed or used" for receiving broadcasts, which potentially covers devices such as a tuner card in a PC or a portable television. However a television installed and used for some other purpose, such as a closed-circuit monitor, video player or a games console, is exempt provided the owner can demonstrate it is not used for receiving broadcasts.
Enforcement in the UK is provided by Capita Group and the AMV consortium. Capita agents are paid bonuses on the basis of the convictions they secure. AMV is an advertising and public relations agency. Several hundred thousand prosecutions are brought each year. Observations at magistrates court show that a very large proportion of those prosecuted are single women on benefits. Capita maintain a database of all addresses in the country, with electronics retailers being subject to large fines if they do not pass on the addresses of anyone buying television receiving equipment. Addresses with no licence are assumed to have a television, and are subject to repeated threatening mailshots and visits by the enforcement agency. In addition to the database, the BBC claims that electronic detectors are used to pick up the small amount of energy re-radiated by the local oscillator in the tuning circuitry. There is no evidence of any prosecution ever having been brought on this basis of this warrantless electronic surveillance and it is widely suspected that the famous detector vans are no more than mock-ups designed to intimidate viewers. It's open to doubt how well the much advertised detectors would work on a TV tuner card within the electrically noisy Faraday cage enclosure of a PC: the simpler method of calling round and looking for the aerial or an operating television would seem more effective. Note that, since the inspectors are not police officers or any other type of government official, they have no right to enter private property unless invited. Some feel that the scheme is as a regressive tax, in that the very poorest are those least likely to have a licence, and least able to pay the fine for not having a licence. A report ("TV sinners", March 1998) by the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux pointed out that failure to pay the fine is the single largest reason for the imprisonment of single mothers. However, supporters of the licence fee claim that it helps maintain a higher quality of programming on the BBC compared to its commercial rivals. Some also claim that it also leads to better programmes on the commercial channels as they seek to draw viewers/listeners away from the BBC's output."
Any other questions should probably be directed here [tvlicensing.co.uk].
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:3, Insightful)
So the question I have is, Will americans have a shot of being able to download BBC shows like "Top Gear"? (instead of having to watch the edited / censored version that the discovery channel plays).
If not, I'll have to continue to download top gear via bittorrent...
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:3, Interesting)
If you have a TV licence for your house, then it covers all TVs within that house, as well as any and all TVs that can be powered solely from their own internal power source i.e. batteries at any other location. The iPod would qualify for that, so as long as you had a TV license at home (which you almost certainly would) then you'd be OK. If you didn't, then they might have to re-think things. That being said, it would only affect BBC programmes, as the license fee is only there to support the BBC as other
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:4, Informative)
Unfortunately, even if the rest of the world starts releasing programming, it won't be US based. BitTorrent's popularity is driven at least in part due to TV programming restrictions on an international level. Were iTunes to get Dr. Who in the UK, I still doubt it would be available for US users, continuing to leave people no legal way to obtain said programming.
It's like asking when DVD region coding will go away, and when a DVD/movie will have the same release date internationally. Despite the number of times Finding Nemo (etc) was pirated because it was on DVD here in the states even before it launched in theaters across the globe, people in charge of distribution and licensing will (seemingly) never get that it's a global world now.
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:2)
DVD region coding is going away when DVD becomes HD-DVD or BluRay - neither supports region coding (something that really irritates me, since I travel between the UK and the USA quite a bit).
At some point the media cartels will have to start allowing world-wide licensing, for TV especially. If you can either download a show from BitTorrent today, or wait six months for it to be aired in the UK, which do you think sounds more attractive? I would love
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:2)
Even though I live in the US and have access to the TV shows, I avoid downloading them. Due to the DRM, there doesn't seem to be any way to burn the episodes to a DVD so that I can watch them on my TV without having to drag the computer over and connect it.
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:3, Interesting)
Perhaps the "analog hole" applies to video as well.
If you're on a Mac, buy yourself the full version--as in the video-capture version--of Snapz Pro X [ambrosiasw.com]. Open Quicktime and watch the show, while Snapz captures the video to MPEG. You'll be left with a very large file, but at least it should be DRM-less.
I have not tried this yet, so I'm not certain it will work, but it's worth a shot. Does anyone else who has a similar utility (Mac or Windows) want to try this and report as to its success/failure?
