None of the three reasons you give really apply to me in this case
I did say:
all the shows consolidated
And I figured "no commercials" was a given.
Extras almost always suck but people seem to want them anyway. I guess it's just the feeling that they are getting more.
Also, the fact that this iTunes model cost you "a small fortune" is exactly why it won't take off (unless somehow the existing television model collapses and people have no other choice).
Quote:
Also, you keep asking what Apple's answer to live TV is? If it's live, can you not just turn on your TV and watch it? Or am I missing something?
How do I get it? Do I have to pay for cable TV, which is going to have all of Apple's proposed features in addition to the live programming, as well as the Apple stuff?
If all Apple wants to do is be an electronic Netflix that's great, best of luck to them. But that really doesn't interest me that much. Especially if we're getting freaking 320x240.
Surely this would be a part of iLife 06? They should definately sell it separately, I want it on my G5 powerMac.
Front Row is the "new" app in iLife '06 I predicted would act as a "media player" to a post of what would be shown at MWSF2006, and I also predicted the nano would get remote control abilities. Granted, I was not spot on, but close enough for me to make a few more predictions.
1 - Front Row will be included in iLife '06 which will have improvements to make it compliment the other iLife apps even more. I can see us being able to view iDVD projects that have been saved as a disk image and GarageBand music that is in its default form (i.e. with a ".band" extension).
2 - The Mac mini will get built-in ability to use the remote.
3 - Apple will start selling an accessory that will give older computers the ability to use Front Row.
4 - There will be an improved iSight.
5 - Improved/new AirPort Express to handle video.
6 - The above 5 predictions will happen at MWSF2006.
I do not know if 802.11n is for longer ranges or faster speeds, but if it is for the latter then I can see the AirPort Express getting 802.11n capabilities to stream video.
Well, it was out before MythTV and it's about 10x easier to set up and use than Linux + MythTV.
And Tivo was out before both. So was ReplayTV.
Quote:
And it streams wirelessly from any other PC running filesharing. Audio, video, pictures, whatever.
Just another computer feature. Woot.
Quote:
Again with words like "groundbreaking". What is the purpose of making these pointless abstracts the focus of discussion?
You're the one acting like MCE is the neatest thing since sliced bread, I'm just trying to ground it in reality. It's just a computer being piped to a TV. That's all.
Quote:
I find it hilarious that a seasoned Apple apologist such as yourself is trotting out "dude you can do that on Linux". I thought consolidation of functionality into an easy-to-use package was the main part of Apple's genius! But when others do it? "duh use linux n00b".
Not at all. I'd love to see Apple bring some ease of use to the market, but again, I was just trying to ground your hyperbole.
Quote:
In the setup I've used it was a Hauppage TV card, some flavor of ATI all-in-wonder w/ DVI out using a DVI->Component adapter to the TV.
UTTERLY missed the point.
The Hauppage TV card - what's the input cable? Coax? ENet? S-video? Who's the provider? Cable? Satellite? Do you have premium services that you want to access? That's the quandry.
The DVI out is completely irrelevant. Hell, my PowerBook does that.
Quote:
But the end-user doesn't have to know any of that crap. All they will have to do is find the right plugs, which isn't exactly rocket science (especially if you include them with the media center box).
Aha, now you're starting to dance around the actual issue. What sorts of interconnects do people have now? What sort will they have in two years? Five? Remember, you have to allow for tuning, and ideally you're going to want to have a box that works with cable, satellite, NTSC, PAL, etc, etc, etc. Looking at the wide array of a *mess* that is home entertainment, I'm not surprised that there's no Apple solution. Until the damned mess gets straightened out, there's no simple easy to use solution.
Great article in this months' IEEE Spectrum regarding exactly this, actually. Talks about the impending switch from analog to digital broadcast, and some of the ripple effects. They're not small. The way we get video in ten years is likely to be utterly unlike anything up until this point.
Kind of like how music is shifting.
Quote:
+ wireless file sharing. Yes. I think I've made it pretty clear that all of this is not complicated and that Apple could very easily do it. I've made that fairly explicit every step of the way.
Except for the input of the video feed.
Quote:
Those specific things I was doing were pretty damned cool. If they don't impress you that's fine but a lot of people would love to be able to do all that easily. As I said above, more people will buy WindowsMCE than will buy Apple computers this year.
And more people will buy Windows than Macs. Point?
Quote:
So you can be as blasé as you like about it, and so can Apple, but the market is growing without them.
So did MP3 players.
Quote:
I don't look at it from any perspective than this:
What does this technology allow me to do?
That's all I care about. I'm not in the business of apologizing for the shortcomings of Microsoft's solution or Apple's solution, I'm in the business of using my television and using my computer and comparing those two solutions to see what suits me best.
I don't care about "revolutionary" or "groundbreaking". I care about what the technology lets me do.
No argument there, except that a ReplayTV box + a Mac mini would do the same. RTV supports moving the media files, which are standard MPEG-2, to computers, other RTV boxes, you name it. The Mac mini has the rest of the pieces. *shrug* It really isn't any big deal.
Quote:
Apple. Orange.
Music has always come in individual, paid-for packages.
And radio is... ?
Quote:
As far as the DVD player crashing, that's meaningless. The DVD player isn't the storage area of your content, it's the just player and it's a pretty cheap one at that.
And you can get scratched discs replaced. Some studios charge for it, others don't.
If Apple allowed re-download of previously bought tracks/shows that would negate that problem. As far as I know they do not allow that now.
Hey, if you don't back up your computer, that's not my problem.
Quote:
And still? what of live TV?
What of it? Have I, at any point, said anything that would make you think that I wouldn't like a PVR? Don't think so. Just trying to point out that if you take a step back and consider broadcast television as scheduled streaming, and nothing more, a lot of possibilities open up with regards to where it can go. The landscape is about to get very interesting, and MCE/PVRs are going to be dinosaurs within five years, in my opinion.
If you hadn't noticed, Apple hasn't been selling media consumption products, they've been reinventing media industries. I don't expect you'll see an integrated home/TV unit until things get to the point that they know which way to jump. Just a guess. Right now the hardware and business models are in massive flux.
The Hauppage TV card - what's the input cable? Coax? ENet? S-video? Who's the provider? Cable? Satellite? Do you have premium services that you want to access? That's the quandry.
Ah, cable from wall to cable provider set-top box to MCE. MCE grabs everything from the set-top box and has channel listings up to 4 weeks ahead. So you never deal with the cable provided set top box, it's all in MCE.
Quote:
What sorts of interconnects do people have now? What sort will they have in two years? Five?
Right now they have a coax coming out of the wall.
In 5 years they will still have a coax coming out of the wall.
And if cable/telco companies move to something else, they'll provide a set-top tuner box with coax, component or HDMI out.
Right now people have coax, composite, component & HDMI coming into their TVs.
In 5 years they will have component & HDMI coming into their TVs.
