Craig Birkmaier wrote:
And we all sat together as families, as about 60-70% of U.S. homes watched Prime Time TV every night.Today you'll see a large flat panel with a cable or DBS box and a remote that can tune several hundred channels owned by the conglomerates, who still own the same five broadcast networks. Appended to this TV are a variety of boxes that provide access to the content owned by these conglomerates. And yes, there are a tiny fraction of viewers who use PCs and other "Smart TV" accessories that offer lot's of legacy content, if you can find it using horribly crude search tools.
Today, even the real-time broadcast content is a lot more plentiful than the 4-5 channels you mention (10X more, in my case, all "free"), but that's not even the point. No one needs to watch in real time. No one needs to be constrained to those channels of content. And there is nothing new to invent in terms of search engines either. If the content is made available on the web, search engines should certainly be able to find it. It's only a matter of tweaking technology we already have. I can get far more content than I could possibly watch, Craig. All with existing search engines.
In short, it's not so much that I disagree with the supposed "vision" that people expect from Apple (I did read the article you pointed out). It's that I scoff at the cult guru mentality of the public and the trade press. You know, just like cult members who hang by every syllable uttered by their favorite charlatan. Moonies, what have you. They have their mouths gaping wide open, waiting for Apple to lead them to the promised land. Instead of engaging their atrophied gray matter.
Sorry Bert, but only a tiny fraction of homes dedicate a PC to the big screen in the family room, and that number is in decline. Truth is nobody has come up with asolution that is turning heads and causing people to buy...and watch.
Everything I read says you continue to be wrong on this, for as many years as you've been repeating it. People watch TV while they browse the web on their tablets. But even that misses the point. First, let's get this out of the way. TV might be low margin, but so are toasters and frying pans. Doesn't translate to "no one wants them."
More to the point, the consumer SHOULD NOT HAVE TO go to the trouble of dedicating a PC to the TV. I only did this because I could see that the CE companies are (evidently?) on the take, behaving like half-wit incompetent bozos who can't come up with a decent connected TV product. Like it's something so incredibly elusive, even as every Tom, Dick, and Harry around them is watching video, browsing the web, getting the latest news and weather, and even checking their bank accounts, on tablets and smartphones.
The good news is that the congloms have driven up the cost of entertainment to a level where real competition may finally be able to help close this 20th century chapterin the history of manipulating the masses...
For you, MVPD addict, perhaps. For me, I don't see that. What I do see is that the congloms allow me, to watch TV as VOD, rather than by appointment, without even having to bother with a PVR. They also have special features available on their sites that did not exist before, interviews with cast members, what have you. What's more, I can watch TV from just about any country in the world, live or recorded, hampered only by the occasional desire by the international networks to artificially limit their own viewership.
So it's unfathomable to me how anyone can be so clueless as to think that TV is like it was in the '50s. If people really yhink that way, someone ought to give them a swift kick in the pants to see if that wakes them out of their catatonic stupor, eh?
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.