Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media Businesses Apple

Apple to Offer MGM Movies 161

Posted by CowboyNeal from the roaring-on-the-mac dept.
UnknowingFool writes "Apple announced today that it will be adding MGM movies to its movie catalog. With Apple already selling Disney and Paramount movies, how long will it be before the other studios work out a deal with Apple?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple to Offer MGM Movies More

Apple to Offer MGM Movies

Comments Filter:

  • Follow or die (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BrowserCapsGuy ( 872795 ) * on Friday April 13, 2007 @12:24AM (#18714177)
    It seems to me the other studios will eventually have no choice but to accept this new method of distribution. Man that sounds dumb. But it's true. Good for Apple for forcing a change that I think most honest, paying customers have been demanding.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by limecat4eva ( 1055464 )
      Good grief, your comment--true as it is--almost begs controversy. I can almost smell them now, the unperceptive masses falling over their keyboards right now to claim Apple never pushes the envelope, only accepts the terms dictated it by the beige suits. Their lack of vision is almost as criminal as their lack of taste.
    • while its user interface is lacking, right now there is, bar none, no higher quality video playback than vlc.

      i dont want to use itunes to play back video.

      in fact.. i want my OLD itunes back.. the one before the RIAA started monkeying in the code and removing features, like internet streaming, then adding needless bloat.

      i want my itunes to be a music player and only a music player. apple's philosophy has always been to make one application for the job, and make it good, and theyre way off base with what th

      • I'm scared whenever I get a iTunes update notification.

        My first reaction always is, what feature did they remove in this update?

    • Last I checked (a few months ago) the quality of Apple releases were substandard. Amazon's ubox (or whatever) used a much higher resolution and a cost of file size. Apple's were below way below that of even dvd's. At the time i just ended up going to the store and picking up a box set of the series i was downloading from them (which was actually cheaper then $2 bucks and episode as there were 24 episodes and the box set was $39.x.

      Until apple's quality increases there is no reason to go with them unless y

  • say no to blogs (Score:5, Insightful)

    by timmarhy ( 659436 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @12:28AM (#18714211)
    am i the only person that's grateful to the poster for NOT linking to a stupid apple fan boy blog?

  • When in Australia?? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Cool and all, but how long does is it gonna take before TV and Movie content trickle down to other iTunes stores, like Australia.

    Sadly, my guess is never.

    • I wouldn't put the blame squarely on Apple. Distribution agreements have kept good content out of the hands of people in other countries for decades. It's only since the advent of broadband Internet access that people have been able to get first-run content from other places without waiting.

      There's a pretty good article about this over on Mind Jack [mindjack.com]

  • no hd? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by timmarhy ( 659436 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @12:32AM (#18714233)
    one thing i'd like to point out - these movies aren't even dvd quality. not sure what the point of that is? seriously if people ripping captures from hd tv can manage dvd quality, you'd think apple with all it's resources could do better.

    oh and wake up and smell the codecs - h264 can do dvd quality at 200megs per hour, you can't tell me peopel with adsl wouldn't be able to download that.

    • HD, or even DVD, would be a good option, but it had better not be the only option yet. There are still quite a few Americans who have only dial-up, and there is a slight chance some of them would be interested in these films from iTunes. It would be nice if they could download these films without tying up their phone lines for a week...

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by sheddd ( 592499 )
        I've bought a bit from the apple store; the average bitrate for their sd content is ~1500kb/second. So assuming your modem kicks ass and you average 50kb/second, it'll take 30 hours to download an hour show, or more realistically, 20 hours to download an hour show that's actually 40 minutes minus the commercials. So your download power on a modem is about one show per day.

        I doubt there are many dialup Itunes video users, but who knows?
    • Time for the wakeup call--most consumers don't give a shit about HD and don't even have HDTVs. They probably don't know what "HD" is.
      • That's changing. Over 15% of US households now have at least one HDTV. The cost of sets are still going down too. The money I paid for a small SD set five years ago will buy a bigger HD set now.
        • I saw just yesterday that it's up to 28%. I'm not on board yet... but soon. Eventually everyone will. It's the law.
      • If they're DLing and watching on their computers, they almost certainly already have an HD display. And at the distance people usually sit from their monitors, the extra quality is huge.
    • The point is establishing the distributions system and the licensing.

      Higher Resolution will come, HD even.

      But first this has to be.
      -Edified [edified.org]
    • oh and wake up and smell the codecs - h264 can do dvd quality at 200megs per hour, you can't tell me peopel with adsl wouldn't be able to download that.

