Slashdot Mirror


Get Your Broadcast TV Anywhere

circletimessquare writes "Ken Schaffer, who made his name inventing a wireless microphone and a satellite telephone service, has a new offering called TV2Me. It's basically MPEG-4, improved upon, that allows for what he calls 'best of class' streaming video over a normal broadband connection. Right now, his only clients are rich sports fanatics, but he eventually wants to make his technology as ubiquitous and as essential as TiVo is to some."

33 of 186 comments (clear)

  1. Streaming news from Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Finally, some fair and balanced news.

    1. Re:Streaming news from Russia by pcmanjon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They idolize him like some sort of genius. In fact one of the articles even said that.

      If I was a billionare able to employ such a venture, I could have done it too. I just don't have the money to get dedicated oc256 lines to 'stream' all the high quality video.

      All this tech is, is higher quality streams. It still uses the same technology as traditional streams, just in higher bitrates. (E.G. Higher server bills, e.g. why it's so expensive)

      If I was a billionare I could easily edit a .conf file to have a higher bitrate too. All I need is a server connected to a fast pipe.

      How does having money for a dedicated server and the ability to boost up the bitrate of a broadcast make you a "true genius in normal mens clothing"?

      Setting up a high quality stream of licensed video from local TV stations is NOT genius, it just takes a wad of cash to do, that's all.

      Too bad I'm not rich... I could then have gotton richer by doing this first.

    2. Re:Streaming news from Russia by jerw134 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you had actually read the article, it says that he has actually tweaked the MPEG-4 codec. Reworking a whole codec is not as simple as changing the bitrate in a configuration file.

  2. icravetv by minus_273 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    i wonder how long before this becomes icravetv part deux

    --
    The war with islam is a war on the beast
    The war on terror is a war for peace
  3. Robert X Cringely... by Sirch · · Score: 2, Informative

    Our favorite geek writer covered this in a nice piece about a month ago.

  4. Stand by for lawsuits by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hollywood isn't going to stand for this.

    It's the reason why we have region-encoding on DVDs, DirecTV can only give the NYC and LA "locals" to people in the boonies, and ICraveTV didn't fly. The NFL and DirecTV make millions off of their Sunday Ticket package which is based on selling for hundreds of dollars a season the right to recieve games freely broadcasted in other parts of the USA.

    Copyright owners are declaring boundries across which their content cannot move freely, and they're going to crush any technology that threatens to make it easy to break those lines.

    1. Re:Stand by for lawsuits by vidarh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The one hope this has, is that it apparently has protection built in to ensure that it's only used as a "virtual extension cord". I.e. you need to have a cable subscription, and presumably you can still only receive one channel at a time, an to one location at a time. That makes it a lot more likely that you can argue that it's not fundamentally different from for instance time shifting with a VCR, which is allowed.

    2. Re:Stand by for lawsuits by 3terrabyte · · Score: 2, Insightful
      No kidding. With all the RIAA-google-new-alerts I get everyday, half are talking about TV shows being shared to be the next big attack.

      Personally, I don't understand the problem. I missed West Wing 2 weeks ago because Lost is on at the same time (unknown to me, but TIVO did it), so I downloaded it from NG. Wouldn't the networks WANT me to keep up to date on my zombie-ness in keeping up with "must-see tv" ?

      I can understand the commercial problem and HBO type shows, but free tv shows?

      Anyway, it's not going to fly. Especially if this guy is going to make any money from this service.

      --

      Why are there only 19 people folding@home for slashdot?

    3. Re:Stand by for lawsuits by srock2588 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Seems to me this could be easily done if your DVR box can be assigned an IP. I don't know how many, probrably none, have this capability, but with some mods I could see making my DVR box a server or at the least somehow tieing into my PC so I can pull the data from it. Of course, the high quality streaming video over the internet will be a challenge.

      --
      Ehh...this is the life we chose.
    4. Re:Stand by for lawsuits by garcia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Copyright owners are declaring boundries across which their content cannot move freely, and they're going to crush any technology that threatens to make it easy to break those lines.

      Copyright owners still have to abide by fairuse. If someone records something at home on whatever media they choose they have the option of viewing that media at a later time.

      This just changes the type of media we are using.

      It's not going to go anywhere anyway. Not enough people are going to pay $6500+ for a proprietary system that delivers their TV shows elsewhere. You can get much less expensive alternatives that use software to do exactly the same thing.

    5. Re:Stand by for lawsuits by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Informative

      I do not see why you could not do this with MythTV. You also do not have to have a static IP to do this. Dynamic DNS and port forwarding should handle it for you. Use VideoLan for the server and it shoudld be workable. Now getting it over you cell phone would be the next step. How long before we see more Television shows broadcasting on the Internet?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:Stand by for lawsuits by sadler121 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      if it meant you were still watching the commercials.

      An excllent way to increase viewership would be to offer Torrent's of programs for free(torrents because this would save on bandwidth) WITH commericals. Yeah Commericals suck, but they pay for the programing. You could then download that episode of the West Wing if you missed it.

