Slashdot Mirror


The Ballpark Stadium of the Future

thejrwr writes to mention a CNN article about the ballpark stadium of the future. The new Cisco stadium for the Oakland A's will be a paragon of the company's technologies, with cellphones carrying personal data used for advertising and identification purposes. "Cisco, which makes the routers, switches and other devices used to link networks and direct traffic on the Internet, is trying to shed its image as solely a maker of networking infrastructure gear. The company also hopes to capitalize on products and services that utilize the network. One example is TelePresence, a technology similar to video conferencing that Cisco introduced last month that aims to deliver a three-dimensional feeling that the participants are all in the same room."

20 of 79 comments (clear)

  1. Technology advances... by Duncan3 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ad technology that is.

    The best part is you cannot leave the stadium until you buy at least $100 worth of advertised product, but you get to do it with your cellphone! Yay, how cool! Go Cisco!

    People really still drag themselves to a stadium through all that traffic when HDTV exists?

    .

    --
    - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
    1. Re:Technology advances... by Kangburra · · Score: 4, Insightful
      People really still drag themselves to a stadium through all that traffic when HDTV exists?


      Yes, social interaction, atmosphere, making friends etc.

      It's not just about the game, there's more to it than that.
      --
      Common sense is not so common
    2. Re:Technology advances... by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Ad technology that is. The best part is you cannot leave the stadium until you buy at least $100 worth of advertised product, but you get to do it with your cellphone! Yay, how cool! Go Cisco! People really still drag themselves to a stadium through all that traffic when HDTV exists?

      Last time I checked, HDTV in my living room can't duplicate the amazing feeling of a ballpark. I say screw the over-commercialization of baseball, but I still love going to a ballgame (sometimes alone, so I can really watch the game, and I even keep scor once in a while, though I don't go home to my my mom's basement afterward, sorry), and having history happen right in front of me. If you're actually at the game, you can avoid looking at ads by watching the game!

      If I had to choose between either baseball or the internet being allowed to survive a nuclear cage match, I'd have a hard time deciding. Besides, even though HDTV is becoming common, I still don't have an ABHCD (Authentic Ballpark Hotdog Cooker and Dispenser).

      --
      This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
    3. Re:Technology advances... by MojoStan · · Score: 2, Insightful
      People really still drag themselves to a stadium through all that traffic when HDTV exists?
      People really still go through the "hassles" of getting laid when HDTV POV porn exists? (Should I post this comment anonymously?)

      I'd guesstimate that over 90 percent of HDTV telecasts show the game from the center field camera. Most of the time, you see nothing but the pitcher, catcher, batter, and home plate umpire from a behind-the-pitcher point of view (no porn joke intended). When the ball is hit, the camera follows the ball. Sure, those are usually the most important things happening at the moment, but a lot more is going on off-camera. Also, the limited view of any camera shot does not give a good perspective of the amazing speeds, distances, and skills displayed in a big league ballgame.

      Some of the things you miss when watching a game on HDTV instead of at the ballpark:

      • A perspective of just how shallow Mark Kotsay (Oakland Athletics) positions himself in center field (to prevent bloop singles) and how skillful he is when running down a drive hit over his head (he actually takes his eyes off the ball and finds it again before the ball comes down).
      • A perspective of just how tall and intimidating Randy Johnson is (6'10", 95-100MPH) on the pitcher's mound (10" high, 60'6" away from home plate).
      • The beauty, coordination, rhythm, and skill of both middle infielders working together on a 6-4-3 double play (the tv camera follows the ball and shows one player briefly at a time).
      • The off-camera action when a hit-and-run is being attempted: runner(s) going as the ball is being pitched, a middle infielder (which one depends on the batter and the pitch) covering second base, a weakly-hit ball going through the infield area vacated by the infielder covering the stolen base attempt.
      • The sound and mood of an entire impatient New York ballpark when Alex Rodriguez ($25 million salary) boots yet another ground ball at Yankee Stadium.
      • An HDTV center field camera does not do justice to the sight (and sometimes sound) of a 100MPH Rich Harden (Oakland A's) fastball and a swing that's quick and accurate enough to hit it. At the ballpark, that pitch looks impossibly fast. A swing that can hit it looks like an optical illusion.
      I guess you have to be a baseball nerd to appreciate some of these things. I also notice a lot of "business-related entertainment" attendies at AT&T Park (S.F. Giants) that seem to ignore about 90 percent of the game. They enjoy being there for other reasons I can't relate to (not that there's anything wrong with that). MLB in the Silicon Valley should attract a good mix of baseball nerds and "suits" trying to impress business clients.
      --
      TO START
      PRESS ANY KEY

      Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...

