[opendtv] =?utf-8?Q?Re:_[opendtv]_Re:_Cracks_Appear_in_Cable_TVâs_? =?utf-8?Q?Bundle_|_c2meworld.com?Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:34:37 -0400
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> On Oct 27, 2014, at 5:02 PM, Manfredi, Albert E
> <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Come now. There's absolutely no technical reason why a connected device such
> as Roku is crippled as it is, other than collusion between these companies.
> There's no reason at all why a Roku or AppleTV cannot be at least as flexible
> as a tablet. I've no idea why you feel obliged to make excuses for these
> sorts of shenanigans.
There is no need for Apple TV to be as flexible as a tablet - that flexibility
is provided BY a tablet or iPhone. We are talking about the user interface to
the TV, a device typically viewed at a comfortable distance, often by a group
of people. And we are talking about a TV display that is still less than
optimal for viewing web content, although I believe 4K displays will solve this
problem.
The user interface to the TV SHOULD NOT be a keyboard and pointing device.
These functions are more appropriately handled by a device in the viewers lap
like a table or phone. The Apple TV remote is as simple as you can get, and
adequate for simple pointing operations; it is considerably easier to set-up
and use with a tablet.
By the way, did you ever try the smartphone app with the Roku you bought for
your wife?
>
>> Why did you buy the Roku box for your wife?
>
> Funny you should say that. Last Friday night at dinner, I made a comment as
> to the limits of Roku. I said, for example, it can't even access cbs.com. My
> wife disagreed. "I can get CBS," she said. "Sure," said I, "but you're only
> capable of doing so through the good graces of Amazon."
Not sure what Amazon has to do with it, but it is nice to know that you are
paying for at least on streaming service...
> To answer your question, it was a brand new Roku 3 (I think it's called) that
> my brother-in-law bought, and then decided to buy some other similar box
> instead. I forget which one. I like the fact that our second TV system is
> finally "connected," but I keep offering to hook up her computer to that
> system.
I'm beginning to like your wife. Hope she does not give in to your outdated
notion that a PC is the best connected device for a TV.
;-)
> Even if it makes great French toast, does it have access to cbs.com? To
> wwitv.com? To whatever-some-new-site-that-just-cropped-up.com? And if not,
> WHY NOT? And why would anyone submit to these artificial limitations?
Yes, yes and yes. If I can access it on my iPAD I can watch it on my Apple TV.
>
>> And new channels are being added all the time.
>
> "But only when anointed by Apple," you forgot to add.
Only when Apple is able to negotiate carriage with the owner of the content.
> Craig! Did you read today's NYT post by Monty? It says exactly what I've been
> saying. You must be the only person left in the US who hasn't figured this
> out!
It said absolutely nothing new. Just a Cliff's Notes version of the similar
article I posted last week. No hard facts or analysis, just "concern" about the
old business model.
Nothing that HBO or CBS have done threatens the bundling model. The one
hypothetical in the NYT article was a woman who only watches two TV shows. For
that use case, the CBS All Access service or HBO may make sense. But there are
100 million US homes that want to watch a wider selection of content, and
people are not going to buy ten or more subscriptions to get what they get now
from a MVPD.
> You said it was a "niche market," even after it was way past that, and you
> also insisted that built-in ATSC receivers would add hundreds of dollars to
> TV sets. I still remember having to show you ads for some DTVs whose price
> fell below the $200 total, with built-in receiver, while you were continuing
> to insist on this. (Some small CRT SDTVs, with built-in ATSC, sold at Target
> years ago, for under $150. Surprise!)
A $200 DTV is NOT a HDTV. And yes, the price of those ATSC tuners did come down
thanks to Moore's Law. But HDTVs were a niche market for the first decade.
> Strabgely, I haven't watched TV by appointment for what, 30 years now, nor
> have I been limited to three TV stations for even longer than that, and yet
> I've managed to do so without pledging allegiance to a walled garden. As you
> think is necessary. Wow. I must be some sort of genius. :)
>
> 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.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Other related posts:
- » [opendtv] =?utf-8?Q?Re:_[opendtv]_Re:_Cracks_Appear_in_Cable_TVâs_? =?utf-8?Q?Bundle_|_c2meworld.com?Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:34:37 -0400 - Craig Birkmaier
