Movies Anywhere (Formerly Disney Movies Anywhere) - Start Here

[Zu Nim]

Originally Posted by huskerbear

Mostly speculation ^^^ and we haven't seen new numbers for years. NONE of us know why they are not joining UV. My whole point is that, that would be the simplest path to unification. If Disney had just joined UV and it was WB who went on their own would have Apple joined WB? with an Apple exclusive? and others follow? Or would have Apple joined nobody instead.
I have said several times, at the end of the day a single universal system should be implemented if we are headed to mostly digital future. Who knows, maybe there is a poison pill within UV keeping some from joining, we really don't know. I just think something put together by the many would be better than that put together by one...do we really want Disney to call all the shots? or Apple? If Apple was in charge there would not be any digital unless you buy it from them and watch on their products....not exactly a democratic process.

The only speculation is a low-impact KeyChest implementation path. Everything else is grounded in fact.

You don't know if Disney joining UV is the simplest path. It's simpler for you but that's myopic. It may not be simpler for most other consumers and it doesn't seem to be simpler for most providers or wouldn't at least one more have joined? Amazon had announced it was joining UV... and didn't. Microsoft is a member of DECE (the UV group)... and didn't implement it. But both joined DMA. Disney probably didn't force them. If Disney was twisting arms, you'd think FandangoNow would be part of DMA by now too.

As an advanced user, I have an extensive UV collection and I would prefer the providers all joined UV. But there's no evidence of that happening and at least some talk about KeyChest.

Also, I don't think there's evidence of Apple getting an exclusive to DMA. They were the first provider so they were situationally exclusive. VUDU and Google joined 8 months later. Eight months is an odd length of time for exclusivity if it was by agreement. More likely DMA wanted to roll out one partner and work out the kinks before getting others on board, and they chose a friendly partner with familiar resources. But I know, the anti-Apple glasses are a dark, dark shade of greed and conspiracy.

As far as KeyChest, it wouldn't surprise me if Disney spun it out as a separate entity to placate the other studios. It's not like KeyChest is a profit center. Nobody's getting rich running a rights management clearinghouse. But it doesn't matter to me if my locker is run by Disney, DECE, or anyone else. My relationship is with the provider that I purchase my movie from and that's the only place I have leverage. I can barely get a response from customer service at MyUV and there's no way to even call them. They're useless. How would Disney be worse?

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by whipnet

I see you'll argue anything regardless of what is presented.

My life may not be exciting or glamorous, but I do have better things to do than argue about movie locker systems on the internet.

If presented with compelling evidence, or even a decent hypothetical theory, I have no problem admitting I'm wrong. At this time, I haven't read anything that would compel me to come to a decent conclusion.



I have issues with UV, but that's primarily due to issues with VUDU, Flixster, and other providers issues' more than the UV system itself, I think. I haven't had any DMA issues, but that could easily be due to the limited library available (at this time) on that system. I do like that Ultraviolet has a website to manage my locker, but it can be a mess (especially these days).

If it comes down to UV vs. KeyChest, I'll be neutral, but I'm not going to assume that UV is superior to KeyChest just because it was first, or because a group of people decided it was better.

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

Alan Gordon gets it. (And a few others.)

Thanks for understanding my point!

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

[...]Maybe the UV sharing model is too confusing for consumers and maybe KeyChest's is natural.

Do we even know if KeyChest has a sharing model?

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

BTW, if UltraViolet is so wonderful for providers why have we only seen retailers shrink or disappear?

+1

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

If VUDU implemented family sharing - like Apple and Google do - there wouldn't be any point to UV.

We disagree here. It's far from perfect, but a UV locker is probably my main attraction to VUDU. I feel secure knowing that should something happen to VUDU, my library is still elsewhere. That's the main draw to locker based systems, IMO.

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

And let's not get into the history of issues UV has had over the past 5 years... MyUV still doesn't display my account correctly.

You should see mine right now...

[Alan Gordon]

A six year old article, but may provide insight as to WHY KeyChest may be more appealing to Apple, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, etc.

