1. Matt on November 9, 2004 11:25 AM writes...

Make no mistake, Portable Media Center devices are not about helping you manage your video. Your video is on DVD.
Actually, no they are not, not if you own a tivo or other hard drive based PVR. Actually some of the newer portable PVR's come with scheduling software that you can use to record your shows or movies directly, just like a tivo.
If you want to watch a movie on a plane or on a long car trip, you can already use a portable DVD player. Why would you buy a video iPod or a Portable Media Center when you can get a DVD player with a bigger screen for less money?
For the same reason that I'm willing to spend more money on an iPod (or similar device) instead of buying a much cheaper portable CD player and hauling around 1000 CDs where ever I go.
Also, the term "Video" and "Movie" are not synonyms in this case. Hey, maybe I ride 45 minutes on the train commuting each day. I can program my PVR to record news, sports highlights, heck even my favorite sit-com so that I can then view it on the train. None of which is a violation of copyright law or the DMCA. Check the betamax decision on that one.
Is there a market for a handheld video player from Apple? I don't know, but there are a number of manufacturers making devices that are using open standard (non-DRM) based encoding options. Maybe they'll succeed, maybe they won't, but if I'm Steve Jobs, I certainly have more than a couple of engineers looking at building one.

2. tom on November 9, 2004 11:47 AM writes...

Here is what I would like to see - and I think I am not the only one - Video iPod not so much for "watching video while jogging" but to be able to carry and show video clips taken with my digital camera. All digital point-and-shoot cameras have that nifty video feature - video that is certainly not good enough to showcase on a full-screen TV, but would be perfect to carry along and show on an iPod. And in order for photo/video iPod to really work - there would be a need to make it possible for iPod to connect directly to a digital camera and download photos and videos from it and then be able to see those same photos and videos without having to go back to iTunes to sync-up. I think Apple missed a big population out there of people with digital cameras who do not want to spend tons of money buying extra memory cards for their camera and do not want to carry along a laptop with them to vacation just so that they can offload photos from their memory cards. I know iPod was supposed to be a music player - but with the addition of the photo iPod - it is not solely that anymore. so why not make it right? all I want to take with me when I go on vacation would be a digital camera and an iPod. all I would need is a 256/512mb memory card for my camera and could offload all those photos and videos to my iPod when the card gets full and continue shooting. oh yeah, and maybe I could even watch a movie or two on the plane. yes, the portable DVD player has a bigger screen, but I do not want to carry an extra gadget just for that. And if Apple really wanted to me to be happy, they would build a CF card reader in iPod so that my digitally camera's card could be just inserted in and copied over to the iPod with a push of a button.

3. KJ on November 9, 2004 12:26 PM writes...

This must be an ironic article. I can't say for sure coz I don't know the author, but he's describing the state of the portable audio market 3 years ago.

LOL. You can't legally copy audio from your CD, why not just carry around a cd player, all music is on a cd... ha ha... good one.

4. Matt on November 9, 2004 12:28 PM writes...

I disagree with the assessment of a video Ipod. I, like many other new yorkers, use my ipod primarily on the subway. Being able to watch a movie clip, tv show, music video, etc, on my ipod would be entertaining enough to occupy my mind for a half hour. I don't think it would take the place of a portable DVD player (since most people carry their ipod with them at all times unlike a portable dvd player, and the screen is too small on an ipod to really enjoy a movie), but I do think it would add enough intrigue for people to purchase a video ipod.

I don't think the photo ipod has enough appeal to turn into a top seller. People just don't care enough about having access to their pictures on their ipod... it's not "cool" enough. The issue for the video ipod would be price, however. I think $600 is too much for an ipod, and if more than $700+ would be the purchase price for a video ipod, i agree that a video ipod isn't worth making

5. Russ on November 9, 2004 01:02 PM writes...

Following my referrers...

