Remember the Sony Watchman? It let you watch television (and radio!) anywhere you went, in glorious 2.5″ black and white.

And now the iPod lets you watch television (and podcasts!) anywhere you go, in glorious 2.5″ color.

Just sayin’. The iPod is nice, but will take a year or so to penetrate the market enough to have a significant impact. What it represents - the mainstreaming of portable video and, more importantly, of TV over IP - is far more significant.

Cringley thinks Apple wants the ABC shows to sell well, and that (along with better-implementations of video hardware) will convince Hollywood to open their vaults to Cupertino. Stephen Speicher thinks Apple wants the ABC shows to bomb (in the short term), so Hollywood will let Steve set the pricing. (That theory echoes similar thinking in an article about the ROKR which I can’t locate at the moment - the idea being that the ROKR will largely fail because of it’s implementation, and the cell industry will bow to Apple’s will to make mobile music distribution work.) Honestly, I don’t think it much matters how well they do - if they do well, Cringley’s route will likely be taken, and we’ll end up with $2 videos permanently. If they don’t sell, Apple will likely be able to negotiate lower prices for a second go ’round, and that will spur sales, and Speicher will have called it. Most likely, it will be somewhere in between, prices won’t change much, and the release of Pixar’s first film in iTunes will dictate feature-length pricing in the near future. (My bet for features is $10, but that’s pricing that would drive most studios insane. They’ll demand proof that it will sell well, which Steve will likely deliver with Cars next fall, says I.) Importantly, Apple has taken the first big step in getting mainstream consumers used to obtaining and consuming video via the internet, a big step which will take years to play out.

All of this will take some time to play out, though, and 2006 will likely be a volatile year for video distribution/consumption and Apple. The more significant thing in the immediate future, though, is for vloggers, who now seem destined to be called “video podcasters”. (This is probably a good thing for branding, since we’re still getting most people to understand the idea of a podcast.) As is widely discussed, a recent confluence of events (most notably reality TV and the popularity of particular no-budget films and documentaries) has been training audiences to accept and embrace lower-quality video, camera work, and production values. Note that the TV shows on iTunes are 320 x 240, a resolution lower than some cameraphones take today. Of course, these aren’t shot on cameraphones, and have lots of money involved in producing them, but the fact that any vlog can sit next to Lost at (technically) the same quality is significant. With the right concept and people, anyone can produce something equally (if not more) compelling with off-the-shelf hardware. I think it’s only a matter of months before Apple helps mint a video podcast star with a hundred thousands viewers. Rocketboom stands a good chance, or maybe someone completely new. (I’m still searching for compelling narrative storytelling in online video.) And within the year I fully expect an indie “network” (really just a brand umbrella for a number of shows, all that ABC becomes in this post-broadcast world) to draw together a bunch of compelling content under one advertising banner, like all the new blog networks. This will be even more viable as Apple begins pushing video in the living room, which is now the (even more) obvious move, either with an 802.11n Airport Express or a media center Mac mini. Or both!

I’m quietly working on a venture (privately, not with CBS) related to all of this, and the new push for video in iTunes is good news for that. I only wish I was ready to launch at this point, but it’s looking like I’ll still squeeze in before the end of 2005, which seems early enough, while maybe lending me perspective on what else I’ll be up against.