Re:When will the rest of the world sign on? (Score:3, Interesting)
The quality is really good. Crystal clear, good framrate, stays in synch, all that good stuff. The stuff from suicidegirls was filmed for it and thus looks really good. The video loooks good but it's an old song (500 miles). All that said I could see watching a sitcom on it but certainly not anything like BG. It's just too small. That and watching video sucks battery at a
Important question... (Score:3, Insightful)
WHICH Office?
This is an important issue here! One is a funny show, the other is the funniest show since Basil Fawlty...
Re:Important question... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Important question... (Score:2)
A quick jaunt over to iTunes would also show this. Anyway, it's the one with Steve Carrell.
Re:Important question... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Important question... (Score:2, Interesting)
Thinking again about this... probably not. The BBC are planning to roll their own online distribution system, and probably wouldn't want to get tied in to a single system like iTunes.
I wish they'd get on with it, though. I want to watch Hartnell-era Doctor Who eps online, dammit!
iTMS dominates now that they feature.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:iTMS dominates now that they feature.... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:iTMS dominates now that they feature.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:iTMS dominates now that they feature.... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:iTMS dominates now that they feature.... (Score:3, Funny)
Apple's going to take the lead just for trying. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Apple's going to take the lead just for trying. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Apple's going to take the lead just for trying. (Score:3, Insightful)
Money does, after all, talk. $1.99 for TV quality, $2.99 for DVD quality, and $3.99 for HD quality, perhaps?
Re:Apple's going to take the lead just for trying. (Score:3, Interesting)
The only thing I would be missing is sports. Someone gives me a la carte sports channels and I will be a very happy person.
ESPN thinking Apple (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Apple's going to take the lead just for trying. (Score:3, Interesting)
I would pay more for HD, but $2 for TV quality is too high a baseline. I'm thinking $1 for 480p (DVD) and $1.50 for 1080p at the very most. Here's why:
Production costs for Lost are under $3M per episode and it is considered the most expensive show on TV today.
Citation: http://starbulletin.com/2005/01/26/news/story2.htm l [starbulletin.com]
Lost has been averaging over 20M viewers per episode this season
Citation: http://www.signonsandiego.com/unio
Re:Apple's going to take the lead just for trying. (Score:5, Insightful)
$0.99 for slightly less than CD quality sans liner and jewelcase.
It hasn't stopped the music jaggernaut any.
Re:Apple's going to take the lead just for trying. (Score:3, Interesting)
This raises a question for me:
If I buy a Battlestar Galactica episode from iTunes and then go and download the same episode in HDTV resolution via BitTorrent, am I breaking the law?
Re:Apple's going to take the lead just for trying. (Score:5, Insightful)
Spend the $1.99 and try it, it's not that bad at all.
Re:Apple's going to take the lead just for trying. (Score:5, Insightful)
Jobs sees this and he has taken hold of it. the success of the iPod proves it, people will pay a moderate sum and be locked in to propriertary content and players. Not even i really care, i'd rather d/l instantly with iTunes and scour the net for 1/2 hour for a song. Move this into other media formats and Jobs is solitifying the long term future of apple. They can move from just computers and ipods to tvs, dvrs, ect. this is the future and he is making apple the leader of the pack
Re:Apple's going to take the lead just for trying. (Score:3)
If you ask everyone that for what they pay for CableTv they could get a service where they simply subscribe to the TV shows they want... both Stargates, Mythbusters, Lost, Bullshit, etc... and they get the shows as well as some freebie teasers of new shows or "highlighted" shows in the "what's new" section they would buy it in droves. CableTv sucks there is mayb
Re:Apple's going to take the lead just for trying. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's way WAY less than 12%. If you have 100 channels and you watch your TV 24/7 without sleeping, with picture-in-a-picture turned on, you're still only utilizing 2% of the content you're getting (not accounting for reruns, etc). Most people with cable get more than 100 channels, and don't wat
I want Firefly! (Score:5, Funny)
...and a pony! (Score:2)
Re:I want Firefly! (Score:3, Informative)
As a non-itunes user... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:As a non-itunes user... (Score:2)
Re:As a non-itunes user... (Score:3, Informative)
If that resolution isn't exact, it's around that size. Works for cartoons, a bit too small to really enjoy other shows on your TV.
Re:As a non-itunes user... (Score:2, Informative)
SD Quality Downloads (Score:5, Informative)
For example, I have a Sony 50" LCD Projection HDTV (Love it, BTW.) I also have a PowerBook. All I do is plug the S-Video cable from my computer to my TV and play all those episode of LOST I love. I had never seen LOST prior to downloading on iTunes, so I thought I would DL a couple and try it out. I was really impressed by the quality. It's better than a normal SD broadcast, the colors are amazing, and the compression is almost never noticable.