      Of course this would never happen. The number one reason is that it would be way to easy to devise a program to parse through the show and delete out the commericals. That and the MPAA has shown they are impervious to the benifits of new tech coming out automaticly assuming it is going to aid piracy and decrease thier market share.

      But if they could look pass that proverbial nose...

  5. $6,000 !!! No thanks. by 8400_RPM · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Thats a bit pricey IMO.

    You could buy a copy of win2k3 and enable streaming video + a $30 ati wonder card and do the same thing....

    1. Re:$6,000 !!! No thanks. by Guspaz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I did RTFA, and I still didn't see anything special here. The quality issues with streaming video isn't the capture card (Fine, maybe you'd need a 100$ capture card instead of a 30$ capture card, but not 6000), but with the actual compression itself. And I highly doubt that this solution, considering how hacked together it is, contains a revolutionary new video codec that could substantially improve quality.

      I can't think of anything this special capture card might do that would be worth anything over a normal capture card. Even a hardware MPEG-4 encoder would be pointless considering how this device is a regular PC and can encode in software without problem.

  6. It isn't a matter of getting TV.. by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It's a matter of TV carrying what you want to watch. I want to watch TV (sports in particular) from other countries, but thanks to NTSC/PAL and a lack of willingness by fatcats at cable companies (who believe that's not what the public wants: Self full-filling prophecy) it's not on the menu or ever likely to be.

    Then there's still the sticky matter of not being allowed to watch a network station from outside the area your local affiliate owns.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:It isn't a matter of getting TV.. by acvh · · Score: 2, Informative

      I want to watch TV (sports in particular) from other countries, but thanks to NTSC/PAL and a lack of willingness by fatcats at cable companies (who believe that's not what the public wants: Self full-filling prophecy) it's not on the menu or ever likely to be.

      Get a DISH. They're always trying to get me to pay $45 to watch cricket from New Delhi, or extreme barfighting, or some other abomination. The content is there, if you're willing to pay for it.

    2. Re:It isn't a matter of getting TV.. by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Interesting
      You'd make fast friends with our Aussie buddy here who pines for the real sports (Rugby, but not Aussie Rules rugby I guess)

      I sympathise. I watched the Rugby World Cup at the local pub (in Santa Cruz, CA) always a day or two after the actual matches. Had to fend of retard baseball fans and stuff, too!

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  7. Figures by big_groo · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Can TV2Me be viewed on a Mac? Presently TV2Me can only be viewed through a Windows-based operating system.

    Why does this irk me so? Not that I'd actually spend 6500 bucks on this *anyway*...

  8. Requirements by RealProgrammer · · Score: 4, Funny
    • Proprietary video card
    • Proprietary software
    • Desire to watch TV

    That last one would mean I'd have to avert my eyes from Slashdot, however briefly. I can't see that happening anytime soon.

    --
    sigs, as if you care.
  9. name by eyeball · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...he eventually wants to make his technology as ubiquitous and as essential as TiVo is to some."

    "Dude, check out my new TV2Me."
    "We got our TV2Me bill."
    "I was watching TV2Me while waiting in the traffic jam."

    The name doesn't really work too well.

    --

    _______
    2B1ASK1
  10. Not high def? by YetAnotherName · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A high-def mpeg2 stream requires about 20mbps ... anyone know how much a similar quality mpeg4 stream takes?

    1. Re:Not high def? by Ingolfke · · Score: 3, Funny

      mpeg2 = 20mbps
      (mpeg2)/2 = (20mbps)/2
      mpeg = 10mbps

      mpeg4 = 4*10mbps
      mpeg4 = 40 mbps

      Correct me if I'm wrong... but I think the maths are right.

      (it's a joke kids, everybody chuckle a little... now go back to work.)

    2. Re:Not high def? by Guspaz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      With a good XviD encode, considering this is TV res here (Can't remember the exact res, but about 320x240, or 320x480 if it's interlaced), I would imagine with a post processor that somewhere aroud 500 to 750 kbit MPEG-4 would provide the same quality as this guy's solution. And considering how he says that you need at least 384kbit upstream, but will do better with more (Read that as you need more to get his level of quality), it seems that his compression is no better than xvid. In fact, he probably took somebody elses MPEG-4 codec that was either already streamable, or took something like XviD and made it streamable... which isn't that hard to do.

  11. Re:Stand by for lawsuits (or not) by Non-linear+Thinker · · Score: 3, Informative

    As to assigning an IP address to a DVR Box, Sony is promoting it's Location Free TV as being able to stream your TV shows to anyplace on the internet.
    http://www.sonystyle.ca/view/LocationFreeTVLanding /index.shtml?storeId=10001&langId=-1&catalogId=100 01&categoryId=47640
    Maybe because it's only being offered in Canada right now they're getting around the MPAA - but what is there to keep someone from setting this up in Canada and running it and accessing from a Wi-Fi hotspot in the Excited States?
    The system can be bought at Best Buy (www.bestbuy.ca) in Canada for about $1800 (Cdn) or from Sonystyle.ca directly. It's basically a Small TV set tablet with a 802.11 link to a base station that streams the video to the tablet and even lets you serf the net with a little browser.
    Sorry - don't know what operating system they're using - it looks like a custom UNIX setup.

