Video iPod May Arrive in September

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."

From the FA

[vlad_petric]

It's all about music videos, not movies. That makes a huge difference, IMNSHO.

Re:This Explains It!

[phlops]

Already happened: http://arstechnica.com/columns/mac/mac-20050710.ar s [arstechnica.com]

The joys of recanting

[Iriel]

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?

Re:firmware update or new device?

[jokell82]

Check again. Current iPods (except for the mini) are color.
http://www.apple.com/ipod [apple.com]

Re:One Problem

[cyberworm]

I do beleive they already have the A/V out on the iPod photo.

Re:The joys of recanting

[norminator]

does anyone know when Microsoft is supposed to release a contender to this possible product?

They don't make the product, but the software that runs on the product, and it's been around for a little while now, I believe. I first saw Creative's version at CES Jan 2004: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/devices/por tablemediacenter/overview.mspx [microsoft.com]

Of course, if you're talking about about "the product" as in the service for buying the video, then see "Bill Gates Swears Vow Against 'Son of iPod'" on the main page.

uh huh?

[d34thm0nk3y]

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]

Depends on your quality requirements.

[rdunnell]

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 my iPod but can't think of a reason why I'd need a video one. But I'm sure someone else might have a very good reason. I'm just saying that it's feasible from a current storage perspective.)

Re:One Problem

[kebes]

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.

Re:Cost of video vs. cost of audio

[kenneth_martens]

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?

I understand what you're saying. It doesn't make sense that a video that costs $1 million to make would cost only twice as much as a song that cost $10,000 to produce. Shouldn't a product's value be a measure of the amount of labor put into producing it?

That idea is called the labor theory of value, and it's one of the underpinnings of Marxism. But in a free market, the value of a product is not determined by the amount of labor put into producing it, but rather by what the consumer is willing to pay. Buying and selling in a free market is a mutually beneficial arrangement: the buyer willingly pays a price for a product he wants.

If the buyer is willing to pay $.99 to download a song, then a song is "worth" $.99. It doesn't matter how much it cost to produce that song. Similarly, the cost to produce a video has no bearing on its value. Only the willingness of the buyer to pay determines its value.

Thus it is not the amount of labor or money spent on making the song or video that determines its price, but rather the willingness of the buyer to pay that determines the price. The free market of buyers will pay whatever they feel is reasonable and not a penny more. If $1.99 is all that is reasonable for a video in the minds of the buyers, then that is what videos are worth.

nail on the head man

[sweetaction]

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