So, yes, I would like HD quality downloads for video (nominal charge is fine for bandwidth) and I'd like higher quality AAC's (norminal charge fine) as an option. But this is a great start and will prove the validity of the concept.
Adam-12 (Score:5, Funny)
Are the TV execs thinkin about the future? (Score:4, Insightful)
In the meantime, Im happy to see more shows on itunes
Re:Are the TV execs thinkin about the future? (Score:2)
I suspect the TV companies are asking for variable pricing right now, and the reason they are only coming on-board slowly and with a limited number of programmes is because Apple won't budge on the issue.
David Hasselhoff show, but not Baywatch??? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:David Hasselhoff show, but not Baywatch??? (Score:2)
In other words: Breasts! (No, not David's)
Knight Rider (Score:2)
Although I loved Knight Rider as a child, I just can't watch it any more because my suspension of disbelief can't hold up to it any more. First, it's obvious that no AI can be as good as KITT. But even if you choose to accept that, then the next question is, why did they think the best use for such amazing AI software is to shove it in a car so some vigilante can fight crime? Or why didn't they at least make copies of it for a thousand other uses?
Also, whenever I see David Hasselhoff now, I just think, "
Re:Knight Rider (Score:2)
This will be news when... (Score:5, Interesting)
yeah... now *that* would be a dream come true? need a quick manos fix? go to itms... and watch on your ipod.
*thinks about productivity*
perhaps that isn't such a great idea.
but yeah... wonder if mister jobs is a misty?
Re:This will be news when... (Score:4, Informative)
I currently have about 40-50 downloaded episodes, some near-DVD quality. Great resource.
Hasselhoff? (Score:5, Funny)
Just when you thought you'd never be able to get live action David Hasselhoff on your iPod video
s/thought/hoped
After all the years (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:After all the years (Score:5, Funny)
And you even forgot the most important reason - David Hasselhoff!
Danger! Danger! Non-uniform pricing!! (Score:5, Informative)
Important Add-on comment (Score:5, Informative)
The important part of that sentence is that the Leno and Conan stuff is 5-10 minutes long for the same price.
Re:Important Add-on comment (Score:2)
$2 for a 6-minute monologue is mighty steep, though.
Re:Danger! Danger! Non-uniform pricing!! (Score:2)
Scripted TV shows and movies are stuff you watch several times and your favourites are stuff you want to collect. Companies can thus get away with charging a premium on it. Are there really that many that will want to watch a particular episode of Late Night Show over and over again unless a relative happened to be on it?
I'll find it surprising if these work out as anything but a free teaser for other material
Re:Danger! Danger! Non-uniform pricing!! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Danger! Danger! Non-uniform pricing!! (Score:2)
Kind of nice. (Score:3, Informative)
Do the math ... properly (Score:3, Insightful)
So that's $1000 for 2y of PVR.
Or you could buy a TiVo. That's $50-300 + $200 of subscriptions for 2y of PVR (by which time TiVo is bankrupt...). And sales tax. Yada yada yada.
Then there's your cable TV bill (or are you doing all this for broad
Thought for the day... (Score:4, Interesting)
Everybody is talking about possible future Apple products - the iphone, icamera etc. I think there is a more logical and much more interesting product apple could make - an Apple TV.
Think about it - Sony and Microsoft are currently battling it out with gaming machines assuming that it's going to become the "media hub" for the home. What if they're completely wrong?
Apple have got many of the pieces of the puzzle already - Frontrow, itunes, a rock solid OS to base things on.
I can imagine my old mum and dad buying an Apple TV, but they would never in a million years buy an XBox or playstation.
Re:Thought for the day... (Score:2)
http://www.lowendmac.com/roadapples/mactv.shtml [lowendmac.com]
Re:Thought for the day... (Score:3, Funny)
Apparently you've never heard the saying... (Score:2)
-everphilski-
How about some free downloads too? (Score:3, Insightful)
For example, why not offer some freebies of more unpopular shows as an incentive to download the popular ones?
Why can't NBC/SciFi/Steve Jobs just give some things away as a way of saying thanks for all the millions of dollars they make?
Re:How about some free downloads too? (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's why there are no iTunes video freebies (Score:2)
What do you think people have been getting from P2P for ages????
Sheesh.
