Slashdot Mirror


Free Net TV Threatens Telecoms

An anonymous reader writes "C|Net's running an article about the threat free television on the internet poses to traditional telecoms and cable companies." From the article: "No one is expecting Internet television to cannibalize traditional TV models overnight. Despite advancements in streaming technology, video delivered on the Web can still be choppy, with frequent interruptions as data packets buffer and reload on the screen. In fact many viewers who watched the NCAA tournament aired by CBS on the Internet last month complained about the network being overloaded."

2 of 116 comments (clear)

  1. Same Old FUD by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Media barons come to power over the decades since that particular media's inception into society.

    A new technology comes along that threatens their iron grip on said media's distribution.

    The archaic dinosaurs do not know what to do so they spread FUD everywhere and turn to the law and lobbying for protection of their source of infinite wealth. They refuse to change to their environment and instead force the environment to change to them--a fatalistic attitude that hinders innovation and growth among other things.

    After all the dust settles, the end consumer (99.9% of the populace) is the one that misses out on what might have been.

    This story could be applied all the way back to printed text that was held from the commoners and slaves to hinder knowledge and understanding.

    It happened with music. It happened with videos. It's happening with television. And it will happen with everything because the people running the industries refuse to lose their power or adapt their production methods.
    "The times, they are a changing." - Bob Dylan
    How about we wake up and change the headline from
    Free Net TV Threatens Telecoms
    to
    Free Net TV to Replace Telecoms
    or
    Community Welcomes New Distribution Method of Telecoms
    We're eating out of the hands of a few select companies and with television over the internet, the fact is that we might not have to.
    --
    My work here is dung.
  2. Re:Us geeks already know the future .. by dada21 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'll get blasted for this and called a troll, but my real opinion is that the distribution cartels (phone companies, cable companies and TV companies) don't want it to happen. They've controlled the system for too long, and they're fearful (rightfully so) of losing out to the smaller direct-caster. Broadcast (ie, not a la carte) is dying.

    The best way to let things progress is to stop holding to the old norms (regulations). Look at all the bandwidth set aside fo television and radio at 50,000 watts per frequency range. All that lovely bandwidth could be better prioritized with lower transmission power and WiFi or something similar. Even cell phone companies hold way too much bandwidth for the type of transmission used, it is crazy that EDGE/3G/whatever isn't even faster than it is today.

    I truly believe we'd see much more technology growth if we didn't hold to standards created 20, 30, 50 years ago. UHF and VHF should be dead, and HDTV along with it. If people want HD broadcasts, they could be better suited to a faster more localized version of the torrent protocol -- maybe set up by a few re-distro companies, maybe by amateurs, let competition bring it about.

    As for paying for it, I believe 5 second spots work just as well as 30 and 60 second spots. The rare times I watch public programming, I actually hear "brought to you by the McDonalds corporation" better than I hear a 30 or 60 second McD's spot.