Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
zwarbot

Apple to use p2p in iTMS for movies

Recommended Posts

From what I am hearing & making a leap of faith theory, I think Apple will use the p2p (Peer-to-Peer) technology to distribute movies via iTunes.

 

Rumours heard: Apple will use a reward opt-in scheme for people who help share the upload of a movie once its downloaded to thier machine. (Standard p2p principle of good sharing karma). So you may get some sort of points to discount your next purchase in the iTMS.

 

Why do I think this..

1. Bandwidth costs - It has been long rumoured that Apple loses money on every song sold in the iTunes Music store due to Bandwidth costs, but make it up most likely in iPod sales. Movies will only get worse & most likely cannot use the same model as music.

2. Lots of Retail locations - One of the main issues with p2p is the initial seeding, however Apple has an advantage in that it can seed out a movie from a main server to all the local Retail stores. They know the store servers are always on, can control the release & be the initial large base of seeders.

3. Control of code for client software - Can be all built seamlessly into iTunes backend, (or Frontrow). The person would see no difference, only the rewards points total which would go up the longer the person left the computer on after a download.

4. Mac Mini Media Center - Apple can easily been seen to making the Mac Mini into a Media Center. So now with a device in the living room which is on for extended periods while movies are watched, can be in the background helping to spread the high bandwidth costs of distributing movies.

 

I personally can't wait for Apple to implement this & hope they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really can't add much to that except to say that I am hoping for it and support it completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been a big fan of bittorrent for a number of years, I'll be interested in how a Apple, a BIG company, implements it. I wonder if they will using the word “bittorrent”? or does it have too many connotations to do with piracy?

One thing is for sure it's been shown that bittorrent is the best most efficient way to distribute BIG movie files.

 

zwarbot, you make a great point on re Bandwidth costs. a song costs $1 (yes I know it really 99c, but I'm going to make th math easy) and the average files size is 3.5MB. A movie that is going to look good is going to be what 350MB or more (any one else what to have it a guess) so the bandwidth is going to increase 100x we are not going to pay $100 for a movie, $10 or $15 may be more reasonable price, Apple needs bittorrent.

 

I'm not sure about using Retail locations as seeds, Retail locations would have a normally net connection with slowish upload speeds. One thing is that if I'm paying for a download I want a good download speed, so Apple will need to have some dedicated seeding servers, most likely through Akamai, who Apple current use for for downloads and all the images on apple.com

 

Apple is going to need to have some kind of reimbursement for the seeds who's bandwidth Apple is using, although all the rumors point to this.

 

While I applaud Apple for using a pier to pier technology I do think it a little ironic, as when they released iTunes 4.9, the first with podcast support, they didn't and still don't support bittorrent feeds all the other podcatchers at the time supported bittorrent, this forced many small podcasters who had been using bittorrent to have to pay large bandwidth bills if they want iTunes users to be able to get their podcast. So Apple doesn't support bittorrent feeds that way of helped small podcaster and now are using a bittorrent like solution when it suits them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apple would probably implament their own p2p protocal in itunes. Therefore it might be best to stop saying bit torrent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point Morn,

I have edited my post to reflect the change. Apple's own p2p makes sense, since Apple won't want to use an open standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using the term bit torrent makes sense for now as it's not a standard p2p implementation (viz. the reason Apple would even consider it). The whole idea rests on this and since BT is really the only model of it's kind, it's what Apple would replicate in their own lock down. Regardless of what it may be called (I agree it won't be [persé] or be called BT) I think the term BT is the best way to understand it right now and probably in the future.

 

As for file sizes... Diggnation releases badly encoded video weekly and in H.264 at a size only borderline big enough to be worth considering for iTMS it still ranks in at around 300-350Mb for 45-60 minutes a week. Movies will need to be encoded much better, (hopefully) larger and will be longer. 300Mb is a bit of a stretch in my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well bittorrent have just signed a a deal with universal to disrubute movies this is very possible. i think apple will implement this as a wy of squeezing more money out the the itunes music store. heres hoping .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

×