Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Video iPod May Arrive in September

Posted by timothy on Mon Jul 18, 2005 12:26 PM
from the then-they-go-to-the-computer-bridal-chamber dept.
Media Media (Apple) Businesses Apple
Fuzzball963 writes "MSNBC is reporting that Apple is in talks with major record labels to license and sell video content on the iTunes music store. The videos would sell for $1.99 and be playable on a video iPod, which Apple has reported may come out sometime in September." Update: 07/18 18:54 GMT by T : Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "Just to add to the previous Apple post, here's a free link to today's Wall Street Journal article upon which the MSNBC article was based."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Video iPod May Arrive in September 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Before everyone starts bitching about the screen, I'd like to mention that the strength of such a video iPod would be in its ability to output signal to a TV.
    That way you can carry half a dozen, dozen movies with you on trips, to your friends houses, wherever, and view them on TV.

    Think of it as your portable movie library.
    (considering that that's what iPods already are for music purposes.)

    • Re:Before everyone starts bitching about the scree (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Golias (176380) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:39PM (#13095614)
      Before everyone starts bitching about the screen, I'd like to mention that the strength of such a video iPod would be in its ability to output signal to a TV.
      That way you can carry half a dozen, dozen movies with you on trips, to your friends houses, wherever, and view them on TV.

      I can already do that, though, provided a computer with DVI-output (eg: any new Mac), and a TV with HDMI-input (eg: pretty much any new TV worth owning) is available for use at the house I'm going to.

      Just rip the DVD's to the iPod with Mac the Ripper, as I would with any other hard drive, and open them using the DVD Player on the Mac at the house I go to.

      Think of it as your portable movie library.
      (considering that that's what iPods already are for music purposes.)

      No, iPods are for listening to music on the go. Are you actually suggesting that their main function is to allow you to take your music to a friends house and play on their stereo?
      • you have a point.
        adding video to iPod (which does one thing and does it well, except now it can do two things -- photos) makes it perhaps too complicated.

        however, what i am suggesting is that Apple would now have a tool to dominate the online video market the way they do music.

        think about it. we're all waiting for movies for download. who's gonna do it and how? Apple is the only company that can even try. All they need are the contracts, bandwidth, and video iPods.

      • I can already do that, though, provided...
        Your provisos are completely ludicrous. A new macintosh and a $1000+ television? I would hope that Apple has a larger target market in mind when they start selling music videos for $2.
        Think of it as your portable movie library.
        (considering that that's what iPods already are for music purposes.)
        No, iPods are for listening to music on the go. Are you actually suggesting that their main function is to allow you to take your music to a friends house and play on their stereo?
        I think he's suggesting that the virtues of a 60GB iPod over a 4GB iPod mini has nothing to do with listening to music on the go.

      • No grandparent poster is right. No one wants to use a computer to serve video from an iPod to a TV. Too many components. These small cables [apple.com] are much easier.

        On the other side I doubt this is what apple wants people to use the iPod for. P2PNet [p2pnet.net] has a good post listing why this isn't what you think. Apple knows a video iPod would get hacked to play nearly anything (though any mpeg4 video like xvid/divx is probably too cpu intensive to work) to play on it. This functionality will be for crap qual

      • Re:Before everyone starts bitching about the scree (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Perl-Pusher (555592) on Monday July 18 2005, @01:26PM (#13096117)
        No, iPods are for listening to music on the go.

        They can be so much more than music on the go. I perform using mine. I can DJ 2,000 songs, in addition I record songs using garageband on my G5 iMac, a FOSTEX 8 track digital recorder and a mixing board. I then play them back over the PA while I sing and play the guitar. It works like a charm! I will probably use a laptop sometime in the future. But for now the ipod works great! Before I do a show I edit the play lists for each set. The great thing is when I DJ, I don't have to carry all my CD's and I'm no longer burning cd back ups all the time. CD's tend to get scratched too easy.