      I think you missed the memo, Apple is using H.264. Their encoding takes about 600 megs per hour of footage, and I think it could stand to be higher.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mr_zorg ( 259994 )
      True, they're not DVD quality, but they're awfully damn close. DVD resolution in 720x480, these are 640x480. I suppose where the real loss comes in is that they're not anamorphic widescreen, but are letterboxed. So you lose (more) pixels to the black bars. I've ripped some of my own DVD's into the same format and resolutions for play on my iPod and they look surprisingly good, even when played back (via my Mac Mini) on my 60" HDTV. (Of course, I'd take a true HD stream over these any day...)
    • People are seeming to forget the videos are distributed to play on an ipod and the cmoputer. The ipod hads some limitations on bit rates and image quality that are much lower than on the computer. I think the movies and TV shows are encoded to be the best quality the ipod can put out (640x480 at some max bit rate...)

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Kjella ( 173770 )
      oh and wake up and smell the codecs - h264 can do dvd quality at 200megs per hour, you can't tell me peopel with adsl wouldn't be able to download that

      200MB/hr? So you're the guy who tried to cram the whole LotR EE movies (3,5 hours) in on a 1CD rip and claim it was DVD quality, I thought you were just a legend. Most seem to agree you can do 3-5x compression over MPEG2, which works out to about 2CDs for a regular movie.
      1

  • only USA (Score:5, Informative)

    by Riquez ( 917372 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @12:35AM (#18714243) Homepage
    It's good to see the Video content of iTunes progressing, obviously a must for Apple TV's success. Still, I have to say, it's only in the USA.
    The rest of the world are still have no Movie/TV content whatsoever (other than Music Vids & Pixar short films). Effectively making Apple TV a USA only device.

  • confused... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by davidmillions.com ( 1086903 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @12:39AM (#18714265) Homepage
    Why do studios care whether the movie is sold through DVDs or downloaded? All they care about is total revenue and profit anyway. An additional revenue is always good, and the people who would buy/rent a DVD vs the people that will download the movie probably wouldn't overlap that much.

  • Shall we... (Score:4, Funny)

    by paulthomas ( 685756 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @12:44AM (#18714297) Journal
    Shall we tag this oldnews? I mean... who doesn't subscribe to the Apple Hot News RSS Feed?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gbobeck ( 926553 )

      I mean... who doesn't subscribe to the Apple Hot News RSS Feed?

      I would assume the mole people who work for Microsoft in the division responsible for the Zune...

  • Ok, it's a step. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Hawthorne01 ( 575586 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @12:52AM (#18714369)
    Let's hope they go from selling movies online with DRM to selling movies online sans DRM. If the record labels (ok, EMI) went from no real online presence to the iTunes store to DRM-free music in less than five years, there's hope the movie studios can learn the same lesson.
    • A good start would be to pick those movies the Studios don't over-promote, such as ones from the 50s and 40s, and therefore wouldn't care much about being stolen. Shown them that people will buy "Charlie Varrick" [imdb.com] or Jimmy Stewart [imdb.com] flicks unprotected for a few bucks, and gradually they'll start loosening up their back catalogue of more contemporary films. At some point, on many of those movies they'll be paying more in fees to the copy-protection companies than they'd lose in theft. They'll further save
      • Hold on!
        Not all films from the '30s, '40s, & '50s are equal.
        Jimmy Stewart is a name actor, famous for his work among film afficiandos. I believe that most Jimmy Stewart flicks are worth more than most contemporary films.
        Also, the films from that era should include many that are public domain. Apple should put those films out, without DRM, ASAP.
        Anyone else annoyed that It's a Wonderful Life was removed from public domain by a technicality? (The film was into public domain, but it was belatedly dis

  • Classic Movies (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13, 2007 @12:54AM (#18714381)
    So, does this mean we will finally have access to all those classic movies which never made it to DVD?

    MGM started in the 1920s. That is a lot of movies that have not seen the light of day in may years. And, will the silent movies (which I don't believe for a second we'll ever get) sell for as much as the modern movies?

    The article says they "own" 4,000 (which would be about 50 per year since the 20s). Where is the list of those movies?

    How about the UA collection? MGM bought UA in 1981. That means all the Bond movies, and the Mary Pickford, Charles Chaplin, Douglas Fairbanks, etc. What of that will we see?
    And who knows what rights got suffled around int he whole Turner buyout.
  • It looks like Apple is moving away [slashdot.org] from the operating system business and towards Hollywood's fat pipe into our homes. I hope they find a good buyer. Or better yet they open source it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tfoss ( 203340 )
      It looks like Apple is moving away from the operating system business and towards Hollywood's fat pipe into our homes. I hope they find a good buyer. Or better yet they open source it.