This really isn't as mysterious as you would want to make it seem.
Quote:
Remember, you have to allow for tuning, and ideally you're going to want to have a box that works with cable, satellite, NTSC, PAL, etc, etc, etc. Looking at the wide array of a *mess* that is home entertainment, I'm not surprised that there's no Apple solution. Until the damned mess gets straightened out, there's no simple easy to use solution.
Why not just get a free barebones set-top tuner from your cable/sat provider and use that as the decoder?
Quote:
And more people will buy Windows than Macs. Point?
This isn't just people buying Windows, it's people buying a computer for their TV.
The fact that it is Windows is very low on the list of why people are buying MCE. Reasons #1-#100 involve it being a Internet-enabled PVR on steroids.
Quote:
So did MP3 players.
Apples. Oranges.
Past success in a completely separate market has nothing to do with this.
Quote:
And radio is... ?
Still around and pretty strong. And completely free.
Quote:
The landscape is about to get very interesting, and MCE/PVRs are going to be dinosaurs within five years, in my opinion.
What of it? Have I, at any point, said anything that would make you think that I wouldn't like a PVR? Don't think so.
"PVRs will be dinosaurs in five years."
"What makes you think I don't want a PVR?"
Here's the thing, PVR is going nowhere.
Satellite television might be doomed eventually but cable & telco companies are going nowhere.
They control the means to get data into your house. So even if you want the happy, insanely expensive world of pay-per-episode television you have to go through one of them and they aren't going to say "oh hey I like your stuff Apple I'll go ahead and quit what I'm doing now and lower the prices for your customers!"
All Apple needs to do is make a better MCE than Microsoft has. I'm sure Apple can do it and that's why I even bother thinking about it.
It's *not* going to happen...sorry. Apple doesn't follow...it leads.
I initially felt that your comment was too warped and uninformed to merit a response. Then I remembered You're Right!!! Sort of. Apple invented the palmtop, video game console with HD, and a whole bunch of other innovative markets that they subsequently let crappier companies dominate. And, yes, they even had a go at the Media PC. Can this be considered "leading"?
The first cable-ready Macintosh! No, not for a cable modem, but for cable TV.
More or less a black LC 550 (complete with a black mouse and black keyboard), Macintosh TV let you watch 16-bit TV or use 8-bit graphics! (Assuming you were in the US, Canada, or some other country using NTSC video. MacTV didn't support any other broadcast standard.)
This was perhaps the oddest Macintosh ever. It was the last desktop with a 68030 processor, the first with a built-in TV tuner, the first black desktop Mac*, and the first Mac to ship with a remote control. The built-in 14" Trinitron monitor displayed 16-bit TV images, but only 8-bit computer graphics. Software allowed it to capture a single frame from the TV as a PICT file.
* MacTV was the only black desktop Mac in the States. The 5400 was available in black overseas but never in the States.
Alas, you can't watch TV and compute at the same time. It was an interesting experiment, marketed exclusively through consumer electronic channels. With a 68040 CPU, the option of watching TV in a small window while computing, and maybe even the ability to capture TV as a QuickTime movie, and this could have been a serious contender. Instead, it is a curious footnote in Apple's history.
Despite using a 32 MHz, MacUser notes that Mac TV is about 15% slower than the 25 MHz LC III and LC 520, "because its data bus is smaller." Cleverly designed in some ways, intentionally crippled in others, Mac TV merits the Road Apple rating. The biggest drawbacks are a complete lack of upgrade options (without losing the TV features) and an 8 MB memory ceiling.
Regardless, this Mac looked great in black. Too bad only 10,000 were ever produced, making it perhaps the most rare Mac ever.
Ah, cable from wall to cable provider set-top box to MCE. MCE grabs everything from the set-top box and has channel listings up to 4 weeks ahead. So you never deal with the cable provided set top box, it's all in MCE.
You're kidding. So it's really a Windows box + 80's video encoder board + 70's IR repeater dongle + access to TV schedule that you can get for free on the Internet.
Good lord. Talk about patchwork.
Quote:
Right now they have a coax coming out of the wall.
In 5 years they will still have a coax coming out of the wall.
And if cable/telco companies move to something else, they'll provide a set-top tuner box with coax, component or HDMI out.
Right now people have coax, composite, component & HDMI coming into their TVs.
In 5 years they will have component & HDMI coming into their TVs.
This really isn't as mysterious as you would want to make it seem.
No, apparently not, since they're going with the lowest common denominator.
Digital cable and satellite are then getting decoded into video, then re-encoded on the fly with loss of resolution. Excellent.
You still haven't answered what the video input is, other than 'a cable'. Insightful, that.
I mean hell, all they did was grab basement technology and slap it together. Here I thought it was something interesting.
Here's a recommendation: Mac mini + ReplayTV PVR. Replay supports moving the standard MPEG-2 files to other computers, including Macs. Use Front Row (yes, assume that Apple isn't totally idiotic and releases it for other computers), and that's it. You're done. FR includes video file playback locally or on a network. Tada. That wasn't so hard, was it? Toss in an iSight and the new Remote, and you have that couch experience. Toss in a wireless keyboard and gyro mouse, and you have the full experience. Including video conferencing in the living room. Keen, that.
Quote:
Why not just get a free barebones set-top tuner from your cable/sat provider and use that as the decoder?
See above. Digital -> analog -> digital = teh suck. I mean hell, if you're going to spring the bucks for a 50" screen, why watch a show at resolution that won't look good over 19"?? Waste of $.
Quote:
This isn't just people buying Windows, it's people buying a computer for their TV.
The fact that it is Windows is very low on the list of why people are buying MCE. Reasons #1-#100 involve it being a Internet-enabled PVR on steroids.
Actually, it's just a pretty basic PVR, hold the steroids. Woot.
Quote:
Apples. Oranges.
Past success in a completely separate market has nothing to do with this.
Point. Missed.
You want to say the market is leaving them behind, that was the same thing being said pre-iPod. You're right, it doesn't mean they'll replicate the success, but it also means that the previous people spouting that line were dead wrong.
Quote:
Still around and pretty strong. And completely free.
Sirius. XM.
Quote:
"PVRs will be dinosaurs in five years."
"What makes you think I don't want a PVR?"
Here's the thing, PVR is going nowhere.
Bull. I predict within ten years you'll see on-demand become more popular than normal subscriptions, in households with digital cable. The PVR becomes *pointless* at that point. Oh right 'live tv'... except how are you supposed to tell it to record something you don't know is going to happen? Everything else is pretty much on-demand. A PVR in such a situation is a dinosaur.
Quote:
Satellite television might be doomed eventually but cable & telco companies are going nowhere.
They control the means to get data into your house.
WHOOHOO! THE LIGHT IS SEEN!
It's *ALL* just ways to get data into your house. Whether it's DSL, cable, satellite, Internet, Comcast, Time/Warner, or freaking carrier pigeon, WHO GIVES YOU THE DATA WON'T MATTER.