      • Re:Before everyone starts bitching about the scree (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Rew190 (138940) on Monday July 18 2005, @01:42PM (#13096317)
        I can already do that, though, provided a computer with DVI-output (eg: any new Mac), and a TV with HDMI-input (eg: pretty much any new TV worth owning) is available for use at the house I'm going to.

        Your method requires not only a Mac, but a relatively new Mac, a high definition TV, and a short enough distance between the two to hook up a rather expensive cable.

        Any bets on how many target users actually have a setup like that? It's not practical...

        ... but how about the ability to plug an RCA or S-Video jack directly from your very portable iPod into a TV and calling it a day?

        Are you actually suggesting that their main function is to allow you to take your music to a friends house and play on their stereo?

        Although I'm not the parent poster, I can attest that many users purchase iPods to plug into their stereos at work. It happens here constantly, and I highly doubt we're the only ones. The point of an iPod is to have ridiculous amounts of music with you in your pocket that you can access anywhere. How would this not translate well with movies? What is the fundamental difference between hooking it up to earphones or to speakers?
    • Actually, If you try out a modern phone, it has a resolution of about 240x320, which is approximately one quarter of the resolution of a normal tv. I have watched quite a lot of content on it, and it works surprisingly well.
      Most people I meet laugh at the idea of watching video from something as small as a mobile phone, but it is already quite enjoyable, and after being shown a video they are always eager to accept being wrong. (As an anecdote I've had some of my friends sit around my phone looking at the video of Satisfaction, and noone complained about the screen size being small)

      I can only imagine that if Apple puts some effort into their video iPod, they'll be able to have the same resolution as a regular TV.
      The idea that we need to watch video on large screens (tv/cinema) is what I think is mostly convention, a small screen (at a closer distance to your eyes) occupies the same percentage of your retina as a big one at a distance.
      To me, such criticism is just like people said "who would ever want to walk and listen to music at the same time?".
      Small screens are usable already. And of course, should you prefer the relaxation of looking at something in the distance, you can always hook the iPod to the TV, just as the parent poster suggested.
    • Before everyone starts bitching...

      Stop right there. I know it's cliche, but you must be new here.

    • nail on the head man (Score:4, Informative)

      by sweetaction (649666) on Monday July 18 2005, @01:11PM (#13095932) Homepage
      I have been messing around with HandBreak http://handbrake.m0k.org/ [m0k.org] and have been able to use that snazzy new H.264 codec and compressed NapoleonDynomite to 652mb with no noticable quality loss at all. My 60 gig iPod should hold at least 60 movies and still a bit of music.

      Small screen? Sure its small. But as said elsewhere in this thread, plug it into your tv. Bam. portable movies.

      Sync it with your new Apple DVR system and... oh wait. not yet.

      go apple

  • firmware update or new device? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by anotherone (132088) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:29PM (#13095468)
    Allegedly the current chip that's now being used for all ipods is capable of playing MPEG4 video. Will we see video support being released as a firmware upgrade or as a whole new ipod? I want to say new ipod but I really don't know if I'd be suprised if apple released it as a firmware upgrade.
    • According to As Seen On TV, Apple was forced to wait for a H.264 hardware decoder before they moved into portable video. It makes sense that enough time has passed for that problem to be solved. Thus, the Apple Store videos will probably be H.264. If Apple makes any equivalent to ripping, it'll probably be to H.264 just like CDs go to AAC by default. The device may be capable of playing MPEG4 also, but do you think Apple is going to forgo the opportunity to put their high end iPod at the $500 price point ag

  • hacked version (Score:3, Interesting)

    by plutonium83 (818340) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:30PM (#13095470)
    I'd be more interested in a hacked version of this new ipod that can play ANY video I want.
  • For a few reasons, I have a hard time believing that video on an iPod (or any other device) will be nearly as popular as music. The main thing is that people have lots of time to _listen_ while they work/drive/exercise/stroll/relax/sleep, but very little time when they can dedicate their most important sense to recreation. DVD's sell well, it's true, but while in my own case I might listen to a CD 20 or 30 times (and sometimes way more), I only watch a movie a few times (and maybe up to 10 times). This is primarily because of the bandwidth of time and attention, not for lack of interest.

