[JK47]

Ok, so with the increasingly numerous selection of videos made available for download by the iTunes Music Store, one has to wonder what the future of iTunes will be. iTunes is changing from an application that primarily a music player and secondarily a music video player to an application that manages both music and videos (not necessarily music videos). I myself have an extensive collection of short clips/TV episodes/music videos/movie trailers, etc... that I have begun importing into iTunes. I have been doing this because Apple has no program that cohesively and effectively manages my videos. They're just randomly stuck in the (terrible) Finder.

Though I love the iTunes Videos interface, there are several drawbacks. One is that when i import a high quality video, the quality of playback from iTunes isn't as high as it is from QT 7. Another is, like I mentioned earlier, that iTunes isn't devoted to video organization/playback, it's more like an added feature. Furthermore, the name 'iTunes' doesn't befit an application that is used to organize one's movies. Also, if Apple were to create a new movie management app, it would have to integrate seamlessly with the iPod, similar to the way iTunes does.

I wanted to know how you think Apple is going to deal with this problem. The way I see it, they have several options. One is that they could re-name iTunes to a name that befits both music and video playback and increase the quality of the stored videos. They could also create an entirely new app to manage videos and sync with the iPod.

Finally, if Apple were to create a new app, how would it be made available? Would it be an iLife '07 upgrade, a Leopard app, or simply a free download as iTunes is now?

Regardless, this is a problem that has to be dealt with by Apple within the next year.

[intlplby]

maybe they should copy itunes video managment half and integrate it with quicktime..... they should have added all that video stuff to quicktime in the first place

[JK47]

Agreed, a third option would be for them to change QT into a video management/playback app.

[PB PM]

The idea of expanding QTs role isn't a bad one, since its also cross platform.

[noah]

Since i Got my vid iPod I have been putting my hundreads of tv shows onto itunes. Its really not that bad. Actually the only fault I've really found is that the videos cannot be made so that it floats over other programs. But in terms of getting videos on I use this great app http://www.nullriver.com/index/products/moviepod. Its made it a lot easier.

[Mac+]

I'm all for renaming iTunes* and have been for sometime, but I also understand that there is brand value involved and the fact that this app has to service cross-platform duties for the Windows crowd as well.

I don't think they'll add a dedicated video storage app just for syncing with iPods. Apple's design philosophy used to be (still is?) about simplicity and ease of use ... although, this does beg the question. "Why has iTunes become a repository for all forms of media?" (ease of porting for Windows aside)

I would prefer to see an iPod sync app that was able to hook into the music, podcast, photo and movie databases that we have managed to accumulate over the years.

One other problem with having the iTunes name handle the purchasing/distribution of a variety of media is the association with the iTMS. Perhaps the acronym for the store could more accurately reflect this if it were to become the iMediaStore and iTunes simply became iMedia or some such thing. (I actually did propose some new acronyms ages ago, but can't locate them at the moment. Anyway, feel free to ding me for those names ... I'm sure we can come up with some better alternatives. )

* the writing was on the wall with photo syncing - rant 1 and rant 2

[admactanium]

i fully believe that itunes being used for video distribution is a somewhat temporary solution. itunes and the ipod are huge brand names with unbelievable brand equity. plus the installed base for itunes is very large. so rather than roll out a new application and device, they're using itunes and the ipod as "trojan horses" to establish a foothold in video distrubution.

i think when/if itunes becomes a dominant enough player for video they'll spin it off into its own application. videos are managed very poorly in itunes right now in my opinion. and the more videos you get the worse the management becomes. the default file browser for videos in itunes is cute, but it really becomes tedious when you start to get a lot of clips in there.

[gck]

Originally Posted by intlplby maybe they should copy itunes video managment half and integrate it with quicktime..... they should have added all that video stuff to quicktime in the first place

I don't like the idea: To my mind, QuickTime is more like a multimedia framework with the QuickTime player being just a simple front end. For example, iTunes uses QuickTime to actually play audio or video files, yet nobody has complained that all of iTunes' functionality should have been integrated into QuickTime in the first place.

Also, how should this video organizing thing fit in with the free/pro licensing scheme that is employed in QuickTime? Wouldn't people feel somewhat ripped-off if Apple's video organizing tool would only allow full-screen playback etc.. if you shell out some money to register it?

QuickTime Player should stay what it is, a light-weight frontend to the QuickTime framework to allow for simple tasks such as exporting into various formats, rudimentary editing etc.. and playback, of course, actually exactly the thing it is right now...

Also, I doubt iTunes will be renamed any time in the near future, as people have already pointed out, its brand value is extremely important. I don't think that having those video features in iTunes now conflicts so much with the name, I see it more like an added value. Maybe if the video thing really takes off, iTunes gets a sister application that will be packaged together with the latest release of iTunes so that all the Windows/Mac iTunes users are "forced" into installing it as well, capitalizing on iTunes' brand value (similar to the fact that iTunes for Windows comes with QuickTime (naturally) PLUS the QuickTime Player (even though the latter isn't needed by iTunes directly, only the framework, effectively "trojanizing" QuickTime Player onto every PC with iTunes installed)).