The content providers != the distribution system. Content providers will continue to look for new distribution models. Subscription pre-scheduled streaming is just *one* possible model now. Expect things to change.
Quote:
So even if you want the happy, insanely expensive world of pay-per-episode television you have to go through one of them and they aren't going to say "oh hey I like your stuff Apple I'll go ahead and quit what I'm doing now and lower the prices for your customers!"
You're confusing the distribution mechanism with the content providers again.
Imagine if the company that actually films, makes, and produces a show like Lost, which is almost never the network that airs it, which is not the company that sends it to you, decided that instead of a major network, they wanted to only distribute their product on-demand, without having to tie to a channel or a cable or satellite company. The net provides the lower infrastructure, it's just data, after all, and 'some company' provides the consumer sale point. Apple is positioning to be 'that company', as I see it.
The move to all digital is going to be interesting, as it means that the cable companies no longer have the monopoly on piping high-quality video to your house.
Quote:
All Apple needs to do is make a better MCE than Microsoft has. I'm sure Apple can do it and that's why I even bother thinking about it.
I'm sure they can too, if your description above is all MCE is. Sheesh.
I'll be getting the mini and the ReplayTV, and avoid Windows. Nothing compelling there.
Never knew Apple put together a semi-complete solution like that.
But I do know I had a PowerMac 7100/66 AV. I had a TV tuner which would plug right into the Mac and I was able to watch TV and record shows on my computer back in early 1994.
Put the remote, software and USB2 IR interface with an auxilery USB2 port for the iPod in a box, and sell it for $50-79 so I can run out and buy one... I would kill for this...it would make life so much easier when on the other side of the room reading...
Web streaming is not nearly as efficient as (? buffering ?) grabbing a TV signal off cable.
How do I know? Because I watched Stevenote and I watched (? buffering ?) the new Albert Einstein episode of Nova on PBS in HD off the same cable. One looks wonderful and never falters and one stutters (? buffering ?) occasionally and drops for no reason (it picks itself up better than it used to, but it still disconnects).
(? buffering ?)
Kick:
Quote:
Good lord. Talk about patchwork.
Did you have a point or was "lolz '70s" supposed to stand on its own as a meaningful argument?
God I can't wait for the digital revolution synergy paradigm.
Quote:
Digital cable and satellite are then getting decoded into video, then re-encoded on the fly with loss of resolution. Excellent.
Where is the resolution lost? Be specific.
Quote:
You want to say the market is leaving them behind, that was the same thing being said pre-iPod. You're right, it doesn't mean they'll replicate the success, but it also means that the previous people spouting that line were dead wrong.
I got your point, it just has absolutely nothing at all to do with the topic at hand.
Quote:
Sirius. XM.
Yes?
Quote:
Oh right 'live tv'... except how are you supposed to tell it to record something you don't know is going to happen? Everything else is pretty much on-demand. A PVR in such a situation is a dinosaur.
I know when a lot of live TV is going to happen.
For instance, this Saturday, live, my beloved Longhorns of the University of Texas are going to do battle against the evil Buffaloes of the University of Colorado. It hasn't happened yet, it will happen live on Saturday. PVR is damn near indispensable there, nowhere near "a dinosaur".
Also, I know some news is going to happen 2 days from now on CNN, I don't know what it is but I know it's going to be there. It will be live.
So everything besides sports and news. Small problem being that sports and news are two of the biggest things on television and neither will ever go away.
Quote:
The move to all digital is going to be interesting, as it means that the cable companies no longer have the monopoly on piping high-quality video to your house.
What does "the move to all digital" mean?
It's either the telco or the cable company. That's it. Those are your choices. And they are going to get their cut, they aren't going to bow out of the game. And if that means making high-speed service more expensive that's what they will do.
Quote:
I'm sure they can too, if your description above is all MCE is. Sheesh.
I am amazed that you are so confident holding court on MCE when you seemingly don't even know what it does or how it works. The kind of blind allegiance you wouldn't expect to see outside of Pravda.
God I can't wait to see Apple come out with a prettified MCE and watch you try to spin it. Better than Scott McClellan.
This has been the most spirited debate I have seen on this board ever. I really believe that there are so many good points made by all. I would like to add a few things to this conversation. With that said, I think all 4 of you are right on!
1) I don't think that Cable coming to my house necessarily means Cable TV. I can just have Cable Internet.
2) I like the idea of having Cable TV but I don't like paying 49 bucks to have 76 channels when i really only watch specific shows from 8 channels.
3) I think there is something greater behind the Podcast Subscription abilities nested within iTunes and the Video content available through iTunes. In addition, I think these two features are what prompted Apple to hire that Subscrption expert they did 6 months ago.
4) I like the idea Akimbo. www.akimbo.com This is essentially a Tivo, but not for Cable TV, but rather IPTV.
Put this all together.
Apple creates their version if Akimbo. You pay a subscription and using the Podcast subscription abilities, it automatically downloads/streams the content when updates are available. What I like about Akimbo is that if you look at their current offerings, it covers both conventional cable provided content, but also web content from providers like iFilm. As long as the catalog of content grows, this appears to be a good mix.
God I can't wait for the digital revolution synergy paradigm.
Well, y'see, they aren't the *same* ICs and hard drives...
Quote:
Where is the resolution lost? Be specific.
You... really don't understand the technology, do you?
Video encoding 101: Digital video is sent to your house compressed. It's lossy compression. The STB decompresses it to raw video, analog. That gets sent to the MCE box, where it is digitized, and then compressed again using lossy compression. On viewing later, it is converted back to analog, and sent on its way, or kept as digital if you're lucky enough to have HDMI.
The recompression throws away information, ie, resolution. Every time you convert to analog and back to digital, if there's compression involved, you lose picture quality... which is going to show up *more* the higher quality your display. Oops.
Quote:
I got your point, it just has absolutely nothing at all to do with the topic at hand.
And yet you were going to argue it. Man, you need to get out more.
Quote:
Yes?
Paid radio. Subscription. Analogous to paid television. And yet the pay for music as singles model works well for iTMS. Put the pieces together, 'rat, I can't do all your thinking for you here.
Quote:
I know when a lot of live TV is going to happen.
For instance, this Saturday, live, my beloved Longhorns of the University of Texas are going to do battle against the evil Buffaloes of the University of Colorado. It hasn't happened yet, it will happen live on Saturday. PVR is damn near indispensable there, nowhere near "a dinosaur".
Also, I know some news is going to happen 2 days from now on CNN, I don't know what it is but I know it's going to be there. It will be live.
So everything besides sports and news. Small problem being that sports and news are two of the biggest things on television and neither will ever go away.
Both of which you can get on-demand at time of broadcast. Just like a live Keynote stream. Imagine that.
All of this can be done *independently* of the cable company. *ANY* data stream to the house (or wireless handheld) will do.
