Archive for the ‘philosophy’ Category

Apple TV, Streaming, and the Wireless DJ: Apple’s Fall 2010 Event

Tuesday, August 31st, 2010

appleevent2010Apple holds an iPod/iTunes-related event each Fall and this year is no exception. However, in addition to the inevitable stat reporting and iPod/iTunes upgrades, I think there’s finally a real possibility of a significant Apple TV update and some cool streaming advances (as has been reported in many other places).

I have a pretty clear idea of how I’d like the rumors I’ve heard to coalesce. My little hypothetical braid combines three things:

  • A new iOS-based Apple TV (iTV?) that gets content by streaming and omits a hard drive altogether;
  • A music streaming service that leverages Apple’s purchase of Lala, enabling your iTunes Library to exist in the cloud and be broadly accessible;
  • and, outside of the rumor mill, the increasing ubiquity (and usefulness) of iTunes (with an expanded request/streaming system for the iTunes DJ feature, which is quite cool but hasn’t yet gelled) and the iOS devices, ie. iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad (as an aside, the last two of these will certainly see FaceTime at some point soon – I’d say iPod Touch at this event and iPad at an update at Macworld 2011 in January).

Here is my vision:

  • Apple TV becomes iTV, a substantially smaller and very portable iOS-based unit that answers the call about the lack of video streaming output in the wonderful but limited Airport Express and fully realizes the power of the included audio streaming output capabilities of that device (which do exist in the current Apple TV to some degree);
  • An enhanced Remote Control app for anyone that has an iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad for iPod/Video functionality that is optimized for the Apple TV and includes an expanded iTunes DJ service (from what now exists in the current iTunes) – note that people also carry a lot of music on these devices themselves;
  • An iTunes Library in the cloud for everyone, or at least some subset of one’s Library (and note that this requirement can be fulfilled simply by streaming the libraries on anyone’s iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad, as well);
  • Now here’s the magic: assuming that streaming (and I’m talking music streaming more than anything here) is fully integrated throughout the iTunes/iOS ecosystem (and assuming that the rights can be managed – this is a far bigger IF than any technical hurdles), you now have…
    • a portable device (the iTV and perhaps subsequent third party docks, etc.) that you can take with you anywhere and hook up to speakers…
    • through which you can stream music from the cloud or any of your iOS devices…
    • with an integrated iTunes DJ request/cueing system (with restrictions to limit musical choices as desired by the system owner, e.g. no explicit, no country, etc.) that allows for anyone on the network to vote music up and down the next played list and contribute musical choices from their own iOS device (or even cloud-based iTunes Libary)…
    • enabling a live, local social network of people DJing music through their iOS devices and associated infrastructure (iTV, speakers, etc.) at parties, events, dances, and other gatherings.

overview-boxWhile I’m exited about the new technologies, hardware, and software features that will inevitably be announced, I see the above as something bigger in a way. There are few things that hold such a special relationship with the human experience as music does. Yet music still tends to be something dictated by one person (the DJ, the party host, the driver, etc.) to a larger group of people, many of whom are perfectly capable of sharing great music that others would like.

When I build a playlist, I’m always thinking of “music that others will like that I also like” so that the most people can enjoy it without my own enjoyment suffering (hence being able to put restrictions on some choices, as above) – but I’m always getting great new music from friends that I haven’t heard and spend lots of time hunting for new music on my own. Why not combine the two ideas in a wireless DJ iTunes/iOS ecosystem and bring music sharing to a new level for the enjoyment of all.

I’m even fine if a “Buy from iTunes” button needs to appear next to each entry in the DJ playlist, too ;-) . (As an aside, some of the above would work spectacularly well for Music Videos as well – and a portable Apple TV would be great for streaming those potential 99 cent TV rentals wherever you’d like, too)

What do you guys think? What would you like to see happen? Leave your thoughts in the comments!

Posted in content, hardware, philosophy, software | 2 Comments »

TV is Dead. Long Live TV.

Sunday, March 1st, 2009

In a recent post on his blog, Rocketboom’s Andrew Baron talks about “10 Reasons Why The TV Studios Will Die” and, in it, links to another great read at the New York Times, “TV Faces Struggle to Stay Viable”.

With the current economic climate, and the increasingly influential trend of online media popularity, I think we’re going to see some very interesting changes over the next couple of years. In the same way that the Wall Street bubble needed some bursting, maybe the industry needs to take a peak at why (as per the NYT article above) “network dramas now cost about $3 million an hour” and why everything has to be so relentlessly ad dollar-driven. And if “the future for the networks, it seems, is more low-cost reality shows, more news and talk” then I can’t imagine that doing anything but accelerating the influence of online media and small/independent producers. Even on the movie side of the equation, there are projects like the non-profit LOTR film “The Hunt for Gollum” (and countless others) being produced that clearly show what can be accomplished with the kind of raw will and vision that started people making films – not the unending bankrolls and 7/8-figure talent.