    • From the FA (Score:5, Informative)

      by vlad_petric (94134) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:34PM (#13095534) Homepage
      It's all about music videos, not movies. That makes a huge difference, IMNSHO.

      • Re:From the FA (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Otter (3800)
        Is there really a significant base of people willing to pay $2 for videos, on top of the expensive new player needed to view them, though? Given that the network that's synonomous with music videos has pretty much abandoned them in favor of "reality" shows (and yet the bastards have canceled their one gem, Wildboyz!), I don't quite see it.
    • Yeah, and some people watch movies every weekend. Go figure.

    • Video _right_there_ (Score:5, Interesting)

      by dazedNconfuzed (154242) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:56PM (#13095801)
      Problem with video tech so far is that you have to settle in to watch it: fire up the home theater, point & click several times on your laptop, open & hold the awkward portable DVD player ... watching videos requires setup time and awkward movement-unfriendly positions. The technology forces you to not move, coupled with set-up/down time.

      Contrast that with a video iPod:
      iPod audio is right there - in pocket, instant on/off.
      iPod video will likewise be right there - in-hand and running practically instantly ... perfect for intermediate "dead time", especially when commuting.
      Spending 10 minutes on a bus? Waiting for an airplane? 5 minutes early for a meeting? Unexpectedly waiting an hour for someone? No time to watch that movie, but have 15 minutes a day to kill?
      One second flat from bored to watching something interesting. Enough storage to actually store several interesting things.
      Yeah, the screen will be small - but it's right there, unlike your laptop which has to be hauled out of your backpack, or your >15" TV which is in your living room and definitely not on the bus or in the elevator with you.

    • Reason #1131 to move to Japan!

      Instead of a 1-hour drive to work, you can have a 1-hour train ride to work, and will be able to watch entire television shows or significant portions of movies during transit. It gives you an excuse to own a video-capable player.

      However, considering that shoulder bags are an acceptable accoutrement for men over there, perhaps you'd be happier with the new Archos PMP with the 7" screen...

      Jasin Natael

  • Sweet! (Score:5, Funny)

    by eln (21727) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:30PM (#13095474) Homepage
    Now they need to make a video camera iPod, so I can film all the video iPod owners running into light poles while trying to watch this thing on their morning jog.
  • I wonder if iTunes will have a built-in video player so I won't need a video iPod. At $3 a movie that's not a bad deal as long as it's at least 600kbps MPEG-4.

  • Link to facts? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by spicyjeff (6305) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:31PM (#13095490) Homepage
    which Apple has reported may come out sometime in September


    They have? Apple being such an open company and all with their future products.

  • This Explains It! (Score:5, Funny)

    by TPIRman (142895) * on Monday July 18 2005, @12:31PM (#13095492)
    ETA of video iPod: September.

    ETA of conspiracy theory explaining why the video iPod is the real reason that Apple switched to Intel: Any second now.

  • Cost of video vs. cost of audio (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MasterC (70492) <cmlburnett&gmail,com> on Monday July 18 2005, @12:31PM (#13095495) Homepage
    So, if a music video is $1.99 and the song is $0.99...then I don't get it. Does it really cost that much to make a song or does it really cost very little to make a video?

    Somehow, I don't see that it's only twice the cost to make a video unless the price of the song is hyper-inflated (which, of course, could never be the case :).

    Just like how the DVD is ~$17 on release day at Wal-Mart but the soundtrack is $16.

  • Gates must be a bit chagrined. (Score:5, Funny)

    by jusdisgi (617863) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:32PM (#13095502)
    Hehe. And this just hours after "Bill Gates Swears Vow Against 'Son of iPod'"

    Too little too late? I thought you said it was a good size!

    -Brodie and Gates.