You really don't see the potential, do you?
Quote:
What does "the move to all digital" mean?
Digital broadcast over-air and line. Simple enough to parse.
Quote:
It's either the telco or the cable company. That's it. Those are your choices. And they are going to get their cut, they aren't going to bow out of the game. And if that means making high-speed service more expensive that's what they will do.
Video is just data. If the telco is billing you for data, they don't care what it is. If you have cable internet, they don't care what it is.
Quote:
I am amazed that you are so confident holding court on MCE when you seemingly don't even know what it does or how it works. The kind of blind allegiance you wouldn't expect to see outside of Pravda.
I'm still figuring out how you can own one and still not understand the basics of how it works, but I guess that describes the majority of the market.
Quote:
God I can't wait to see Apple come out with a prettified MCE and watch you try to spin it. Better than Scott McClellan. [/B]
If they come out with something as hacked up as an MCE, I'll be the first to bitch.
I'm glad it works for your needs. I'm also glad there are people who have more vision. I don't see Apple in this market until the digital migration frees up the current tie between distribution channel and the content providers, then they'll try and repeat the iTMS model by being the new distribution method.
In the meantime, a ReplayTV and a Mac mini do the same things the MCE box does. I'd still prefer to see a nice H.264 based solution, but I don't think that's going to happen until the basic distribution is unified on digital over a standard computer network, be it wired, wireless, whatever.
I couldn't read the whole thread because you guys kept rambling on and on about the same stuff. Just want to clear something up.
There are PVR solutions available for macs. Check out the EyeTV, ConvertX, and Evolution TV. These have hardware decoding to MPEG4 and Divx, and given Wednesdays announcements, I'm sure H.264 is coming soon. Updates to these programs will tie into the iTunes database, so FrontRow will recognize all the videos you save, automatically. You can bet on that.
All that needs to happen is FrontRow for mac mini. which i hope happens with iLife '06.
Apple is demonstrating the STREAMING capability in FrontRow with its movie trailers. This, as someone said early in this thread, is mostly just a proof of concept; reel the Hollywood guys & the Major networks with 2 options: stream or sell a la carte. Technology demonstration complete.
The recompression throws away information, ie, resolution. Every time you convert to analog and back to digital, if there's compression involved, you lose picture quality... which is going to show up *more* the higher quality your display. Oops.
Loss of picture quality is not a necessary consequence. As a matter of fact, good tuner cards can make it look better even after all the conversion dancing than it did on arrival.
There is a tremendous difference between the theoretical loss of "resolution" due to that process and a hit in real-world picture quality. There are a lot of factors that go into it and what you described is merely one of them.
If you have good, quality components it is possible to have no noticeable difference in picture quality.
Further, the analog conversion is not a necessary step in the process, it is optional (though prevalent). All-digital setups exist already (granted, over-the-air only right now in MCE).
But MCE is going away, anyway. Windows Vista will be bringing a lot more to this, including CableCARD support. (And hey, thank Microsoft for backing HD-DVD which includes Managed Copy).
CableCARD is coming, Shuttle has already shown a potential product.
But? Vista won't be here until late 2006 at the earliest. Lots of time still for Apple to beat them to the punch.
Quote:
Paid radio. Put the pieces together, 'rat, I can't do all your thinking for you here.
Paid radio services exist now, yes. Some people are now paying for what was once free because it has offered improvements over the free model (or things not even available via the free model).
That is almost vaguely somewhat like what we're talking about but not really. Please clarify.
Quote:
Video is just data. If the telco is billing you for data, they don't care what it is. If you have cable internet, they don't care what it is.
They will care a lot if their television and phone services are being dropped for access to broadband alone, slashing their revenue.
What will the practical upshot of that caring be? Most likely a far more rigid pricing structure than you see today.
There are a ton of people with broadband out there with bandwidth limitations already.
"You've got 4GB to do all of your Internet, TV & phone stuff this month? good luck!"
Hopefully there will be enough competition to make sure that doesn't happen.
I'm even mildly hopeful companies like Verizon with services like FiOS who have no real vested interest in television won't mind pimping out their megabandwidth for potential web TV exploitation.
I know you think you're providing some special knowledge that my caveman brain is not grasping, but let me assure you these ideas are not new; not new to me and not new to the industry.
Apple is demonstrating the STREAMING capability in FrontRow with its movie trailers. This, as someone said early in this thread, is mostly just a proof of concept; reel the Hollywood guys & the Major networks with 2 options: stream or sell a la carte. Technology demonstration complete.
Apple is demonstrating the STREAMING capability in FrontRow with its movie trailers. This, as someone said early in this thread, is mostly just a proof of concept; reel the Hollywood guys & the Major networks with 2 options: stream or sell a la carte. Technology demonstration complete.
On of the TV stations here in Denmark already offers tv shows, news and movies on demand by streaming the content to the users over the internet.
PVR will be unnecessary in a few years, and I can't even see why it's so cool to have your computer act as a PVR today.
Windows MCE is basically a fully fledged computer (with fans and all) with a fully fledged OS acting as a basic video recorder.
A dedicated recorder is cheaper and much more stable, and getting your content (photos, music, movies and so on) can happen over a simple wireless device (like a beefed up AirPort Express). D.Link already offer such a solution.
They will care a lot if their television and phone services are being dropped for access to broadband alone, slashing their revenue.
What will the practical upshot of that caring be? Most likely a far more rigid pricing structure than you see today.
There are a ton of people with broadband out there with bandwidth limitations already.
"You've got 4GB to do all of your Internet, TV & phone stuff this month? good luck!"
LOL. You really mean this? So people in a free market are going to step back from ?20 a month unlimited bandwidth DSL connections to bandwidth limits for higher prices???
It is basic economics: once new technology allows more functionality for lower prices, the 'old' technology companies adapt or die.
Think zeppelin vs airplane
Think horse vs car
In the future
Think landline vs VOIP
Think cable tv vs IPtv
The future will be ONE digital line from the internet to/from your house containing internet, telephony, and video. Both live and on demand.
Separate lines will go. Separate telephony is leaving as we speak (skype, gTalk), separate television will leave tomorrow.
Television through network channels as we know it is rapidly approaching its' final breath.
Broadcast channels may hate this, but they are becoming redundant real fast and they either transform or die.
THE economic trend of this age is this: expensive middle men that are no longer needed are going digital or going away! Think computer store vs Dell or Apple. Think video rental places. Think record stores. The digital age is making the line from producers to consumers shorter, more efficient and cheaper. This goes for physical products as well as content.
Separate networks for - whatever - will go, because one network, one line is cheaper.
Apple has seen the light. Let's schedule a follow-up to this (very informative!) discussion in five years (friday 14 october 2010) and see where we will be then... 8)
Comments
Originally posted by stupider...likeafox
None of the three reasons you give really apply to me in this case
I did say:
all the shows consolidated
And I figured "no commercials" was a given.