I'm amazed at all the Apple zealots out there and all the excuses they'll come up with for Jobs dropping the ball on this one. You're just *proving my point* with everything you said. Jobs said people don't want video, yet you said "I would love it". Which is it? And saying "copying a DVD is illegal" is exactly what I'm pointing to when I talk about Jobs industry ties and you're completely discounting personal camcorder videos, which is just as valid a use as showing off your photo album. And where did you get all those costs from? Just making up numbers to prove your point? The iPod Photo already has video decoding in it - it's more or less a matter of flipping a switch with no additional costs involved. "The device would need a large hard drive and a color screen" What do you think the iPod Photo is?!?!

Your post makes no sense. Jobs screwed up. He'll be saying as much within the year.

-Russ

6. Karl on November 9, 2004 01:25 PM writes...

I have an Archos AV480. You don't have to 'Rip' anything to get content onto it, because it can record from composite or S-video out via its docking cradle. All I have to do is play the DVD on my TV and hook the video out on my TV to the Archos and presto! No 'lengthy encoding session' or 'ripping' involved.

-kd

7. Karl on November 9, 2004 01:27 PM writes...

By the way, through the above process and recording from broadcast TV, I now have every Simpsons episode on said device...now what was this about paying "big bucks"?

8. cfgr on November 9, 2004 01:30 PM writes...

Mr. Jobs is just watching the market and eventually will 'produce' an Ipod with video capabilities....just watch out... *_*
His Ipod came way after the others who dared to take the risks. Apple just copied the succesfull features of others.

Until then i'm very lucky i can watch video (movies captures from satellites, TV-sets and DVD's) on my Archos AV-380....whenever I want it.
Be it on a plane, a bus, the subway or the train or on a holiday - room tv-set or video-projector.
My FREEDOM of choice, time and place.

9. Jim on November 9, 2004 03:39 PM writes...

I'm with Tom on the need to make the iPod photo a direct storage device for cameras. Perhaps there will be some interconnect gadget that will add the capability but it should have been built in.

I personally do not see a mass-market for video playback. Having to route a DVD through a TV for uploading to an Archos device is hardly equivalent to a 10 second upload of an entire album over firewire or USB2. It seems silly to take a video that is encoded for playback on a high resolution TV and transfer it to a 6" screen without desampling the resolution. Heck, you can barely make out the make of car, nevermind the license plate.

As for the conspiracy theories about Jobs and the film industry, methinks this guy can smell a buck and that if he thought this would be a profitable avenue, he'd have followed it. Things may change, but if Apple had launched a video iPod now, it would have been premature.

In the meantime, I'll stick to my laptop/iPod combo. This early adopter ain't biting.....

10. David on November 9, 2004 03:45 PM writes...

To the pro-video people.

Lengthy encoding sessions. Putting an S video cable to your computer for an hour while you encode two shows is a lengthy encoding process. Unlike a regular cd which ca be ripped in 15-20 minutes for an hour's worth of music.

Also those who like watching a little window with web based news highlights need to get a bigger monitor. I find those 320x240 video clips barely visible on my 1600x1200 desktop. Now why would I want to watch 25 minutes of that.

No what the Ipod photo should have is the ability to play power point/Keynote presentations. Walk into a room, plug in the video/audio cord to any tv, and hit play. That would be useful.

11. Peter on November 9, 2004 04:28 PM writes...

cfgr is on the right track.

An iPod A/V makes no sense - yet.

Steve Jobs once said at a MWSF Keynote, that putting a computer on the back of an LCD is a horrible idea, and then launched the "lamp" iMac. Three years later Apple launches the "where's the computer?" iMac, making the lamp iMac as a stop-gap product.

The iPod Photo is the stop-gap product as well. The products on the market today and tomorrow are niche products, with only early adopters joining the party. An Archos-type player will not sell in the millions per quarter like an iPod - ever.

Apple currently gives us valid reasons as to why these products fail to capture the imagination and buying power of the masses. Playing movies on a 2" LCD indeed, does not make for a "movie" experience to say the least. Portable DVD players are interesting, but when you have a nice 12" PowerBook or compact notebook with 3-4 times the screen real-estate, why? Why bring yet another piece of HW along with you when a notebook does the same movie viewing task - and better? Lastly, content is missing. Where can one go to download a new release movie? - legally, and with a repeatability in quality one would expect?

