| The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
| The future of TV? https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4589 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Midgen [ Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The future of TV? |
So, I recently sent Comcast (cable TV) packing, because I'm tired of paying $100 a month for 800 channels of total garbage, when I'm really only interested in a handful shows/networks. Until the major networks and the cable and satellite companies can figure out a better way of providing pay-as-you-go types of services, or allowing me to build my own channel bundles that are more reasonably priced, I'll be getting my digital entertainment elsewhere (OTA, netflix/amazon on demand, hulu, google.tv, etc...). In looking into alternatives to cable/satellite services, I stumbled on this new startup (it happenss to be local to me), that is causing a bit of a stir. It's called IVI TV (pronounced like "Ivy"). They are rebroadcasting network television claiming they have the right to because it's already in the public domain as a broadcast signal. They are charging ~$5 a month for what looks like (on the surface) is a pretty decent selection of channels. Here is the company main site http://www.ivi.tv/ The client is Laptop/Desktop only (for now, but they plan on expanding to mobile clients like phones and tablets as well). There is obviously a lot of controversy about this. They received cease and desist orders from the major broadcast networks almost as fast as they went live, but they claim what they are doing is all perfectly legal. Based on this alone, it's probably not worth signing up until the legal battles are over, although they do offer 30 days free service, so it might be worth checking out... However, in looking at this a little closer, there are some serious concerns.... This article by Dave Taylor at the Huffington Post outlines some potential pitfalls http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-tayl ... 35678.html The client software is peer-to-peer, which means that you are broadcasting their content, and possibly could be held liable for whatever laws this company might be breaking (they do mention in the license agreement that you agree to participate in the Peer to Peer network). Other downsides include the fact that the video quality is apparently fairly low. Suitable for small window laptop viewing, but probably not something you want to try to watch on your big screen. Also, since they are just re-broadcasting the live broadcast signal, all of the annoying commercials will still be intact... Unless they have some really good lawyers, I suspect ivi.tv will get shut down fairly quickly, or at least have to change their business model to one where they can pay whatever fees and royalties (and their undoubtedly substantial legal bills) the networks require. Another article I found via a google news search of 'cable tv subscriber losses' linked me to this google news article reposted from The Canadian Press that talks about cable companies are losing TV subscribers at record rates. http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadi ... Id=5044859 While some believe this is because of the rising popularity of streaming services like Netflix and Hulu, others (myself included) tend to believe that the core reason is that the bundling practices that cable and satellite companies are offering are just completely ridiculous in terms of value, and with the economy being what it is now, many people are just looking for more affordable alternatives, and are finding services like Netflix and Hulu to be better for their budgets. I learned something from that article that I find interesting. Apparently the cable companies hands are somewhat tied by the six major networks in determining what channel packages are bundled together. In other words, Disney for example, either requires, or provides strong financial incentives, to the providers for bundling certain of their channels together, regardless of what the consumers needs or desires are. I'll quote the last part of the Canadian Press Article as a teaser The Canadian Press via Google News wrote: Cable companies would like to get low-income customers back with cheaper cable packages, but their hands are tied. Content providers such as The Walt Disney Co. and News Corp. won't license their channels one by one, so subscribers have to take big, expensive channel packages, or very basic ones, which offer little beyond what's available with an antenna. Content providers now get billions of dollars in fees from cable service providers, and they want to make sure that whatever new industry model comes along, they'll get paid. It's not obvious yet that Internet video will let them sustain their profit levels. Six companies create the content that consumes 85 per cent of U.S. viewing hours, Moffett said. "Until they get on board, the train's not leaving the station." I am somewhat heartened by the fact that people are voting with their wallets and sending a message to the cable companies, and indirectly to the networks, that we want to improve the signal to noise ratio of our cable packages. I'm willing to pay more 'per channel' (significantly more) for the channels I want, or even better, just the shows I want, especially if I can get them without annoying commercials every 15 minutes,a nd get them at a time that is convenient to me. I hope this is the start of a long term trend away from the traditional all-or-nothing bundle packages and towards more specific channel bundling options, or even better, pay-as-you-go, on-demand options.... If that happens, I might get back on the train... |
|
| Author: | Taskiss [ Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The future of TV? |
Midgen wrote: There is obviously a lot of controversy about this. Ya think?  Quote: They received cease and desist orders from the major broadcast networks almost as fast as they went live, but they claim what they are doing is all perfectly legal. Based on this alone, it's probably not worth signing up until the legal battles are over, although they do offer 30 days free service, so it might be worth checking out.. What could go wrong? 