Extras almost always suck but people seem to want them anyway. I guess it's just the feeling that they are getting more.
Also, the fact that this iTunes model cost you "a small fortune" is exactly why it won't take off (unless somehow the existing television model collapses and people have no other choice).
Also, you keep asking what Apple's answer to live TV is? If it's live, can you not just turn on your TV and watch it? Or am I missing something?
How do I get it? Do I have to pay for cable TV, which is going to have all of Apple's proposed features in addition to the live programming, as well as the Apple stuff?
If all Apple wants to do is be an electronic Netflix that's great, best of luck to them. But that really doesn't interest me that much. Especially if we're getting freaking 320x240.
Originally posted by iDunno
Surely this would be a part of iLife 06? They should definately sell it separately, I want it on my G5 powerMac.
Front Row is the "new" app in iLife '06 I predicted would act as a "media player" to a post of what would be shown at MWSF2006, and I also predicted the nano would get remote control abilities. Granted, I was not spot on, but close enough for me to make a few more predictions.
1 - Front Row will be included in iLife '06 which will have improvements to make it compliment the other iLife apps even more. I can see us being able to view iDVD projects that have been saved as a disk image and GarageBand music that is in its default form (i.e. with a ".band" extension).
2 - The Mac mini will get built-in ability to use the remote.
3 - Apple will start selling an accessory that will give older computers the ability to use Front Row.
4 - There will be an improved iSight.
5 - Improved/new AirPort Express to handle video.
6 - The above 5 predictions will happen at MWSF2006.
I do not know if 802.11n is for longer ranges or faster speeds, but if it is for the latter then I can see the AirPort Express getting 802.11n capabilities to stream video.
Originally posted by groverat
Well, it was out before MythTV and it's about 10x easier to set up and use than Linux + MythTV.
And Tivo was out before both. So was ReplayTV.
And it streams wirelessly from any other PC running filesharing. Audio, video, pictures, whatever.
Just another computer feature. Woot.
Again with words like "groundbreaking". What is the purpose of making these pointless abstracts the focus of discussion?
I find it hilarious that a seasoned Apple apologist such as yourself is trotting out "dude you can do that on Linux". I thought consolidation of functionality into an easy-to-use package was the main part of Apple's genius! But when others do it? "duh use linux n00b".
Not at all. I'd love to see Apple bring some ease of use to the market, but again, I was just trying to ground your hyperbole.
In the setup I've used it was a Hauppage TV card, some flavor of ATI all-in-wonder w/ DVI out using a DVI->Component adapter to the TV.
UTTERLY missed the point.
The Hauppage TV card - what's the input cable? Coax? ENet? S-video? Who's the provider? Cable? Satellite? Do you have premium services that you want to access? That's the quandry.
The DVI out is completely irrelevant. Hell, my PowerBook does that.
But the end-user doesn't have to know any of that crap. All they will have to do is find the right plugs, which isn't exactly rocket science (especially if you include them with the media center box).
Aha, now you're starting to dance around the actual issue. What sorts of interconnects do people have now? What sort will they have in two years? Five? Remember, you have to allow for tuning, and ideally you're going to want to have a box that works with cable, satellite, NTSC, PAL, etc, etc, etc. Looking at the wide array of a *mess* that is home entertainment, I'm not surprised that there's no Apple solution. Until the damned mess gets straightened out, there's no simple easy to use solution.
Great article in this months' IEEE Spectrum regarding exactly this, actually. Talks about the impending switch from analog to digital broadcast, and some of the ripple effects. They're not small. The way we get video in ten years is likely to be utterly unlike anything up until this point.
Kind of like how music is shifting.
+ wireless file sharing. Yes. I think I've made it pretty clear that all of this is not complicated and that Apple could very easily do it. I've made that fairly explicit every step of the way.
Except for the input of the video feed.
Those specific things I was doing were pretty damned cool. If they don't impress you that's fine but a lot of people would love to be able to do all that easily. As I said above, more people will buy WindowsMCE than will buy Apple computers this year.
And more people will buy Windows than Macs. Point?
So you can be as blasé as you like about it, and so can Apple, but the market is growing without them.
So did MP3 players.
I don't look at it from any perspective than this:
What does this technology allow me to do?
That's all I care about. I'm not in the business of apologizing for the shortcomings of Microsoft's solution or Apple's solution, I'm in the business of using my television and using my computer and comparing those two solutions to see what suits me best.
I don't care about "revolutionary" or "groundbreaking". I care about what the technology lets me do.
No argument there, except that a ReplayTV box + a Mac mini would do the same. RTV supports moving the media files, which are standard MPEG-2, to computers, other RTV boxes, you name it. The Mac mini has the rest of the pieces. *shrug* It really isn't any big deal.
Apple. Orange.
Music has always come in individual, paid-for packages.
And radio is... ?
As far as the DVD player crashing, that's meaningless. The DVD player isn't the storage area of your content, it's the just player and it's a pretty cheap one at that.
And you can get scratched discs replaced. Some studios charge for it, others don't.
If Apple allowed re-download of previously bought tracks/shows that would negate that problem. As far as I know they do not allow that now.
Hey, if you don't back up your computer, that's not my problem.
And still? what of live TV?
What of it? Have I, at any point, said anything that would make you think that I wouldn't like a PVR? Don't think so. Just trying to point out that if you take a step back and consider broadcast television as scheduled streaming, and nothing more, a lot of possibilities open up with regards to where it can go. The landscape is about to get very interesting, and MCE/PVRs are going to be dinosaurs within five years, in my opinion.
If you hadn't noticed, Apple hasn't been selling media consumption products, they've been reinventing media industries. I don't expect you'll see an integrated home/TV unit until things get to the point that they know which way to jump. Just a guess. Right now the hardware and business models are in massive flux.
The Hauppage TV card - what's the input cable? Coax? ENet? S-video? Who's the provider? Cable? Satellite? Do you have premium services that you want to access? That's the quandry.
Ah, cable from wall to cable provider set-top box to MCE. MCE grabs everything from the set-top box and has channel listings up to 4 weeks ahead. So you never deal with the cable provided set top box, it's all in MCE.
What sorts of interconnects do people have now? What sort will they have in two years? Five?
Right now they have a coax coming out of the wall.
In 5 years they will still have a coax coming out of the wall.
And if cable/telco companies move to something else, they'll provide a set-top tuner box with coax, component or HDMI out.
Right now people have coax, composite, component & HDMI coming into their TVs.
In 5 years they will have component & HDMI coming into their TVs.
This really isn't as mysterious as you would want to make it seem.
Remember, you have to allow for tuning, and ideally you're going to want to have a box that works with cable, satellite, NTSC, PAL, etc, etc, etc. Looking at the wide array of a *mess* that is home entertainment, I'm not surprised that there's no Apple solution. Until the damned mess gets straightened out, there's no simple easy to use solution.