  • Why stop with music videos? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by alvinrod (889928) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:33PM (#13095527)
    Apple really needs to get into the market the same way they got into the online music market: invent it and make it work so seemlessly that later competitors won't be able to keep up.

    Apple could easily pitch the success of their iTunes music store the the major motion picture companies and probably work out a reasonable DRM that's flexible enough for consumers to handle.

    Personally, I don't care if some other company is first out the door and gets it right like Apple did with the iPod and iTunes, but I just hope that other company isn't Microsoft given a lot of the recent /. articles about Longhorn having DRM for monitors and EF by Intel.

  • Protable video devices (Score:3, Insightful)

    by norminator (784674) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:35PM (#13095556)
    There's been a few comments on /. lately about how portable video devices won't take off because noone wants to watch video on a small screen. But I've been thinking about this, and the regular iPod line has been inspiring high-end custom electronics manufacturers to integrate the iPod into nice home audio systems. The more I think about it, the purpose of the Video iPod wouldn't necessarily be to watch video wherever you go, although that would be an extra bonus, but to bring video wherever you want to, and easily watch it on whatever decent-size display you want. I'm sure it wouldn't have DVI or component out, so it wouldn't be a source for super-awesome hi-def video, but it would be great for home movies, music videos, funny videos downloaded from the Internet, and a lot of other things.

  • The joys of recanting (Score:3, Informative)

    by Iriel (810009) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:35PM (#13095557) Homepage
    I seem to recall Steve Jobs mentioning that video was never meant to be portable. If memory serves, that was only one or two years ago.

    Fast forward and any technology statement can and will be proven wrong by technology advances, customer demand, or the latter despite the lack of the former followed by several years of beta testing that people will call 1G.

    Regardless, I'm still looking forward to what Apple can bring to the less than booming world of portable video players. And does anyone know when Microsoft is supposed to release a contender to this possible product?

  • This is just perfect! (Score:3, Funny)

    by DaFork (608023) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:36PM (#13095572)
    Now my Aunt can carry around hours of her crappy home videos anywhere she wants for instant torture.

  • I'd buy them on one condition (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ShatteredDream (636520) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:44PM (#13095658) Homepage
    If I could buy them and burn them to DVD using iTunes, then hell yeah I'd pay $1.99 per video. However, if they expect me to have to watch them on a tiny iPod screen or on my laptop then forget it. I have about 6-7 DVDs of music videos that I've downloaded online. If I can't watch them on my TV using VCDs or DVDs, then this isn't a good reason for me to give up on downloading music videos.
  • ...at least it does to me. I don't know who else was following along with the claims of "As Seen on TV" of being a big shot at apple but here [slashdot.org] he pretty much states there will never be a video ipod from apple. I'm guessing most people already had their suspicions about the guy but for me this confirms mine.

  • uh huh? (Score:3, Informative)

    by d34thm0nk3y (653414) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:47PM (#13095703)
    Didn't he just say the opposite, oh yeah.

    Mr. Jobs addressed the issue of video on iPods when asked by Mike Wendland of the Detroit Free Press whether or not Apple was looking to add features to the iPod. "We want it to make toast," replied Mr. Jobs. "We're toying with refrigeration, too."

    While intended to get a laugh, which it did, Mr. Jobs also offered a more substantive answer as to why Apple had heretofore not added too many features to the iPod. "One of the things we say around Apple, and I paraphrase Bill Clinton from the 1992 presidential race, is 'It's about the music, stupid.'"

    Mr. Jobs says that there is a big difference between the way people listen to music and other activities like watching videos. Specifically, he said, you can listen to music in the background, while movies require that you actually watch them. "You can't watch a video and drive a car," he said. "We're focused on music."

    Sources: one [engadget.com]
    two [macobserver.com]

  • Looking forward (Score:3, Funny)

    by AtariAmarok (451306) on Monday July 18 2005, @01:01PM (#13095846)
    Looking forward to new three-color iPod ads on TV showing someone wearing an iPod, dancing down the street watching the screen, and smashing into a nearby lamppost.
    • I'm thinking the design of the video iPod might be slightly different than the audio version. At least that's what I'm hoping for, because you're right -- it will be horrific if it's the little stamp sized screen they have now. Maybe if they had something similar to the PSP's screen...