Apple will solve these problems with the launch of an iPod A/V and an iTunes for movie downloads software solution.

The iPod A/V is 30,000 songs or 100 movies in your pocket. The iPod A/V will store music or movies - rented or purchased.

However, it's primary use is NOT to play movies back on the 2' LCD. The primary use for the iPod A/V will be to playback movies on any TV or Projector anywhere, any time. The new movie download software will contain standard or h.264 (high def) downloads to rent or purchase.

However, there are a few problems with this technology at the present time.
• iPod Memory Buffer: The iPod A/V will need to be able to playback two hours of video without skipping. That will mean a much larger size of buffer RAM.
• Licensing: Over and above the physical iPod limitations and issues, Apple will need to work out licensing agreements with Hollywood - just as they did with the music industry. Apple has a successful working model to point to in iTunes to help speed the process along.

Problems the iPod A/V will solve:
• No need to rent movies and return them - The whole process on average takes about an hour. Instead, download, eat dinner, then have the movie ready to go. Sure, the download will take around an hour, but you need not go anywhere, or guess what everyone at home wants to watch - or play the dreaded cell phone conversation between home and the video store.
• No late fees
• All movies in stock, all the time
• No returning of movie rentals (5 day self-delete)
• Purchase movies and burn once to a DVD if you choose to do so
• No need to a new BlueLaser DVD player to play upcoming High Definition movies. Simply download them to the iPod A/V
• The iPod A/V is a High Definition DVD player in your pocket - with movie and music library with you wherever you go

This technology will probably be delivered once an 80 Gig Hard Drive is ready to go, along with Hollywood onboard. Count on MWSF '06.

12. Karl on November 9, 2004 04:53 PM writes...

I didn't say that the workaround was the best way, in fact, there are far more efficient (read: complex) ways to get content onto my Archos (my networked DVD player is often involved), they are just a bit more iffy as far as legality goes.

Music and video are different beasts, and yes there is a learning curve involved in portable video. There was a learning curve in portable audio too, back before mp3 became all the rage.

If you haven't seen the screen on an Archos 400 series, you don't know what you're talking about regarding clarity. I can tell when Leno has something between his teeth.

13. Sandy McMurray on November 9, 2004 05:17 PM writes...

> I can tell when Leno has something between his teeth.

I believe that's Letterman you're watching. ;-)

14. Robert Boylin on November 9, 2004 05:49 PM writes...

I'm in agreement with Peter. Microsoft hasn't been able to get the industry to adopt their video codec so they launch products early to put some pressure on them. AVC in Mpeg 4 is coming to American broadcast standards as it has over most of the civilized world. Its beauty is in the flexibility of scaling from HD on down to cell phones. It's all based on Quicktime and Microsoft is worried. With Jobs' motion picture clout he should be able to finalize the DRM problem. Ultra Wi-Fi broadcasting to various screens will also be coming next year. When the two meet everyone will be jumping on the market potential and Apple will integrate them with the type of interface that has eluded the industry so far.

15. Speed on November 9, 2004 05:51 PM writes...

Amen brother! I love my iPod, but why in the heck would I want one to watch non-proprietary video on it? No thanks. I'd get a 150$ 7" DVD player for that. Keep up the great work dude!

16. Tige on November 9, 2004 11:20 PM writes...

Video is a cool app. But they have no reason to come out with any until they have an arrangement with studios through iTunes I would imagine.

If you could buy Simpsons and Seinfeld episodes through iTunes and sync it with your iPod that would be a cool thing. Obviously,

And this could and should happen one day. Studios need to change their licensing policies and movies with DRM should be available online in really good quality. Sure, Jobs says people can't fit a video player in their pockets and don't want to see the video on a small screen.