      Repeat after me, Apple [apple.com] is [apple.com] a [apple.com] hardware [apple.com] company [apple.com]. They have been since day one.
      -Ted
    • Their priority is tasteful world domination. Your Apple TV [apple.com] connected to your Apple Cinema Display [apple.com], which links seamlessly to your .Mac [apple.com] account holding your iWeb [apple.com] page created on the desktop Mac [apple.com] wirelessly linked to all the rest through Airport [apple.com]. You're still thinking in terms of individually wrapped boxes, each standing in its own category. OS-X sells Macs, and integrates the rest of the Apple Digital Lifestyle. As such, it's a vital component, but increasingly a tightly-integrated part of the whole.
    • Apple open source Hollywood?
      Sorry, the MPAA isn't going to allow that if they have any say at all.

  • Gotta say: "Who Cares?" (Score:4, Insightful)

    by OverlordQ ( 264228 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @01:18AM (#18714541) Journal
    I for one would rather go buy a more expensive DVD then get a crappy quality video from iTunes.

    • Re:Gotta say: "Who Cares?" (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Mr2001 ( 90979 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @02:20AM (#18714877) Homepage Journal
      You've been modded down, but you're right. In most cases, the DVD doesn't cost more than $5 over Apple's price, and you get slightly higher video quality, bonus features and commentary, and you can play it anywhere. There's no PlayFair or QTFairUse for iTunes's video DRM, so the movies you buy there will only play on a computer, an iPod, or the stillborn Apple TV.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by rm69990 ( 885744 )
        While I agree the AppleTV won't do very well, calling it stillborn a couple weeks after launch with no sales data available is a bit of a stretch. In-fact, calling anything stillborn when it's just been released is a stretch.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by DrXym ( 126579 )
          The problem with Apple TV is that it assumes that you are an iTMS customer with a PC or Mac, that you may own an iPod, a home LAN network (preferably wifi) and that you're prepared to pay an additional $300 to watch meh quality movies on your TV. $300 is treading perilously close to the XBox 360 price point which does far more than an Apple TV, including deliver higher quality movies for less than they cost on iTMS. I think Apple could have a problem from Microsoft, Sony, TIVO and virtually every digital sa
          • Exactly, and most of the people in that target group are savvy enough to buy a DVD and rip it for their own use rather than use DRM encumbered iCrap.

            AppleTV might not be stillborn, but it was born with serious birth defects and disabilities.
            • You've got that entirely wrong. Nothing about the Apple TV presumes that you are buying your movies from iTunes.

              I have a very large DVD collection, most of which have been ripped, and an Apple TV. By simply adding the movies to my iTunes library (done long ago), I can watch all of my ripped DVDs on any computer or TV in my house, just by picking them from a list. I also have some movies which I purchased from iTunes, simply because it's cheaper and easier than buying the DVD and doing the rip myself. Th

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Mr2001 ( 90979 )
                A modded Xbox with XBMC installed is also incredibly slick, but costs 1/3 as much as an Apple TV, works with any display, supports many more media types, and plays from a CD/DVD or an SMB share - plus you can use it for games, emulators, YouTube, Sirius radio, etc. Apple TV only provides an advantage if you get your movies from iTunes, because no one else can decrypt Apple's DRM.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Jerry Rivers ( 881171 )
      Good grief, OverlordQ's post is not a "troll." I wish people would think a little before the get out the mod bat. Just because someone expresses an opinion contrary to your beliefs does not mean they are trolling for anything.

      I happened to disagree with him that buying a DVD is better than buying a crappy iTunes video. Unless you get the DVD used and for a very cheap price of course. You then either have to resell it or trash it unless you like having all sorts of old DVDs around that you've already wat

      • I happened to disagree with him that buying a DVD is better than buying a crappy iTunes video. Unless you get the DVD used and for a very cheap price of course.

        How do you figure? I see the #1 movie on iTMS is currently The Longest Yard, at $9.99. The DVD sells for $11.99 new from Amazon; $2 more. The #2 movie, School of Rock is $9.99 on DVD; identical price. Same for numbers 3 and 4. Pirates of the Caribbean 2, at #5, is $14.99 from iTMS, $18.99 on DVD, so there's a slightly larger difference there. But I

        • I'm not sure I understand your point here. Are you saying it is better to buy from ITMS or on DVD? My argument against both is that the ITMS videos are inferior quality to DVD and you don't get DVD extras. DVDs on the other hand tend to clutter your apartment for a long time after you buy it.

          My point is that I would rather rent from Netflix (even HD if I choose) than use either of the above, because I get the best of both worlds without worry.

  • And by "Today" (Score:3, Informative)

    by PunkXRock ( 512777 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @01:30AM (#18714613) Homepage Journal
    We of course mean 2 days ago. Slashdot, you have gotten oh so slow.