        • Re:One Problem (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Sandor at the Zoo (98013) on Monday July 18 2005, @01:03PM (#13095872)
          Why not bump up the processor a little so we can watch Xvid and Ogg movies? Oh wait...no DRM to piss off your customers?

          Yeah! Just like I can't listen to DRM-less MP3s on my iPod now! Oh, wait...

          And customers are so "pissed off" that Apple just passed the 500 million song mark at the iTMS.

          Give me a break.

          And how does QuickTime or DRM take up "way more space than it needs too[sic]"?

          I would expect Apple to use H.264, which stands up to any other codec in the quality per bitrate fight. Assuming they are actually doing a vPod, and that they can get a cheap custom processor for H.264 decoding, etc.

          It'd be nice if they supported XViD, but if they don't support Ogg Snigfa or whatever the video codec is called, I don't think anyone will care. "Anyone" meaning "anyone who would be a paying customer" for a vPod. :-)

    • Now that's a bit short-sighted. I'll bet big money that the first peripheral/add-on is an A/V red-white-yellow output so you can connect it to your TV.

      <paranoia>(Or, will Apple balk at this, considering how easy that would make it to circumvent the inevitable DRM on the movies?)</paranoia>

    • Re:One Problem (Score:5, Informative)

      by kebes (861706) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:51PM (#13095749) Journal
      Ever watched a movie on a PSP? It's actually not too bad (I was surprised too). If the video-iPod had a cable to hook up to a normal TV (or computer) that would be amazing... but even with PSP-style video size/resolution, it's good enough for watching the morning news on the bus, or perhaps watching an episode of the "Family Guy" (or other TV that doesn't require awesome resolution)... It's even reasonable for watching normal TV and movies in situations where you don't have access to a normal TV screen.

      And of course, if the pixel density is high enough, there's not much difference between watching a 4-inch screen at 2ft distance versus watching a 52-inch screen at 15ft.

    • Yep (Score:5, Funny)

      by Knome_fan (898727) on Monday July 18 2005, @12:39PM (#13095611)
      It'll be called iPrOn
    • "Does this mean Apple will now become the world's largest porn vendor???

      Not that I, uh, know much about it but I think Kazaa and such have the monopoly on that specific content.

      On a side note, imagine the contest like Apple just did with their 500th million song...

      And the winner is John Smith, who downloaded 'Sweet Cheeks and Sticky Buns IV'!

      • Re:Yeah, but... (Score:4, Funny)

        by Dogtanian (588974) on Monday July 18 2005, @01:10PM (#13095925) Homepage
        Oddly enough, I have absolutely no interest in wathcing pr0n on a 1 - 1/2 inch screen.

        There's a joke insulting your manhood and including the words "life size" in there somewhere, but I think I'll leave it.
    • For a small(ish) screen and earbuds, you don't need surround sound audio tracks and high resolution HD video feeds. A compressed video stream at a reduced screen size and bitrate can hold a movie in under a gigabyte of space. You're not going to have breathtaking quality anyway, so it's not as if you're going to severely miss something.

      So, now your 60Gb iPod holds 30 Gb of music and 30-60 movies or a bunch more TV programs.

      (I'm not debating whether or not it's an idea that's really worth much. I like m
    • Of course, you're totally immersed in other activities sitting on a plane, train, or bus. Or if you're a passenger in a car on a trip. Or peddling away at the gym. Or sitting in a waiting room. Or hotel room. Or sitting around somewhere on a night shift. Or...

      You get the idea. There's a ton of dead time in which such a thing could be useful, in addition to the fact that you can STILL use it to play music the rest of the time.

      As to battery life, that's an unknown assumption. But really, all it needs to

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.