|
|
| Author: | Aethien [ Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Oh, that's what Ivi TV is. A friend of mine texted that, referring me to a baseball game I wasn't able to watch. I had no clue what he was talking about, then moved on to other things. Huh. |
|
| Author: | Müs [ Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ala Carte services for the win. Problem is, the providers *know* that they'll lose money on the deal cause there's so much crap that people don't want in their cable packages. |
|
| Author: | Kaffis Mark V [ Fri Nov 05, 2010 2:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Müs wrote: Ala Carte services for the win. Problem is, the providers *know* that they'll lose money on the deal cause there's so much crap that people don't want in their cable packages. That is, until people start not paying for the packages in quantity. |
|
| Author: | Jeryn [ Mon Nov 08, 2010 2:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I dropped TV a couple months ago and don't miss it. I was paying like 90 a month when you add up package rates and DVR lease and HD channels and tax. I picked up a Netflix account when I cut TV, and figure my net savings are probably something approaching $1k a year. Sounds like a no brainer to me  The one that I keep wondering about is ATDHE. It consistently has streams of any sporting event I could care to watch. Premier League soccer, NCAA football, NFL; it's all there. I haven't even bothered to look into where it falls on a "flagrantly illegal" to "completely legit" continuum, though. |
|
| Author: | Screeling [ Mon Nov 08, 2010 6:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Finally ditched it as well. So far so good. |
|
| Author: | Katas [ Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The future of TV? |
Dropped TV Spring '09. Been doing Hulu and Netflix in the interim... got HDTV + Mac mini and it's gorgeous, though the new AppleTV has me thinking of simplifying since it's a little bit of a pain to vnc://10.0.1.2/ to "change the channel" on my TV. |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Tue Nov 09, 2010 6:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | The future of TV? |
I too am almost entirely Hulu based. I let the sales lady con me into keeping 2-13 on my cable. Took time Warner a good 6 months to stop calling to get me to buy more services. I think they finally realized I don't want or need digital phone. |
|
| Author: | Shelgeyr [ Tue Nov 09, 2010 9:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I gave up on TV the year of the OJ trial. Had cable for a while back in 2001-2003 because I was working for a cable company, but never really watched it much and dropped it as soon as I lost the employee discount. |
|
| Author: | Caleria [ Tue Nov 09, 2010 11:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Cancelled our DirecTV sub last week. Put an antenna up outside, and can now get 8 HD channels for free. Anything not covered by those, I watch on Netflix. Saving money is good. |
|
| Author: | Lenas [ Tue Nov 09, 2010 1:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
See, I thought I was cool with just Netflix, and for a while I was. But now I've watched all shows! All of them! I miss the mind-numbing channel-changing of yesteryear. I think I'm going to get cable again. It's nice not having to plan what you watch. |
|
| Author: | Aethien [ Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
At our old house, and I suspect at the new one, too, we couldn't get any kind of TV reception with an antennae. So we use cable, but I don't rent a box from them. Asked for the basic "broadcast" package, and hooked up the cable directly to the TV. Did a channel scan the first day, and much to my surprise, the TV pulled in 75-100 channels, including ESPN, History, Sci Fi, etc. In our new house (might have to check if reception is better, but I doubt it), I got the same package ($16.95/month) and did the same thing, but the channel selection is much different. History and SyFy are gone, although I still get the Golf Channel and quite a few others in HD. But, I just noticed last night that we seem to be losing channels. Many of the channels we used to get changed their location, and now they're gone altogether (ESPN, Home and Garden Channel, Animal Planet). I'm kind of curious why that is. Heck, we don't even have Netflix yet. We just don't watch that much TV. My nightly ST:TOS fix is about it, for me. Really don't like the idea of having to plan my TV watching. Random channel-flipping is fun. |
|
| Author: | Screeling [ Tue Nov 09, 2010 3:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Lenas wrote: See, I thought I was cool with just Netflix, and for a while I was. But now I've watched all shows! All of them! I miss the mind-numbing channel-changing of yesteryear. I think I'm going to get cable again. It's nice not having to plan what you watch. See, I thought this too. But then I noticed I'd end up watching movies on TV that I a) already owned or b) were on Netflix. So basically I was subjecting myself to commercials when I didn't need to. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|