  • This news release seems to have been timed to divert attention from a bigger issue. Herb Greenberg points out that the iPhone is in trouble. [marketwatch.com] A late iPhone is a real problem for Apple, because the other phone vendors aren't standing still. Apple could get into the position Sony finds itself with the PS3 - last to market at the highest price.

    • Actually there isn't a lot of spin on their original release from what I can see. They're cannibalising the dev team on osx to work on the iphone. Admitting that is going to have an effect on their stock because once a company starts having to do that for a project it's in deep trouble (in fact the times I've seen it done have always seen the ultimate failure of one or both projects - it doesn't work and is an act of desparate mismanagement).
      • It looks to me like it's mostly QA folk. I work at a software company and while software may be "ready", until it's tested, it doesn't go out the door. It's common to pull testers away from other projects to QA a product that should ship sooner. Firaxis talked about the same thing with their last Civ4 expansion; it was done, but couldn't go out the door since the QA folk were working on releasing something else.

        I don't think it spells any sort of major problem for Apple or a shifting of net resources awa
    • Apple could get into the position Sony finds itself with the PS3 - last to market at the highest price.

      You can already get smartphones with media players and good web browsers for less than the iPhone *today*, and a 4GB secure digital card for your smartphone will set you back less than the price of an iPod Shuffle.

  • What about Europe? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by lucason ( 795664 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @04:14AM (#18715449) Homepage
    Yada, Yada, Yada... All this is useless to me as long as we can't buy anything over here in Europe.
    • Rumour has it Sony will be the one that offers movie downloads to Europe (Well they own studios, so it's not a surprise).

      AppleTV is kinda pointless in Europe, but if it's really true that it requires a PC to stream of it's kinda pointless anywhere... the showcentre 200 can do the same thing for 1/3rd of the price and it's truly HD.
    • Europe? Here in Canada we share the same freaking DVD region code as the USA, yet we still have jack and shit.

      Seriously, that's just retarded.

  • If You Want My Business... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Nom du Keyboard ( 633989 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @04:28AM (#18715535)
    To me, it's not how long before the other studios come on board, but rather:

    How long before you ship true high-def movies worth watching on today's equipment, rather than this low-res stuff?

    -and-

    How long before you let me burn that movie to DVD for substantially less money than the $19 it costs me to buy it in the store, so that I can watch it more than once?

    Until you can meet at least one, if not both, of the above, you really aren't attracting me as a consumer.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Kjella ( 173770 )
      How long before you ship true high-def movies worth watching on today's equipment, rather than this low-res stuff?

      -and-

      How long before you let me burn that movie to DVD for substantially less money than the $19 it costs me to buy it in the store, so that I can watch it more than once?

      As for the first: When it becomes practical for more than a tiiiiny segment of the population to download 20-40GB in a reasonable time at a reasonable cost. You don't need to have a station wagon full, but your bandwidth from B
      • to download 20-40GB in a reasonable time at a reasonable cost.

        You really need to be reading some of the other poster's comments about new codecs such as H.264. You don't need great compression when your disc holds 40GB and can optimize for other benefits, however, you can get very good results with much less data and the right codec. Translation: I should be able to get better than current DVD quality in far less than 40GB.

  • I think Apple will beat Google (Score:4, Insightful)

    by CrazyJim1 ( 809850 ) on Friday April 13, 2007 @05:30AM (#18715773) Journal
    In the war of online video, I believe rights to media will beat out youtube.com Now YouTube will have it's uses, but for distrobution of movies and television, gaining the rights is the way to go. I think there is more profit in movies and television than there is with YouTube.
  • Although examples of recent films were given, the MGM name (and its back catalogue) is most strongly associated with films made during its heyday, which ended around the late 1950s. (The company was a pale shadow of its former self from the 1960s onwards).

    Because of this, MGM is particularly associated with.... musicals! If the "Apple is teh ghey" trolls were actually smart, they'd have connected the dots and pointed out that Apple users would just *love* being able to watch The Wizard of Oz [wikipedia.org] on their Appl
  • too. If they dont, "other parts of the world" will be continuing to "acquire" their stuff from "different sources".
  • We don't need more DRM? Seriously, the only effect this "new method of distribution" would ever have is to make DRM even more ubiquitous than it already is, and I for one don't think that's "awesome" or "blazingly modern". Not only does DRM take away any and all fair use rights that are guaranteed by law, it brings up the interesting question of "what the fsck am I gonna do with all these crappy videos I bought now that Apple's out of business?". Of course, the MPAA would just say "buy it again", but that's
  • ...MGM is pwned by SONY, so no going around buying MGM content off of the Apple store now, ya hear?*

    * does not supply to the more rational-thinking people who stated to only boycott SONY BMG.

Slashdot Top Deals

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db

Close