Re:How about some free downloads too? (Score:5, Funny)
Because if I'm Steve Jobs, slashdot is the first site I click each day for marketing advice.
Re:How about some free downloads too? (Score:3, Interesting)
A Deal With FOX? (Score:2, Interesting)
I'd pay $100 for a season of Arrested Development. I'm 30 years old, and this is the funniest show I've ever seen on TV.
Re:A Deal With FOX? (Score:2)
Great, but... (Score:2, Redundant)
Kudos to Apple again (Score:2, Interesting)
Battlestar Galactica (Score:4, Interesting)
But no.
Season 1: $25.87
Season 2: $1.99/episode
*drools*
Yawn... (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:Yawn... (Score:3, Informative)
Now, keep in mind that a 45-minute episode of "Lost" takes 10-20 minutes to download. You want twice the resolution, th
What Technology is Behind iTMS? (Score:5, Interesting)
-JT
Re:What Technology is Behind iTMS? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What Technology is Behind iTMS? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What Technology is Behind iTMS? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What Technology is Behind iTMS? (Score:3)
XBMC? (Score:2)
Soon in France... (Score:4, Funny)
Apple was about to open the TV shows download service in France but backed out at the last minute after a market analysis showed that nobody would care unless Apple offers all seasons of MacGyver in HD.
Overpriced! (Score:3, Insightful)
Average number of viewers/episode: 17.44mil [yahoo.com]
Number of ads per show: Probably about 10min of National ads (20 30-second spots), 5 of local ads (10 30-second spots)
Price per 30-second National spot: $560,000 [sc.edu]
National ad revenue per show: $11.2m
Value/viewer: $.64!
Now, this isn't counting the value of the local ads (which sell in the tens of thousands of $/spot, depending on the market and timeslot), what the show will make in syndication, or DVD sales, but neither is it counting the costs associated with broadcasting television, which are far greater than the cost of hosting a file. I just can't imagine a single show being worth more than a dollar. $2!? I think I'll find [ahem!] other ways to get the shows for a better price point.
I'd gladly pay a quarter for the rights to watch a 30-min show ad-free for 24hrs, encumbered with DRM and everything. If there were a huge database of these shows, I might even go back at a later date and pay to watch them again. A system like that would have to be at LEAST as profitable as broadcast TV, if not moreso...
Leno and Conan (Score:3, Informative)
Only 300 episodes? (Score:3, Funny)
Just bought some shows off iTMS... (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know what apple is doing, but the 320x240 video looks better than TV quality. The images are crisp, colors are quite lush and yes, no blotchy spots from bad encoding.
Took almost 20 minutes to download a 40 min episode... and this on a shared T1. The files are between 110-120 MB each. I can see why they are not doing HD quality... 400-600 MB would take for ever to download... (not everyone has an OC-3 pipe at home....; stuck with Comcast at home....).
All in all a good compromise between speed and quality. Pleasantly surprised, is more like it!
Re:Not for me. (Score:3, Informative)
There's always a couple... (Score:2)
It is widley rumored that Apple will be releasing an Intel based "media" mac, perhaps the revamped Mini, at MWSF this year. Considering the new software and integration plans for this product, you can begin to see how additional features will come out.
And, come on
Re:Not for me. (Score:5, Interesting)
h.264 will be the format of choice with the next-gen video cards with hardware support for h.264.
FairPlay does sort of suck, since you can't do anything with it, but at least it works, and doesn't get the movie/music people are bent out of shape.
Mac + Windows represents virtually all the _consumer_ market. Plus, iTunes can run on Linux via CrossOverOffice and others, so this point is not all that strong. The market just isn't there for solid native Linux support.
You can play these videos are FAR many more devices than the 5G iPod, like EVERY PC and Mac with iTunes. Yes, the videos right now are built for the iPod, but if you think the iPod is the only intended device, you've missed the point - the iPod is just a test.
Why do you need to burn a DVD when you can hook up your PC/Mac to your TV/HDTV, or even better yet, watch them on your nice high res monitor? Most people don't have HDTVs, so their computer monitors are as high res as they go. And you can burn the files to a data DVD to take wherever, or network share, or whatever. The DVD isn't tomorrow's technology - it's barely even today's. These videos represent a physical media-free environment, so again, whether this is a good thing or not, I think you're missing the point.
HDTV downloads would take FOREVER. Of course, if reports from Front Row-equipped iMacs streaming in HD trailer without stuttering or loading times is true, Apple is two steps ahead of us on this already.