  12. Snapstream is similar by rjelks · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Snapstream's Beyond TV server is kind of like this. You can log on anywhere with an interenet connection and view live streams from your home PC's tv-tuner card. It will only stream mpeg2, but you can also access recorded shows (can encode in divx or whatever you want). The quality might not be as high, but it looks like a cheap alternative. There are other options for streaming Live TV from your home pc that I've been playing around with, but with Snapstream, you can change channels much easier from remote locations. It's not exactly the same, but you can get your local cable from remote locations. $100 vs. $6500??

  13. Seems like a scam to me, or at least a ripoff. by Guspaz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This "TV2Me" device is just a standard SFF PC with a TV tuner (http://spaceshift.net/images/pvs.jpg). And yet he charges 6500$ US for this.

    Is it just me, or could I put together a box with all the same hardware for under 500$ US?

    The ONLY unique thing about this thing is the streaming of the remote control over the net. Is that feature really worth $6000 US? I mean, it's just a convienience to avoid using remote desktop to change the channel.

    So again, seems like either a scam or ripoff to me.

    1. Re:Seems like a scam to me, or at least a ripoff. by kmo · · Score: 2, Informative
      The ONLY unique thing about this thing is the streaming of the remote control over the net.

      Actually, the unique thing is that it can supposedly stream TV quality images over a much lower bandwidth connection (384kbs) than other systems. It uses a custom card for this. See this Cringely article for another take on it.

  14. erm by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Informative

    that link is in the story dude

    i should know, i'm the submitter

    but so should anyone else who took the 3 seconds it took to hoever over the links... less time than it took for you to write your post, that's for sure!

    lol ;-P

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  15. Re:Stand by for lawsuits (or not) by UID1000000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is available in the US too. Sharper Image has them and a few others do too.

    I've used the TV itself it's nice - the image can get grainy.

    I think that it's actaully Palm based, which would make more sense being that Sony Clie is a Palm OS. It's a thin client OS, I know that much.

    --
    UID 1000000 is just around the corner.

  16. Great for homesick ex-pats by jettoblack · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I live in Japan and often thought of building a box like this to leave in my family's house in the US, so that I can watch my favorite TV programs from here. Fortunately, thanks to bittorrent, I can download all my shows faster and in much higher quality than I could stream live from a home broadband connection. But if there is a worldwide crackdown on BT/P2P/etc., I'll definitely consider doing it myself. Should be easily under $400 to build a box like this.

  17. What it does by gordguide · · Score: 3, Informative

    Some of the posters seem to be confused as to what, exactly this does. Now, they all seem to get the TV over IP part. Fine.

    You buy the box for $6,500.00 and stick it in your house. Then you go off somewhere, let's say a hotel 3,000 miles away, and log in to your stream.

    You don't lug the box around. It stays at home.

    You don't "get" the Manchester United game or Moscow TV, unless you already could get them. Reread last sentence. Twice.

    If you want to stream ESPN, you must already subscribe to ESPN at home. Reread that sentence, if necessary.

    You can stream the local, over-the-air channels you might be missing in whatever God-forsaken hotel room you might find yourself in, for free if they are free at your house. At home.

    You can stream the cable, satellite, or whatever you pay for and get at home.

    What you don't get:
    Any channel you can't get at home, now.
    Channels you don't pay for now, if they require you to pay at home.
    No, you can't say goodbye to the cable company, tear down the dish, or steal the world's broadcast signals unless you already do steal them.

    If you need the local news when you're in Bali, it's a workable solution. If you want 2,000 channels you can't get at home while you're in Bali, you still can't get them.

  18. I don't know if you've been to your local by msimm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Blockbuster lately, but network programing is increasingly finding its way into the DVD market. Of course it doesn't help that most downloaded TV programs are stripped of commercial. You know their advertisers don't care that you missed West Wing, they only care that you missed their expensive advertising spot(s).

    --
    Quack, quack.
  19. Bah... I've been doing it for months. by sanermind · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm in Denver, and don't have cable. However, my parents (in Cleveland), happen to subscribe to an uber-cable offering of just about everything available [over 300 channels]. We both have broadband as well. So, it was a simple matter to drop a $30 bttv card in the linux box working as a firewall at their house, and build an IR transmitter to control a dedicated cable decoder box. Mpeg4 at 512 kilobit is perfectly watchable, especially at 320x240 resolution. I recommend downloading ffmpeg if you are interested in doing the same.

    --

    ---
    the pen is mightier than the sword, the sword is mightier than the court, the court is mightier than the pen.