[julesstoop]

They should however fix iTunes' video playback. It may be running on the QuickTime framework under the hood, but it's a much less responsive and sometimes even blatantly slower video player than QuickTime player.

[Hobbes]

Originally Posted by admactanium i fully believe that itunes being used for video distribution is a somewhat temporary solution. itunes and the ipod are huge brand names with unbelievable brand equity. plus the installed base for itunes is very large. so rather than roll out a new application and device, they're using itunes and the ipod as "trojan horses" to establish a foothold in video distrubution. i think when/if itunes becomes a dominant enough player for video they'll spin it off into its own application. videos are managed very poorly in itunes right now in my opinion. and the more videos you get the worse the management becomes. the default file browser for videos in itunes is cute, but it really becomes tedious when you start to get a lot of clips in there.

I agree completely. The puzzle for Apple here is that they need -- at least as a default option -- one application to open and check in when you plug in your iPod, and that app for a long time to come is going to be iTunes, as the iPod will primarily be a music player for a long time to come.

But if videos become increasingly popular, and if (or rather, when) they introduce a new movie download service, along with the new "real" video iPod, I think they'll do this: link iTunes to the iPod, and link their new iFlicks (say, ahem, a movie management program, that you just *know* is going to be heavily Delicious Library-"inspired" ) to the rumored full-screen iPod. (A user can, of course, change these links from a preference, and have both open, or none.)

The more these two programs communicate with one another (lord only hopes Apple won't store different files for each program), the better off users will be.

Alternately, Apple can be more aggressive, and completely remove the video management from iTunes, and require users to download the upcoming "iFlicks" to store and manage video. I think that's too pushy, though; there are surely lots of people who will primarily use their video-capable iPods for music and purchasing the occasional or semiregular tv program, and iTunes' UI serves those people perhaps not ideally but efficiently (one-stop shopping). We will see though... they may want to push iFlicks as strongly as they can.

[gck]

Originally Posted by Hobbes The more these two programs communicate with one another (lord only hopes Apple won't store different files for each program), the better off users will be.

They really should, I'd hate to mess around with two different applications to sync one device. Why not integrate the whole iPod sync'ing thing with iSync rather than having it in iTunes and a potential iFlicks type of app? iTunes/iFlicks could open iSync when you want to sync or configure the synchronization process, but basically all your sync'ing needs are handled by iSync. I'd find it extremely irritating to have some help files say "If you want to sync data to your phone or PDA, use iSync. If you want to sync your iPod, use iTunes. If you want to sync your videoPod, open iFlicks. If you want to sync to .Mac, open .Mac Preferences". This should really all go into one application...

But then again, this would require iSync being somehow ported to Windows because of iTunes, so it's not going to happen.

[Mac+]

Originally Posted by gck They really should, I'd hate to mess around with two different applications to sync one device. Why not integrate the whole iPod sync'ing thing with iSync rather than having it in iTunes and a potential iFlicks type of app? iTunes/iFlicks could open iSync when you want to sync or configure the synchronization process, but basically all your sync'ing needs are handled by iSync. I'd find it extremely irritating to have some help files say "If you want to sync data to your phone or PDA, use iSync. If you want to sync your iPod, use iTunes. If you want to sync your videoPod, open iFlicks. If you want to sync to .Mac, open .Mac Preferences". This should really all go into one application... But then again, this would require iSync being somehow ported to Windows because of iTunes, so it's not going to happen.

I agree with the idea of an iPod Sync app (I posted it above - but the quote is below)

Originally Posted by Mac+ I would prefer to see an iPod sync app that was able to hook into the music, podcast, photo and movie databases that we have managed to accumulate over the years.

However, Apple may just have to make two separate apps.

A Macintosh OS X specific version of iSync for phones, PDAs, .Mac and other data for Mac computers only and a Mac/Windows "iPod Sync" for music, photos, movies, podcasts, what have you, so they can offer it to all iPod users, regardless of platform.

Of course, the iCal, Address Book and 3rd party note syncing of Mac specific software (such as Sticky Brain and Delicious Library) to an iPod will need to be sorted somehow too and this is where it gets even more confounded.

[Hobbes]

Apple won't use iSync due to the cross-platform issue, and developing a separate cross-platform app just for syncing just means yet *another* entirely separate app that loads up when you plug in your iPod. Ugh.

It's in Apple's DNA (as SJ always says) to keep it as simple as possible, and I think that means: one app that opens when you plug in your iPod, and one app to manage your iPod's contents (and sync up data along the way). (As always, of course, unless you choose otherwise.)

*However*, if an iPod is released whose "primary" purpose is other than music, that app could be different than iTunes...

[Mac+]

Originally Posted by Hobbes It's in Apple's DNA (as SJ always says) to keep it as simple as possible, and I think that means: one app that opens when you plug in your iPod, and one app to manage your iPod's contents (and sync up data along the way). (As always, of course, unless you choose otherwise.)

I'm happy with this too ... just don't keep calling that app iTunes.