I really don't think they have a choice if Apple decides to negotiate directly with content creators.
There's always a choice. They could introduce data caps which Comcast already has done and/or increase the rates they charge to make up for the revenue loss. They also have shareholders that they answer to. I would welcome a change on how things are done but change will come gradually instead of all at once. Right now there isn't enough incentive for the content creators to do things Apple's way.
Good luck, because...
Try explaining away "we're too lazy to do anything about our network".
Everyone needs to go out and pirate more TV, then.
Good luck because what? Comcast has already done it. They could easily cap internet only customers and provide unlimited data to TV subscribers.
They're all doing something about the network, Verizon with FiOS and AT&T with U-verse, the stockholders are going to want to see a good return on that capital expenditure.
Unfortunately there's no Napster for TV shows.
They could easily cap internet only customers and provide unlimited data to TV subscribers.
Easily? Maybe. Legally? No.
They're all doing something about the network...
Funny how my available speeds and prices haven't changed in the last decade, huh. :no:
...Verizon with FiOS...
Could have sworn they stopped rolling that out.
The only way any of the existing ISPs is going to be forced to lay more fiber is through a government mandate (wrong way to go) or via Google expanding their network and lowering their prices (also wrong, since Google).
Unfortunately there's no Napster for TV shows.
There is, however, every single other torrent website out there.
Easily? Maybe. Legally? No.
Funny how my available speeds and prices haven't changed in the last decade, huh. :no:
Could have sworn they stopped rolling that out.
The only way any of the existing ISPs is going to be forced to lay more fiber is through a government mandate (wrong way to go) or via Google expanding their network and lowering their prices (also wrong, since Google).
There is, however, every single other torrent website out there.
Move out of the boonies. Yes the FiOS rollout has stopped for now, but as the need for faster internet increases I can see it starting back up. The telecoms have always been regulated by the government so a mandate wouldn't be out of the norm.
How safe are those torrent sites? I know that the Napster software was made so it would only access the shared folder of the users.
The need has been increasing all the years it has been stopped. There's no suitable explanation for why fiber isn't being laid 24/7.
Define safe.
Because laying down fiber is expensive and the telcos no longer enjoy a monopoly that would ensure a return on their investment. Safe is virus free and if you're sharing that only your shared folder gets accessed.
So are our monthly plans; they're hoarding it somewhere.
...and the telcos no longer enjoy a monopoly that would ensure a return on their investment.
... You're sure? Better write a letter to my local telecoms telling them that they don't have a monopoly anymore so they better stop carving up my city and refusing to offer service across a street.
Safe is virus free and if you're sharing that only your shared folder gets accessed.
Oh, I'd imagine so. Pirates tend to be all up on security.
So are our monthly plans; they're hoarding it somewhere.
... You're sure? Better write a letter to my local telecoms telling them that they don't have a monopoly anymore so they better stop carving up my city and refusing to offer service across a street.
Oh, I'd imagine so. Pirates tend to be all up on security.
Can't you get internet/phone from your local cable company? If yes then there's no monopoly.
Nope, where I live there is one ISP. On the other side of the city, there is one ISP, not the same.
The two cable companies are the same way.
And the two power companies. In bad storms, only half the city goes dark.
Wow that's blows. Unfortunately in small cites or rural towns there aren't enough customers to justify building a modern network. It would literally take decades to recover the cost of building it.
Nope, where I live there is one ISP. On the other side of the city, there is one ISP, not the same.
The two cable companies are the same way.
And the two power companies. In bad storms, only half the city goes dark.
Same where I'm at, and just outside a major metropolitan city. There's on cable company on one side, and another on the other side. Calling the "wrong" on for service, they said they'd transfer me to the "department" that could help me... next thing I'm on the phone with the other cable company.
I stand by my statement that the pipes that carry this stuff through the neighborhood will not handle the extra bandwidth from large scale TV streaming without some form of technical wizardry. It will probably be a next gen form of compression that will compromise quality still further. The last decade and a half with audio has proven that the consumers quest is for having larger QUANTITIES of product in ever smaller storage devices and for faster streaming with total disregard for quality. Hence $400 headphones for mp3 listening.