Disney offers KeyChest, but where is the KeyMaster?

[huskerbear]

Originally Posted by Greyman

Actually, the way Keychest has been successful, one company in charge, advised by its partners, may not be a bad thing.

Not sure where this is coming from. No one is suggesting Apple be in charge. Keychest is Disney and not Apple and it includes most of the major providers.

Successful yes, but it's only ONE studios movies. Content is king, most of it does not belong to Disney. Zero of the content belongs to Vudu or Amazon or itunes. Maybe Apple and Disney being tied at the hip, think alike? I don't purchase much Disney mostly because I'm not into animated, and their stuff wont family share too my grand kids. However I have followed a couple titles for a long time waiting for their price to drop...they don't for the most part and 3D....well, I just don't want Disney in charge lol.

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by huskerbear

Successful yes, but it's only ONE studios movies.

The point of this thread is that the above may be temporary.

Originally Posted by huskerbear

Zero of the content belongs to Vudu or Amazon or itunes.

How much content belongs to VUDU, Amazon, or iTunes on UV?

Originally Posted by huskerbear

Maybe Apple and Disney being tied at the hip, think alike?

[huskerbear]

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

The only speculation is a low-impact KeyChest implementation path. Everything else is grounded in fact.

You don't know if Disney joining UV is the simplest path. It's simpler for you but that's myopic. It may not be simpler for most other consumers and it doesn't seem to be simpler for most providers or wouldn't at least one more have joined? Amazon had announced it was joining UV... and didn't. Microsoft is a member of DECE (the UV group)... and didn't implement it. But both joined DMA. Disney probably didn't force them. If Disney was twisting arms, you'd think FandangoNow would be part of DMA by now too.

As an advanced user, I have an extensive UV collection and I would prefer the providers all joined UV. But there's no evidence of that happening and at least some talk about KeyChest.

Also, I don't think there's evidence of Apple getting an exclusive to DMA. They were the first provider so they were situationally exclusive. VUDU and Google joined 8 months later. Eight months is an odd length of time for exclusivity if it was by agreement. More likely DMA wanted to roll out one partner and work out the kinks before getting others on board, and they chose a friendly partner with familiar resources. But I know, the anti-Apple glasses are a dark, dark shade of greed and conspiracy.

As far as KeyChest, it wouldn't surprise me if Disney spun it out as a separate entity to placate the other studios. It's not like KeyChest is a profit center. Nobody's getting rich running a rights management clearinghouse. But it doesn't matter to me if my locker is run by Disney, DECE, or anyone else. My relationship is with the provider that I purchase my movie from and that's the only place I have leverage. I can barely get a response from customer service at MyUV and there's no way to even call them. They're useless. How would Disney be worse?

I still believe it was an exclusive but, does it really matter? It seemed like an exclusive. I guess I haven't had many issues with UV or Vudu but, I only have about 1400 movies and tv. Never had to call for anything anyway.

Iv'e never had anything against Apple. Clear back when I was first hearing about digital (probably years later than most) somebody said oh yeah, you can do that, you need itunes. So then I find out itunes is an Apple only thing, oh well, I wasn't going to switch from Roku just for that. Then UV came out shortly after, finally something that can work everyplace! Then came years of itunes users saying "die UV die" don't need it, don't want it.....years of that really turned me off from Apple and the die hard Apple nuts out there.... Back on topic, it doesn't really matter if it's called UV, keychest or whatever if they implement it right. The consumer doesn't even need to know how that part works, just so it's seamless. Needing different players depending on where digital is purchased is a bad idea imo.

[huskerbear]

Originally Posted by Alan Gordon

The point of this thread is that the above may be temporary.



How much content belongs to VUDU, Amazon, or iTunes on UV?

Content is content, doesn't matter if it's UV or keychest.

[Zu Nim]

Originally Posted by Alan Gordon

Do we even know if KeyChest has a sharing model?

