Apple to Livestream Music Event: Good for Apple, Good for Apple Fans, and Good, Maybe, For Livebloggers
By Harry McCracken | Tuesday, August 31, 2010 at 6:07 pm
When I liveblog Apple press events, the number one question from attendees is…well, kind of irritating, once you’ve heard it for the four hundredth time: “Is there a live stream of this event?” Usually, the answer is no, unless you count the occasional unauthorized spystream from someone in the audience using a phone app like Qik. Unlike a number of its competitors, Apple’s practice has been to post video of its events later rather than to broadcast it live.
Not tomorrow, though: The company has announced that it’ll broadcast a live stream of its traditional September music event. And there’s an interesting twist: It’s using its HTTP Streaming technology, which works on Macs, iPhones, and iPads. And that’s it. Windows users are apparently out of luck, although I imagine they’ll still be able watch a playback version later.
I’m in Berlin at the moment to attend the IFA consumer electronics show, which is why I won’t be at tomorrow’s event in person–I’m glad that the computer I happened to bring with me is a Mac, and that I have an iPhone with me. But I’ll only watch the live stream if I happen to be somewhere at 7pm Berlin time tomorrow where I can watch video without bankrupting myself on metered Internet access.
Conspiracy theorists are entitled to wonder whether this unexpected move has anything to do with June’s iPhone 4 keynote at Apple’s WWDC event, in which wireless network problems fouled up a large chunk of the demo and Steve Jobs was reduced to pleading with livebloggers in the audience to shut down their Internet connections. By livestreaming the event, Apple gets to be the primary means by which the world learns about the news.
(Of course, if there are any major technical problems tomorrow, they’ll be all the more embarrassing if people can see them live on the Internet…)
Over at Daring Fireball, John Gruber is musing that a successful live stream by Apple would spell doom for “the live-blogging racket.” I’m not so sure. While it’s true that it might eliminate the value of livebloggers relaying every spec, feature, and other detail that’s revealed, that sounds like a good thing to me: It would let them spend less time parroting facts and more time providing instant analysis. And at my liveblog events, at least, I find that the comments from the crowd are at least as interesting as what I have to say–as long as they aren’t “Is there a live stream of this event?”
9 Comments
Read more:
9 Comments For This Post
August 31st, 2010 at 12:17 pm
I'll still follow the live blogs because I can do that at work at my own pace. Watching live video would be much less convenient.
August 31st, 2010 at 6:32 pm
"And there’s an interesting twist: It’s using its HTTP Streaming technology, which works on Macs, iPhones, and iPads. And that’s it."
I think Apple will be live testing their NC Data Center and don't want to "over stress it" on its first public (but perhaps not announced) activity.
August 31st, 2010 at 7:40 pm
I used to watch Apple events live on the Internet around 2002-ish through Quicktime. It was fun. I always wondered why they stopped streaming them.
August 31st, 2010 at 7:13 pm
Apple's official comment at the time was that the events got too expensive to broadcast live. Not many of us took that at face value. 🙂
August 31st, 2010 at 8:46 pm
Apple thinks that the "proprietary" Flash plug-in has no place in the future of online video, despite the fact that 98% of people have Flash-enabled browsers. Instead, they're going to stream using their own proprietary protocol, that 90% of people won't be able to view? They can't even make it work in Safari on Windows?
This shouldn't be surprising; it's always been clear that the Apple, the same company behind Quicktime and iTunes (both totally disgraceful on Windows), has no real interest in catering to the needs of Windows, or creating workable cross-platform solutions. What I don't understand is how they can talk about HTML5 and the need for open-standards, when Apple is more closed than anyone, and frequently works to undermine openness and standards which they cannot control.
August 31st, 2010 at 9:46 pm
"Instead, they're going to stream using their own proprietary protocol"
LOL You don't really expect Apple to use Flash to broadcast their live stream, do you?
"that 90% of people won't be able to view?"
Apple doesn't want those 90% of people to be able to view their broadcast.
"Apple has no real interest in catering to the needs of Windows"
It's not often a company "caters to the demands" of it's largest competitor.
August 31st, 2010 at 11:00 pm
Sorry, I meant to write "Windows Users", and I said "needs", not "demands". It may shock you to learn that Microsoft is NOT Apple's largest competitor. Microsoft is Apple's largest PARTNER. I don't have solid numbers, but I'd guess that the best-selling 3rd party software for Mac is probably Microsoft Office. Apart from that, are more iPod owners who use iTunes with Windows systems than there are Mac users. Period.
I'm not sure why Apple wouldn't want the majority of iTunes users to be able to watch their announcement of new iPods. Why does Steve hate Flash so much? Is it because he sees Adobe as a competitor? I don't know how to break this to Steve, but if Adobe took the same view, which they may do someday, and stop supporting OS X, Apple would be sunk.
Imagine if Macs couldn't run Flash and Photoshop, Illustrator, etc… If Adobe decided to play hardball graphics professionals and "normal" users (who expect to browse the web and not see Lego blocks everywhere) would have no choice but to move to Windows. It would destroy OS X.
Back to Microsoft, imagine if THEY decided to use Apple's tactics, stopped developing Office for Mac, and broke Quicktime and iTunes compatibility (which they could do, by refusing to "sign" Apple's drivers). How many Macs would Apple sell to students if the only way they could use Word or Excel documents was to run Windows in a VM? How many people would buy iPods if they weren't Windows-compatible? A LOT fewer.
I think it's in Apple's best interest, really everyone's best interest, if Apple would work WITH their PARTNERS instead of against them.
September 1st, 2010 at 9:35 am
"It may shock you to learn that Microsoft is NOT Apple's largest competitor. Microsoft is Apple's largest PARTNER."
It can be argued they are both. But "partner" assumes a relationship that really isn't there.
"I don't have solid numbers, but I'd guess that the best-selling 3rd party software for Mac is probably Microsoft Office."
I would dispute that but I get your point.
"I'm not sure why Apple wouldn't want the majority of iTunes users to be able to watch their announcement of new iPods."
As I said, I believe it's to stress test their new data center in NC.
"Why does Steve hate Flash so much?"
Because, at least on the Mac, Flash sucks. 75% of reported crashes of Safari on the Mac are a direct result of Flash content. Adobe has shown little inclination to optimize Flash on the Mac.
"Back to Microsoft, imagine if THEY decided to use Apple's tactics, stopped developing Office for Mac, and broke Quicktime and iTunes compatibility"
Microsoft likes making money. Office for the Mac makes them money. And they *have* tried to "break" QT in the past.
"I think it's in Apple's best interest, really everyone's best interest, if Apple would work WITH their PARTNERS instead of against them."
The reverse is true, too.
September 1st, 2010 at 2:39 pm
Live stream finally and I missed it! I just assumed it'd be no different waking up at 11 and backtrack the liveblogging. Alas! Next time.