I stand by my statement that the pipes that carry this stuff through the neighborhood will not handle the extra bandwidth from large scale TV streaming without some form of technical wizardry.
I stand by my statement that this isn't how the Internet works and that they'll handle it just fine given that a large portion of the population already streams HD video to their houses every single night.
It will probably be a next gen form of compression that will compromise quality still further.
... You'd prefer a 1080p movie to be a terabyte, would you? Quality isn't compromised in the same way as audio.
Quality isn't compromised in the same way as audio.
You don't think so? Take a look at a sunset in any iTunes/Netflix movie. Those bands of color are among the most annoying artefacts ever, audio or video.
Compressed video is about a thousand percent better than it was a decade ago, but it ain't "there" yet.
Comments
Many telecoms are indeed ISPs. Do you really think that the amount they make for internet access will make up for the loss of TV revenue?
I really don't think they have a choice if Apple decides to negotiate directly with content creators.
There's always a choice. They could introduce data caps which Comcast already has done and/or increase the rates they charge to make up for the revenue loss. They also have shareholders that they answer to. I would welcome a change on how things are done but change will come gradually instead of all at once. Right now there isn't enough incentive for the content creators to do things Apple's way.
Good luck, because...
Try explaining away "we're too lazy to do anything about our network".
Everyone needs to go out and pirate more TV, then.
Good luck because what? Comcast has already done it. They could easily cap internet only customers and provide unlimited data to TV subscribers.
They're all doing something about the network, Verizon with FiOS and AT&T with U-verse, the stockholders are going to want to see a good return on that capital expenditure.
Unfortunately there's no Napster for TV shows.
Easily? Maybe. Legally? No.
Funny how my available speeds and prices haven't changed in the last decade, huh. :no:
Could have sworn they stopped rolling that out.
The only way any of the existing ISPs is going to be forced to lay more fiber is through a government mandate (wrong way to go) or via Google expanding their network and lowering their prices (also wrong, since Google).
There is, however, every single other torrent website out there.
Move out of the boonies. Yes the FiOS rollout has stopped for now, but as the need for faster internet increases I can see it starting back up. The telecoms have always been regulated by the government so a mandate wouldn't be out of the norm.
How safe are those torrent sites? I know that the Napster software was made so it would only access the shared folder of the users.
The need has been increasing all the years it has been stopped. There's no suitable explanation for why fiber isn't being laid 24/7.
Define safe.
Because laying down fiber is expensive and the telcos no longer enjoy a monopoly that would ensure a return on their investment. Safe is virus free and if you're sharing that only your shared folder gets accessed.
So are our monthly plans; they're hoarding it somewhere.
... You're sure? Better write a letter to my local telecoms telling them that they don't have a monopoly anymore so they better stop carving up my city and refusing to offer service across a street.
Oh, I'd imagine so. Pirates tend to be all up on security.
Can't you get internet/phone from your local cable company? If yes then there's no monopoly.
Nope, where I live there is one ISP. On the other side of the city, there is one ISP, not the same.
The two cable companies are the same way.
And the two power companies. In bad storms, only half the city goes dark.
Wow that's blows. Unfortunately in small cites or rural towns there aren't enough customers to justify building a modern network. It would literally take decades to recover the cost of building it.
Same where I'm at, and just outside a major metropolitan city. There's on cable company on one side, and another on the other side. Calling the "wrong" on for service, they said they'd transfer me to the "department" that could help me... next thing I'm on the phone with the other cable company.
They're all one big colluding syndicate.
I stand by my statement that this isn't how the Internet works and that they'll handle it just fine given that a large portion of the population already streams HD video to their houses every single night.
... You'd prefer a 1080p movie to be a terabyte, would you? Quality isn't compromised in the same way as audio.
Also, the point at which degradation becomes unacceptable is totally subjective.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Quality isn't compromised in the same way as audio.
You don't think so? Take a look at a sunset in any iTunes/Netflix movie. Those bands of color are among the most annoying artefacts ever, audio or video.
Compressed video is about a thousand percent better than it was a decade ago, but it ain't "there" yet.
Go look up streaming video stats. Netflix, Hulu, iTunes, and the like.
The majority is always sane.
That's why iTunes 12 better darn well have H.265 support. Apple used to be the one spearheading new technologies…
That says a lot right there.