Perhaps poorly explained on my part. KeyChest's sharing is with your own accounts at different providers. But two of those providers have family sharing, which gives 99% of consumers the same value as the UV sharing model. KeyChest's sharing model is having the providers offer sharing.

We disagree here. It's far from perfect, but a UV locker is probably my main attraction to VUDU. I feel secure knowing that should something happen to VUDU, my library is still elsewhere. That's the main draw to locker based systems, IMO.

I agree that a cross-provider locker system is attractive. But my point is that UV barely qualifies in its current state. If something happens to VUDU (unlikely), where else do you really have to turn? FandangoNow or CinemaNow? One is sad and the other is nearly dead. So if the only real place you can exercise your UV rights is at VUDU, they could implement family sharing and you'd have effectively what you have now. A locker without strong customer-facing providers is hardly a locker at all.

This would be a different discussion if UV had a vibrant ecosystem of providers. That was the dream but UV hasn't come close to achieving it. I think the biggest addition was Verizon FiOS two years ago and that only serves Verizon customers. In the meantime, we lost Target Ticket as well as some international outfits.

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by huskerbear

Content is content, doesn't matter if it's UV or keychest.

I agree... hence why I didn't understand this quote:

Originally Posted by huskerbear

Zero of the content belongs to Vudu or Amazon or itunes.

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

Perhaps poorly explained on my part. KeyChest's sharing is with your own accounts at different providers. But two of those providers have family sharing, which gives 99% of consumers the same value as the UV sharing model. KeyChest's sharing model is having the providers offer sharing.

Gotcha...

Hopefully VUDU might create a decent sharing setup, as iTunes' version could use improvement.

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

I agree that a cross-provider locker system is attractive. But my point is that UV barely qualifies in its current state. If something happens to VUDU (unlikely), where else do you really have to turn? FandangoNow or CinemaNow? One is sad and the other is nearly dead. So if the only real place you can exercise your UV rights is at VUDU, they could implement family sharing and you'd have effectively what you have now. A locker without strong customer-facing providers is hardly a locker at all.

As stated earlier in this thread, FandangoNOW (which I was able to stream from for the first time earlier this year) is pretty decent when it comes to streaming, it's only their UI that's crappy, but you make a decent point here.

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

This would be a different discussion if UV had a vibrant ecosystem of providers. That was the dream but UV hasn't come close to achieving it. I think the biggest addition was Verizon FiOS two years ago and that only serves Verizon customers. In the meantime, we lost Target Ticket as well as some international outfits.

Not only just Verizon customers, but a subset of Verizon customers, and that's gotten smaller due to Verizon selling off multiple FiOS territories to Frontier.

Kaleidoscope was another UV provider on the ever shrinking list.

[Zu Nim]

Originally Posted by Alan Gordon

As stated earlier in this thread, FandangoNOW (which I was able to stream from for the first time earlier this year) is pretty decent when it comes to streaming, it's only their UI that's crappy, but you make a decent point here.

It's not the UI as much as the content. VUDU has more than 10,000 UV-enabled movies and nearly 9,000 UV-enabled TV episodes. FandangoNow has about 6,500 UV-enabled movies and 0 UV-enabled TV episodes. So if you bought TV shows with UV you'd be completely SOL, and 1 out of 3 of your UV movies won't be viewable. I'm exaggerating because some of the missing 3,000 UV movies at FandangoNow surely are less popular choices, but they have a significantly smaller UV catalog.

That said, I give FandangoNow some credit because they've probably added 1,000 UV titles this year - one of the few bright spots. CinemaNow has lost entire studios: Disney, MGM, Lionsgate, and Universal.

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

It's not the UI as much as the content. VUDU has more than 10,000 UV-enabled movies and nearly 9,000 UV-enabled TV episodes.
FandangoNow has about 6,500 UV-enabled movies and 0 UV-enabled TV episodes. So if you bought TV shows with UV you'd be completely SOL, and 1 out of 3 of your UV movies won't be viewable. I'm exaggerating because some of the missing 3,000 UV movies at FandangoNow surely are less popular choices, but they have a significantly smaller UV catalog.

