Craig Birkmaier wrote: > Because content is king and five companies control most of what > the American public watches. Which is an orthogonal argument. Apple, at best, wanted to get in bed with the MVPDs, to get to the content. That's hardly innovative. The innovation the awe-struck faithful are looking for, from an Apple TV, has to do with technology. Something that any TV maker can do independently, using existing building blocks, not becoming slave to any one solution. > Thank you for making my point. This is not discovery. It is > looking under every haystack for something you might want. Not at all. It is going directly to the source when you know the source, and using the search engine when you want to discover. > And this re-enforces the perception that a program producer must sell > out to the congloms if they want to reach the mass TV audience. Again, an orthogonal discussion, and untrue to boot. With the vast choice available over the Internet, any producer will have to look for some way of getting good visibility. Whether that's a conglom, or whether that's an OTT site like Hulu, which allows people to browse through different genres. We've been over this countless times. I sometimes browse through movies at Hulu, and pick one that looks interesting, without having had a clue beforehand what even to "search" for. Aside from, say, "drama." Just for kicks, I typed "drama movies online" in Webcrawler, and came up with pages and pages of results. Portals like this one: http://www.indiemoviesonline.com/free-movies/drama PLENTY of discovery, Craig. Discovery for those who don't even know what specifically they are after. If you do know what you're after, it's that much easier. For example, I've bookmarked a whole slew of YouTube videos of songs I like, even odd ones, like Lolita's Seeman. (Look it up. Several different versions of it, even one in English by Petula Clark.) > Case in point: Google TV. They provided a framework for CE manufacturers > to integrate the stuff you want. It went NOWHERE because they did not > solve the real problems. Discovery and Human Interface I think it went nowhere because the content owners didn't want some third party creating an unnecessary monopoly. So they blocked their content from this would-be monopolist, as they did from Apple. The good news is, the content owners only do this for companies that try to get too greedy. They don't want to block content from EVERYONE. So the CE companies should learn to do their own thing. > Now Bert suddenly changes his position: Only for those with a reading comprehension problem. I said, (1) you don't need Apple or Google, or any other single "prophet," to solve something that has already been solved. And (2), independent of this, I disagree with your point that the congloms are charging consumers ever more for their stuff, and only making it available through MVPDs. That second point has nothing to do with the technology. It simply disagrees with your confused complaints. I can get SOME content FOTI that previously was only available via MVPDs. QED. Bert ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.