Why not just get a free barebones set-top tuner from your cable/sat provider and use that as the decoder?
And more people will buy Windows than Macs. Point?
This isn't just people buying Windows, it's people buying a computer for their TV.
The fact that it is Windows is very low on the list of why people are buying MCE. Reasons #1-#100 involve it being a Internet-enabled PVR on steroids.
So did MP3 players.
Apples. Oranges.
Past success in a completely separate market has nothing to do with this.
And radio is... ?
Still around and pretty strong. And completely free.
The landscape is about to get very interesting, and MCE/PVRs are going to be dinosaurs within five years, in my opinion.
What of it? Have I, at any point, said anything that would make you think that I wouldn't like a PVR? Don't think so.
"PVRs will be dinosaurs in five years."
"What makes you think I don't want a PVR?"
Here's the thing, PVR is going nowhere.
Satellite television might be doomed eventually but cable & telco companies are going nowhere.
They control the means to get data into your house. So even if you want the happy, insanely expensive world of pay-per-episode television you have to go through one of them and they aren't going to say "oh hey I like your stuff Apple I'll go ahead and quit what I'm doing now and lower the prices for your customers!"
All Apple needs to do is make a better MCE than Microsoft has. I'm sure Apple can do it and that's why I even bother thinking about it.
Originally posted by groverat
All Apple needs to do is make a better MCE than Microsoft has. I'm sure Apple can do it and that's why I even bother thinking about it.
It's *not* going to happen...sorry. Apple doesn't follow...it leads.
Originally posted by groverat
Yes, and it's just like watching live TV, only far less reliable.
Nonsense. Why is it far less reliable?
Originally posted by kim kap sol
It's *not* going to happen...sorry. Apple doesn't follow...it leads.
I initially felt that your comment was too warped and uninformed to merit a response. Then I remembered You're Right!!! Sort of. Apple invented the palmtop, video game console with HD, and a whole bunch of other innovative markets that they subsequently let crappier companies dominate. And, yes, they even had a go at the Media PC. Can this be considered "leading"?
Who Remembers the Mac TV?
The first cable-ready Macintosh! No, not for a cable modem, but for cable TV.
More or less a black LC 550 (complete with a black mouse and black keyboard), Macintosh TV let you watch 16-bit TV or use 8-bit graphics! (Assuming you were in the US, Canada, or some other country using NTSC video. MacTV didn't support any other broadcast standard.)
This was perhaps the oddest Macintosh ever. It was the last desktop with a 68030 processor, the first with a built-in TV tuner, the first black desktop Mac*, and the first Mac to ship with a remote control. The built-in 14" Trinitron monitor displayed 16-bit TV images, but only 8-bit computer graphics. Software allowed it to capture a single frame from the TV as a PICT file.
* MacTV was the only black desktop Mac in the States. The 5400 was available in black overseas but never in the States.
Alas, you can't watch TV and compute at the same time. It was an interesting experiment, marketed exclusively through consumer electronic channels. With a 68040 CPU, the option of watching TV in a small window while computing, and maybe even the ability to capture TV as a QuickTime movie, and this could have been a serious contender. Instead, it is a curious footnote in Apple's history.
Despite using a 32 MHz, MacUser notes that Mac TV is about 15% slower than the 25 MHz LC III and LC 520, "because its data bus is smaller." Cleverly designed in some ways, intentionally crippled in others, Mac TV merits the Road Apple rating. The biggest drawbacks are a complete lack of upgrade options (without losing the TV features) and an 8 MB memory ceiling.
Regardless, this Mac looked great in black. Too bad only 10,000 were ever produced, making it perhaps the most rare Mac ever.
--B
Originally posted by groverat
Ah, cable from wall to cable provider set-top box to MCE. MCE grabs everything from the set-top box and has channel listings up to 4 weeks ahead. So you never deal with the cable provided set top box, it's all in MCE.
You're kidding. So it's really a Windows box + 80's video encoder board + 70's IR repeater dongle + access to TV schedule that you can get for free on the Internet.
Good lord. Talk about patchwork.
Right now they have a coax coming out of the wall.
In 5 years they will still have a coax coming out of the wall.
And if cable/telco companies move to something else, they'll provide a set-top tuner box with coax, component or HDMI out.
Right now people have coax, composite, component & HDMI coming into their TVs.
In 5 years they will have component & HDMI coming into their TVs.
This really isn't as mysterious as you would want to make it seem.
No, apparently not, since they're going with the lowest common denominator.
Digital cable and satellite are then getting decoded into video, then re-encoded on the fly with loss of resolution. Excellent.
You still haven't answered what the video input is, other than 'a cable'. Insightful, that.
I mean hell, all they did was grab basement technology and slap it together. Here I thought it was something interesting.
Here's a recommendation: Mac mini + ReplayTV PVR. Replay supports moving the standard MPEG-2 files to other computers, including Macs. Use Front Row (yes, assume that Apple isn't totally idiotic and releases it for other computers), and that's it. You're done. FR includes video file playback locally or on a network. Tada. That wasn't so hard, was it? Toss in an iSight and the new Remote, and you have that couch experience. Toss in a wireless keyboard and gyro mouse, and you have the full experience. Including video conferencing in the living room. Keen, that.
Why not just get a free barebones set-top tuner from your cable/sat provider and use that as the decoder?
See above. Digital -> analog -> digital = teh suck. I mean hell, if you're going to spring the bucks for a 50" screen, why watch a show at resolution that won't look good over 19"?? Waste of $.
This isn't just people buying Windows, it's people buying a computer for their TV.
The fact that it is Windows is very low on the list of why people are buying MCE. Reasons #1-#100 involve it being a Internet-enabled PVR on steroids.
Actually, it's just a pretty basic PVR, hold the steroids. Woot.
Apples. Oranges.
Past success in a completely separate market has nothing to do with this.
Point. Missed.
You want to say the market is leaving them behind, that was the same thing being said pre-iPod. You're right, it doesn't mean they'll replicate the success, but it also means that the previous people spouting that line were dead wrong.
Still around and pretty strong. And completely free.
Sirius. XM.
"PVRs will be dinosaurs in five years."
"What makes you think I don't want a PVR?"
Here's the thing, PVR is going nowhere.
Bull. I predict within ten years you'll see on-demand become more popular than normal subscriptions, in households with digital cable. The PVR becomes *pointless* at that point. Oh right 'live tv'... except how are you supposed to tell it to record something you don't know is going to happen? Everything else is pretty much on-demand. A PVR in such a situation is a dinosaur.
Satellite television might be doomed eventually but cable & telco companies are going nowhere.
They control the means to get data into your house.
WHOOHOO! THE LIGHT IS SEEN!
It's *ALL* just ways to get data into your house. Whether it's DSL, cable, satellite, Internet, Comcast, Time/Warner, or freaking carrier pigeon, WHO GIVES YOU THE DATA WON'T MATTER.