So, while most of us would have preferred that the recession had not occurred, I still see a lot of potential for a realignment of creative (and many other) forces. With the incredible power available at such low costs through modern technology (from cameras to editing suites to distribution, as well as sharing tools/techniques online), I really believe that we can bring an old and increasingly bloated medium into the 21st century. No cables required.

Posted in philosophy | 7 Comments »

Economy affects online video

Monday, February 16th, 2009

Sorry for the lack of posts for the past couple of weeks – between some horrible bug I got (probably as sick as I’ve ever been in the developed world), my in-laws visiting (thanks for the baby help but a lot of people to have in one house), and my sister giving birth (congrats Amber), I had to take any additional time off for the sake of sanity.  But that’s all over now :-) …

Just read an interesting story on TechCrunch this morning about MTV pulling the plug on embeddable videos. While it turns out that this isn’t quite the case, MTVN representative Mark Jafar noted that:

The only thing we’re pulling back is fully open access to our music video API, and it’s purely an issue of economics. Every music video we stream through the API costs us money due to our deals with the record labels, regardless of whether an ad is attached or not. So, allowing developers to use the open music video API can be a money-losing proposition for us. However, we’re absolutely open to extending the music video API to third-party publishers who are willing to work with us to monetize.

One promising thing I see from that response is a recognition that it’s not about protecting the content per se, it’s about being able to monetize it in a way that provides real value to the parties involved (although I would note that there seems to be a lot of parties involved in some of these things – still too many middle-men, see digital music industry struggles). So fair enough – people have to get paid.

However, it would seem to me, given the enormous number of ways that content can be linked to/from online, that there’s got to be some more creative ways to deal with situations like this than just attaching ads. Just one example, given the music context here, would be to link out to purchase sites for the music involved (kind of an Amazon affiliate thing)? You’d want to make sure this could be done in an elegant way, and maybe this is being done somewhere else (let us know if you have any examples), but it is surprising that an industry with such an easily electronically-sellable product (i.e. music) can’t figure out a little larger monetization pool than direct advertising.

In any case, it is nice to see that they aren’t shutting the whole thing down (although it seems the are redirecting viewing to their site), they’re just trying to find a way to pay for it. Again, fair enough. Any readers have some ideas about how companies can monetize video content online outside of the traditional direct ad model? As always, let us know in the comments.

Posted in content, philosophy | 2 Comments »

HD and Streaming

Wednesday, January 28th, 2009

There is a lot of miscommunication about what is “HDTV”, especially around claims by George Ou and others about how you can’t talk HDTV without talking about bitrates. While there is a reason for this thinking, the definition of HDTV is really only resolution-based, i.e. any digital video that has a resolution of 720p or more (720p, 1080i, 1080p, etc.) is high def. Period.

Now George and friends DO have a very good point in the following respect: all HD video is not (created or transmitted) equal. If Blu-ray has a bitrate of 40 Mbps and iTunes has a bitrate of 4 Mbps (and they’re both using the same codec – very important since different codecs are better/worse at compression – although I don’t think there are many codecs that would overcome a 10-fold difference) then Blu-ray should absolutely have a much better quality picture than iTunes BUT they are both “HD”. [see also George's excellent Video Quality Reference Table for a list of sources, codecs, resolutions, and bitrates - keeping in mind that only one of those columns relates to the definition of HD and that's the "Resolution" column]

See, here’s the problem: if we start looking at picture QUALITY then we need to consider things like that fact that many (many, many, many) people don’t have the video settings on their TVs in an optimal configuration, those TVs may not be in an optical viewing space, the TV itself may be poor quality, etc. So while it’s great to have some non-subjective measure of quality (like bitrate – with the caveat that we need to also consider the codec), in the end when we’re trying to make an argument about the end-viewing quality we need to just admit that it’s hard to compare.

For example, a very nice and professionally adjusted TV playing back an iTunes HD rental may very well have as good or better a picture than a poorly-adjusted TV playing a Blu-ray disc. That’s all there is to it.

It’s not that what George and others are saying about quality is inaccurate, but once you start introducing variables like bitrate in an attempt to get at the quality issue then it seems remiss to actually ignore the viewing environment and other variables (it’s kind of like moving towards some “SuperHD” resolution even though our eyes may not be able to discern the change). And, really, it’s beside the point if what they’re looking for is a definition of what is and isn’t HD.

All that said, where do you guys think the best quality “HD” is in the decabled world? Let us know your fav sources in the comments!

PS: R.e. Blu-ray – Why is a technology in the 21st century using a dash in the middle of the name? That’s so 1900s :-) .

Posted in content, metadata, philosophy | 13 Comments »