That said, I give FandangoNow some credit because they've probably added 1,000 UV titles this year - one of the few bright spots. CinemaNow has lost entire studios: Disney, MGM, Lionsgate, and Universal.

Point taken, but FandangoNOW does have UV-enabled TV episodes. Not as many as VUDU for sure, but a quick check on FandangoNOW showed episodes of shows from Warner Bros., HBO, Sony, Universal, Paramount, and Starz/Anchor Bay. - My mistake, that was not correct.



One thing I think the studios need to work on, whether it's UV or KeyChest, is to make more TV shows locker-enabled. Too many TV series these days are not UV enabled, and many of those are only titles that will get a Blu-ray release with digital copy.

A second thing of course would be to have some smaller studios join. I have a fair amount of movies from New Video, eOne, and Image that are sadly not UV.

[Zu Nim]

Originally Posted by Alan Gordon

Point taken, but FandangoNOW does have UV-enabled TV episodes. Not as many as VUDU for sure, but a quick check on FandangoNOW showed episodes of shows from Warner Bros., HBO, Sony, Universal, Paramount, and Starz/Anchor Bay.

Could you possibly name one? I can't find any.

Just to be clear - FandangoNow has never carried UV TV episodes. I'm asking because they could've changed something recently that I haven't seen. If you're seeing TV episodes in your UltraViolet Library when you look on FandangoNow, that will display all the records FandangoNow sees when you link. You cannot actually view all those items, however. (Go ahead, try!)

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

Could you possibly name one? I can't find any.

Sony: "The Blacklist", "Outlander", etc.
WB: "Gotham", "The Flash", "Arrow", "The Big Bang Theory", etc.
HBO: "Game Of Thrones"
Universal: "Grimm", "Defiance", "Dominion", etc.
Paramount: "Scorpion", etc.
Starz/Anchor Bay: "Black Sails", "Magic City", etc.

Never mind...

[Zu Nim]

Originally Posted by Alan Gordon

HBO: "Game Of Thrones"

Yeah, you see... none of those are UV-enabled. You can't watch them on FandangoNow. They're just records in your UltraViolet Library. Fandango doesn't even carry HBO shows. (It's very misleading.)

If you look up one of the shows they actually carry, like The Blacklist, you'll see that there are no UV logos to be found.

[Greyman]

Originally Posted by huskerbear

Successful yes, but it's only ONE studios movies.

The other part of the trick is working well with multiple providers, and they have done that. The next step, would be to bring on other studios, the topic of this thread.

Content is king, most of it does not belong to Disney. Zero of the content belongs to Vudu or Amazon or itunes. Maybe Apple and Disney being tied at the hip, think alike?

? Not sure if you are trying to make an actual point. Vudu and Disney have a partnership, why not tie them at the hip too?

Originally Posted by huskerbear

Iv'e never had anything against Apple. ..........years of that really turned me off from Apple and the die hard Apple nuts out there....

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

Yeah, you see... none of those are UV-enabled. You can't watch them on FandangoNow. They're just records in your UltraViolet Library. Fandango doesn't even carry HBO shows. (It's very misleading.)

If you look up one of the shows they actually carry, like The Blacklist, you'll see that there are no UV logos to be found.

Aah! I've never actually tried to view them...

I could have sworn I'd seen ONE episode of a TV series added to my UV locker from FandangoNOW, but with the mess the UV website is in right now, I doubt I'd be able to tell you what it was.

[huskerbear]

Originally Posted by Alan Gordon

I agree... hence why I didn't understand this quote:

I said content is king...meaning Disney has a little (keychest) Everybody else adds up to much more (uv) so UV has a lot more content available....content is king.

[Greyman]

Originally Posted by huskerbear

I said content is king...meaning Disney has a little (keychest) Everybody else adds up to much more (uv) so UV has a lot more content available....content is king.

Actually revenue is king, that's what keeps both the providers and the studios in business. If the studios think Keychest can maximize their income, they will switch.