Fine, but why is Apple so married to the current design of the iPod. I saw a really nice 3D mockup of what a video iPod would look like on Gizmodo that would be really cool. And more importantly, even if it was on the tiny screen hey.. People would pay for the fact that the iPod would just be a carry device for the movie/tv episodes. It makes sense that you could stick all these video files on the iPod, and plug it into a TV w/ an SVIDEO port or a computer with a miniVGA port and view that.

It's not that big a deal either way. I do think, Media Centers, Tablet PC's and Portable Media Players (the ones with the screen and the new external harddisc players without the screen) are worth the time and the investment on R&D for Apple. I think it's cooler to invest on those than on a U2 special edition iPod.

17. Kev on November 10, 2004 09:16 AM writes...

I think Apple will enter the handheld video market when the technology and content is ready, namely, once H.264 (much higher quality at low bit rates) arrives with Tiger. Apple will then extend its Airport Express to network video throughout the house, followed by the handheld video device, and the beginning of a video store.

But the device will not be in the iPod form factor. I think they will shift to a tablet with a 7" screen, allowing for even better battery life. Think shrunken iMac with a clickwheel in one corner. And it may be priced at about $599 (since both the 40GB and 60GB iPod Photo will get a $100 price reduction come January).

18. Charles on November 10, 2004 01:06 PM writes...

This was mentioned briefly above, but I thought I'd make some additional comments. In Steve Jobs presentation of the photo ipod he attempted to defend the absence of video playback by saying "where will this video content come from?" I don't know Steve-perhaps it could be created from one of the video production apps that Apple sells to people to make simple family movies or even hollywood releases. While many people may not want to watch 2 hour films on 2 inch screens, I'm sure that being able to pass around a small device displaying simple movies created with the dv camera and imovie would be appealing. Even if they didn't want to watch these short quicktimes on the ipod's screen, the ability to connect to a television would solve this. Because Garageband and Soundtrack are recent releases and iphoto is far from being a competent photo editing program, personal videos have long been the one thing that have been created using Apple software yet absent in portable format. Apple has been attempting to push this ilife concept for a while now, but it is lacking in their cash cow ipod product. I think people will want to carry as much of their digital lives with them as possible so a device that also contains video would fulfill this desire. The average person will not have enough music and photos to fill 60g of ipod space so Apple should seriously consider this before attempting to sell an 80g+ drive in the future.

As far as copyright issues go, it's much easier to dump unprotected, illegally obtained music onto an ipod than it is to rip a protected, 2 hour movie and I have a feeling that people are creating more movies from their homes than they are music.

If cost is an issue Apple may have to reduce that precious profit margin that makes their product that much more expensive than their competitors’. I'm excited to see what competitors release because competition will push everybody, but I've been frustrated waiting for Apple to catch up. Their market share can only go downwards from here and this will be why. As one review site wrote "Digital photography enthusiasts will flock to the new iPod (photo)", but enthusiasts would and should only buy this product if they could connect their camera and upload photos out in the field which can be accomplished using competing devices.

19. Scooter on November 12, 2004 09:53 AM writes...

I agree this article calls it wrong. The truth is iPod is a cash cow that is clouding Jobs' vision.
I expect the money makers in the next few years will be G3 camera phones with e.g. microdrives that give us still and video functions, and swappable media. Something like a cross between the Sony M-1 cybershot and the JVC Everio. With music of course.
I commute daily on Tokyo trains and I can tell you that 15" and even 7" screens are simply too big for truly personal video. I'd love to watch a 3-4" screen at half an arm's length and am more likely to watch TV content than feature movies in those circumstances. I can make do with one of the hybrid video cameras mentioned above but they aren't designed for the job and have sub 3" screens. Naturally I'd love to plug the device into a giant plasma screen, and share movies (retail or home made) with friends and family. I expect an xbox portable HD will compete here as a transfer mechanism.
Video downloads are getting huge and people will be consuming more and more A/V content. Winners will reflect reality and help develop new business models.
Hopefully Jobs sees the light and launches the A/V Pod together with iFlicks - before competitors close him down.

20. Anon on November 19, 2004 04:49 PM writes...

Scooter, get the Archos AV420 or 480...it's exactly what you're looking for.