The content providers != the distribution system. Content providers will continue to look for new distribution models. Subscription pre-scheduled streaming is just *one* possible model now. Expect things to change.
So even if you want the happy, insanely expensive world of pay-per-episode television you have to go through one of them and they aren't going to say "oh hey I like your stuff Apple I'll go ahead and quit what I'm doing now and lower the prices for your customers!"
You're confusing the distribution mechanism with the content providers again.
Imagine if the company that actually films, makes, and produces a show like Lost, which is almost never the network that airs it, which is not the company that sends it to you, decided that instead of a major network, they wanted to only distribute their product on-demand, without having to tie to a channel or a cable or satellite company. The net provides the lower infrastructure, it's just data, after all, and 'some company' provides the consumer sale point. Apple is positioning to be 'that company', as I see it.
The move to all digital is going to be interesting, as it means that the cable companies no longer have the monopoly on piping high-quality video to your house.
All Apple needs to do is make a better MCE than Microsoft has. I'm sure Apple can do it and that's why I even bother thinking about it.
I'm sure they can too, if your description above is all MCE is. Sheesh.
I'll be getting the mini and the ReplayTV, and avoid Windows. Nothing compelling there.
But I do know I had a PowerMac 7100/66 AV. I had a TV tuner which would plug right into the Mac and I was able to watch TV and record shows on my computer back in early 1994.
Put the remote, software and USB2 IR interface with an auxilery USB2 port for the iPod in a box, and sell it for $50-79 so I can run out and buy one... I would kill for this...it would make life so much easier when on the other side of the room reading...
sincerly:
A bussy college student.
Nonsense. Why is it far less reliable?
Web streaming is not nearly as efficient as (? buffering ?) grabbing a TV signal off cable.
How do I know? Because I watched Stevenote and I watched (? buffering ?) the new Albert Einstein episode of Nova on PBS in HD off the same cable. One looks wonderful and never falters and one stutters (? buffering ?) occasionally and drops for no reason (it picks itself up better than it used to, but it still disconnects).
(? buffering ?)
Kick:
Good lord. Talk about patchwork.
Did you have a point or was "lolz '70s" supposed to stand on its own as a meaningful argument?
You have integrated circuits and hard drives from the 1950s? Good lord. Talk about patchwork.
God I can't wait for the digital revolution synergy paradigm.
Digital cable and satellite are then getting decoded into video, then re-encoded on the fly with loss of resolution. Excellent.
Where is the resolution lost? Be specific.
You want to say the market is leaving them behind, that was the same thing being said pre-iPod. You're right, it doesn't mean they'll replicate the success, but it also means that the previous people spouting that line were dead wrong.
I got your point, it just has absolutely nothing at all to do with the topic at hand.
Sirius. XM.
Yes?
Oh right 'live tv'... except how are you supposed to tell it to record something you don't know is going to happen? Everything else is pretty much on-demand. A PVR in such a situation is a dinosaur.
I know when a lot of live TV is going to happen.
For instance, this Saturday, live, my beloved Longhorns of the University of Texas are going to do battle against the evil Buffaloes of the University of Colorado. It hasn't happened yet, it will happen live on Saturday. PVR is damn near indispensable there, nowhere near "a dinosaur".
Also, I know some news is going to happen 2 days from now on CNN, I don't know what it is but I know it's going to be there. It will be live.
So everything besides sports and news. Small problem being that sports and news are two of the biggest things on television and neither will ever go away.
The move to all digital is going to be interesting, as it means that the cable companies no longer have the monopoly on piping high-quality video to your house.
What does "the move to all digital" mean?
It's either the telco or the cable company. That's it. Those are your choices. And they are going to get their cut, they aren't going to bow out of the game. And if that means making high-speed service more expensive that's what they will do.
I'm sure they can too, if your description above is all MCE is. Sheesh.
I am amazed that you are so confident holding court on MCE when you seemingly don't even know what it does or how it works. The kind of blind allegiance you wouldn't expect to see outside of Pravda.
God I can't wait to see Apple come out with a prettified MCE and watch you try to spin it. Better than Scott McClellan.
1) I don't think that Cable coming to my house necessarily means Cable TV. I can just have Cable Internet.
2) I like the idea of having Cable TV but I don't like paying 49 bucks to have 76 channels when i really only watch specific shows from 8 channels.
3) I think there is something greater behind the Podcast Subscription abilities nested within iTunes and the Video content available through iTunes. In addition, I think these two features are what prompted Apple to hire that Subscrption expert they did 6 months ago.
4) I like the idea Akimbo. www.akimbo.com This is essentially a Tivo, but not for Cable TV, but rather IPTV.
Put this all together.
Apple creates their version if Akimbo. You pay a subscription and using the Podcast subscription abilities, it automatically downloads/streams the content when updates are available. What I like about Akimbo is that if you look at their current offerings, it covers both conventional cable provided content, but also web content from providers like iFilm. As long as the catalog of content grows, this appears to be a good mix.
Your thoughts?
Originally posted by groverat
Did you have a point or was "lolz '70s" supposed to stand on its own as a meaningful argument?
You have integrated circuits and hard drives from the 1950s? Good lord. Talk about patchwork.
God I can't wait for the digital revolution synergy paradigm.
Well, y'see, they aren't the *same* ICs and hard drives...
Where is the resolution lost? Be specific.
You... really don't understand the technology, do you?
Video encoding 101: Digital video is sent to your house compressed. It's lossy compression. The STB decompresses it to raw video, analog. That gets sent to the MCE box, where it is digitized, and then compressed again using lossy compression. On viewing later, it is converted back to analog, and sent on its way, or kept as digital if you're lucky enough to have HDMI.
The recompression throws away information, ie, resolution. Every time you convert to analog and back to digital, if there's compression involved, you lose picture quality... which is going to show up *more* the higher quality your display. Oops.
I got your point, it just has absolutely nothing at all to do with the topic at hand.
And yet you were going to argue it. Man, you need to get out more.
Yes?
Paid radio. Subscription. Analogous to paid television. And yet the pay for music as singles model works well for iTMS. Put the pieces together, 'rat, I can't do all your thinking for you here.
I know when a lot of live TV is going to happen.
For instance, this Saturday, live, my beloved Longhorns of the University of Texas are going to do battle against the evil Buffaloes of the University of Colorado. It hasn't happened yet, it will happen live on Saturday. PVR is damn near indispensable there, nowhere near "a dinosaur".
Also, I know some news is going to happen 2 days from now on CNN, I don't know what it is but I know it's going to be there. It will be live.
So everything besides sports and news. Small problem being that sports and news are two of the biggest things on television and neither will ever go away.
Both of which you can get on-demand at time of broadcast. Just like a live Keynote stream. Imagine that.
All of this can be done *independently* of the cable company. *ANY* data stream to the house (or wireless handheld) will do.