Point is - this isn't meant to be a be all that ends all offering. This is a test, this is only a test. Why the heck else would they pick such a crazy variety of shows to test many potential demographics?
Re:Not for me. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's an Apple service intended for video iPod users. Why would they want you to have it anywhere else?
Open and accessible store? Nope. You need iTunes which is only available for Macintosh and Windows.
Hm, Mac OS X and Windows. That covers how much market?
Compatibility with many devices? Nope. Only one: the iPod 5G.
Here's an idea. Lets build a time machine and go back and build in video functionality in the old iPods.
Well at least I can create a DVD, like iTunes lets me burn a CD with my purchased songs, right? Nope. No burning. Only playback.
Hrm. Let's see. Can you play a DVD on your iPod? No?
Well at least the new episodes of Law & Order, which are filmed in HDTV, will be shown in brilliant 1280x720 resolution, right? Nope. 320x240.
Again, you're talking about a service for the video iPod. The resolution it can display is only so high.
Good for you, Apple. Welcome to the 19th century. I'll be over here with my trusty BitTorrent client.
19th century? Wow. I guess you're trying to make your point. Yet Apple is the first company to offer something like this.
As for BitTorrent, grow up. Do you seriously expect that everyone would work for free to create these shows?
Imagine if half the audience for Lost suddenly started watching the shows only on BitTorrent. The advertisement rates for the slot would drop, creating less cash for the network and the show, probably causing the network to pull the show because it's not creating enough revenue.
That is one of the reasons I shell out $40 for the seasons worth of Battlestar Galactica. I know I can get a reasonable quality copy off BitTorrent, probably even the very same DVD images. However I'd like to see more of the show. Thus I pay some money so the actors and the crew and the network can earn some money and be encouraged to create another season.
Re:Not for me. (Score:3, Interesting)
Hell, we're using computers. They might as well offer it in 1080p for those of us with big enough monitors.
Re:Not for me. (Score:5, Funny)
Let's get out my handy-dandy little red pen here.
Sure, let's. I'll get out my bright green pen and join you.
h.264 format? I guess that's okay.
Oh, you're too kind.
'FairPlay' DRM? Not good. I can't play it outside iTunes.
Well, actually, you can play it in QuickTime. A much better video player.
Open and accessible store? Nope. You need iTunes which is only available for Macintosh and Windows.
And...Apple should cater to the 1% of computer users who run only Linux with this why, exactly?
Compatibility with many devices? Nope. Only one: the iPod 5G.
Um, actually, it's compatible with those 99% of computers running Windows and Mac OS X.
Well at least I can create a DVD, like iTunes lets me burn a CD with my purchased songs, right? Nope. No burning. Only playback.
I'll admit that this is kind of annoying, but I have little doubt that it will change, given time. Don't forget, this is still a very new service.
Well at least the new episodes of Law & Order, which are filmed in HDTV, will be shown in brilliant 1280x720 resolution, right? Nope. 320x240.
Ah...well, you may have a nice fat OC3 to download shows on, but many (if not most) of us are still stuck on nominally 784kbps pipes, that actually turn out to be more like 80kbps most of the time if we're lucky. Oh, and most of us don't have HDTVs to watch them on, either.
Good for you, Apple. Welcome to the 19th century. I'll be over here with my trusty BitTorrent client.
And I'll be here with my copy of iTunes, watchin' the next Law & Order legally in what I, and many, many others consider to be a perfectly acceptable resolution and format, on my laptop, or maybe plug my TV into it and watch it there (it'll probably be higher quality than what comes over the cable anyway).
I think your real problem is that you are both rich and extremely myopic. You seem to think that Apple's (essentially) brand-new service should provide the absolute top-of-the-line product to be worth purchasing at all, when in reality, most people either couldn't use that product ('cause it would take them 3 days to download the file) or it wouldn't be any different, for them, than what they're getting ('cause they don't have a 60" 1080p HDTV with 9.2 ultra-surround--they have a 28" analog TV with ordinary stereo speakers).
So take a peek outside your soundproof, well-upholstered, $30,000 technological paradise and glance at the real world once in a while, and you'll see why Apple is doing this. Then stop being such a whiner.
Dan Aris
Re:Can stop Paying (Score:3, Funny)
In case you haven't noticed, the cost of videos from iTMS is £1.89 - almost twice the price o
Re:Not so impressive as it sounds. (Score:2)
moderation (Score:3, Insightful)