You really don't see the potential, do you?
What does "the move to all digital" mean?
Digital broadcast over-air and line. Simple enough to parse.
It's either the telco or the cable company. That's it. Those are your choices. And they are going to get their cut, they aren't going to bow out of the game. And if that means making high-speed service more expensive that's what they will do.
Video is just data. If the telco is billing you for data, they don't care what it is. If you have cable internet, they don't care what it is.
I am amazed that you are so confident holding court on MCE when you seemingly don't even know what it does or how it works. The kind of blind allegiance you wouldn't expect to see outside of Pravda.
I'm still figuring out how you can own one and still not understand the basics of how it works, but I guess that describes the majority of the market.
God I can't wait to see Apple come out with a prettified MCE and watch you try to spin it. Better than Scott McClellan. [/B]
If they come out with something as hacked up as an MCE, I'll be the first to bitch.
I'm glad it works for your needs. I'm also glad there are people who have more vision. I don't see Apple in this market until the digital migration frees up the current tie between distribution channel and the content providers, then they'll try and repeat the iTMS model by being the new distribution method.
In the meantime, a ReplayTV and a Mac mini do the same things the MCE box does. I'd still prefer to see a nice H.264 based solution, but I don't think that's going to happen until the basic distribution is unified on digital over a standard computer network, be it wired, wireless, whatever.
There are PVR solutions available for macs. Check out the EyeTV, ConvertX, and Evolution TV. These have hardware decoding to MPEG4 and Divx, and given Wednesdays announcements, I'm sure H.264 is coming soon. Updates to these programs will tie into the iTunes database, so FrontRow will recognize all the videos you save, automatically. You can bet on that.
All that needs to happen is FrontRow for mac mini. which i hope happens with iLife '06.
Apple is demonstrating the STREAMING capability in FrontRow with its movie trailers. This, as someone said early in this thread, is mostly just a proof of concept; reel the Hollywood guys & the Major networks with 2 options: stream or sell a la carte. Technology demonstration complete.
The recompression throws away information, ie, resolution. Every time you convert to analog and back to digital, if there's compression involved, you lose picture quality... which is going to show up *more* the higher quality your display. Oops.
Loss of picture quality is not a necessary consequence. As a matter of fact, good tuner cards can make it look better even after all the conversion dancing than it did on arrival.
There is a tremendous difference between the theoretical loss of "resolution" due to that process and a hit in real-world picture quality. There are a lot of factors that go into it and what you described is merely one of them.
If you have good, quality components it is possible to have no noticeable difference in picture quality.
Further, the analog conversion is not a necessary step in the process, it is optional (though prevalent). All-digital setups exist already (granted, over-the-air only right now in MCE).
But MCE is going away, anyway. Windows Vista will be bringing a lot more to this, including CableCARD support. (And hey, thank Microsoft for backing HD-DVD which includes Managed Copy).
CableCARD is coming, Shuttle has already shown a potential product.
But? Vista won't be here until late 2006 at the earliest. Lots of time still for Apple to beat them to the punch.
Paid radio. Put the pieces together, 'rat, I can't do all your thinking for you here.
Paid radio services exist now, yes. Some people are now paying for what was once free because it has offered improvements over the free model (or things not even available via the free model).
That is almost vaguely somewhat like what we're talking about but not really. Please clarify.
Video is just data. If the telco is billing you for data, they don't care what it is. If you have cable internet, they don't care what it is.
They will care a lot if their television and phone services are being dropped for access to broadband alone, slashing their revenue.
What will the practical upshot of that caring be? Most likely a far more rigid pricing structure than you see today.
There are a ton of people with broadband out there with bandwidth limitations already.
"You've got 4GB to do all of your Internet, TV & phone stuff this month? good luck!"
Hopefully there will be enough competition to make sure that doesn't happen.
I'm even mildly hopeful companies like Verizon with services like FiOS who have no real vested interest in television won't mind pimping out their megabandwidth for potential web TV exploitation.
I know you think you're providing some special knowledge that my caveman brain is not grasping, but let me assure you these ideas are not new; not new to me and not new to the industry.
Originally posted by Imergingenious
Apple is demonstrating the STREAMING capability in FrontRow with its movie trailers. This, as someone said early in this thread, is mostly just a proof of concept; reel the Hollywood guys & the Major networks with 2 options: stream or sell a la carte. Technology demonstration complete.
Bing bing bing!
I love that idea, best of both worlds.
Originally posted by Imergingenious
Apple is demonstrating the STREAMING capability in FrontRow with its movie trailers. This, as someone said early in this thread, is mostly just a proof of concept; reel the Hollywood guys & the Major networks with 2 options: stream or sell a la carte. Technology demonstration complete.
On of the TV stations here in Denmark already offers tv shows, news and movies on demand by streaming the content to the users over the internet.
PVR will be unnecessary in a few years, and I can't even see why it's so cool to have your computer act as a PVR today.
Windows MCE is basically a fully fledged computer (with fans and all) with a fully fledged OS acting as a basic video recorder.
A dedicated recorder is cheaper and much more stable, and getting your content (photos, music, movies and so on) can happen over a simple wireless device (like a beefed up AirPort Express). D.Link already offer such a solution.
Originally posted by groverat
They will care a lot if their television and phone services are being dropped for access to broadband alone, slashing their revenue.
What will the practical upshot of that caring be? Most likely a far more rigid pricing structure than you see today.
There are a ton of people with broadband out there with bandwidth limitations already.
"You've got 4GB to do all of your Internet, TV & phone stuff this month? good luck!"
LOL. You really mean this?
It is basic economics: once new technology allows more functionality for lower prices, the 'old' technology companies adapt or die.
Think zeppelin vs airplane
Think horse vs car
In the future
Think landline vs VOIP
Think cable tv vs IPtv
The future will be ONE digital line from the internet to/from your house containing internet, telephony, and video. Both live and on demand.
Separate lines will go. Separate telephony is leaving as we speak (skype, gTalk), separate television will leave tomorrow.
Television through network channels as we know it is rapidly approaching its' final breath.
Broadcast channels may hate this, but they are becoming redundant real fast and they either transform or die.
THE economic trend of this age is this: expensive middle men that are no longer needed are going digital or going away! Think computer store vs Dell or Apple. Think video rental places. Think record stores. The digital age is making the line from producers to consumers shorter, more efficient and cheaper. This goes for physical products as well as content.
Separate networks for - whatever - will go, because one network, one line is cheaper.
Apple has seen the light. Let's schedule a follow-up to this (very informative!) discussion in five years (friday 14 october 2010) and see where we will be then... 8)
Originally posted by dutch pear
So people in a free market are going to step back from ?20 a month unlimited bandwidth DSL connections to bandwidth limits for higher prices?
Those who have access to that will not step back from it, but not everyone has access to that.
There are people in the world who are not you.
There are places in the world that are not where you live.