    4. Re:Technology advances... by drsquare · · Score: 4, Informative
      Yes, social interaction, atmosphere, making friends etc.


      Not to mention, being able to look at any part of the field you want, not the very small section the director wants you to look at, or a closeup of some celebrity in the crowd, or some commercials, or an irrelevent replay from ten minutes ago, or some talking heads, or any other crap that gets in the way which is avoided by actually going to the game.

      You can have the biggest resolution TVs in the world, it still won't count for anything until they invent a technology which allows you to see the entire field, all the time, completely uninterrupted. And no announcers.
  2. Good for Cisco by robinesque · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But it seems like the users of the ball park are going to need a lot of specialized gear to fully utilize the park... Will it degrade gracefully?

  3. Waste of taxpayer money by portforward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Look, I have nothing against sports, or sports fans. If they want to go cheer whomever they want, that is fine. Just pay for the building yourself, don't use my tax dollars. Case in point - my hometown Seattle. Apparently nobody liked it because it wasn't new enough or old enough. (the problem with the ceiling tiles was fixable for less than a half billion dollars) So, they tore down the Kingdome to make room for two half-billion dollar buildings. (I heard that there was still three years left on the bonds for the Kingdome - the county hadn't finished paying the mortgage!)

    One of those buildings is perhaps used 14 days out of the year. In it, the second richest man in the world pays 50 odd men multiple million dollars a year a piece to play a child's game. As a tax payer and potential fan, I have to pay a lot of money to see the inside of a resource that I pay for.

    I don't buy the "increased tax revenue" bit- people would spend their money in other ways. It isn't like I can tell my friends, "hey let's go down to the stadium and play football on the grass". This is a pure taxpayer takeaway, and it sickens me how city after city falls for it. If they want to conduct a business, they should have to pay for the facility just like any other business.

    1. Re:Waste of taxpayer money by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, you can argue that a new stadium is an investment in the city. It can revitalize an area of town and attract new business.

      Case in point, PacBell/SBC/AT&T Park has been a contributing factor to completely revamping the Embarcadero in San Francisco. That said, although SF contributed a few million dollars in tax abatements, the stadium has been privately funded.

      --
      "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
    2. Re:Waste of taxpayer money by jlarocco · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Well, you can argue that a new stadium is an investment in the city. It can revitalize an area of town and attract new business.

      Bullshit. I could say that about any building. "If you build this new Intel fab for us, it will revitalize the area and attract new businesses. It's an investment." Every other business is lucky if they get tax breaks when they build a new building. They sure as hell aren't paid for with tax dollars. Why should sports stadiums be any different?

    3. Re:Waste of taxpayer money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I am in the same boat as you. I love baseball, football, basketball (SF Giants, 49ers, and Sac Kings) but I still think it is a joke that the public needs to help finance stadium/arena deals for billionaire owners. The only thing a city and its residents should be doing is providing unused land. I live in Sacramento, and the arena deal here was just shot down big time by the voters. The owners are casino running billionaires but still need the public to finance just about every cent of their arena? The Maloof brothers have always claimed that Arco Arena doesn't have enough luxury suites, which doesn't help much with their revenues, etc, etc.. The cost of going to a game (family of 4, food, parking, etc) has gone up dramatically in Sacramento (and probably elsewhere too), but by making a $500 million arena it is somehow going to get cheaper or stay the same price? Hell no. What a great investment for the city taxpayers. Pay for an arena that will get increasingly harder to attend games at! One thing that I found hilarious too was that right before the election (a month or so?) the Maloofs did a commercial for Carls Jr. where they are sitting around in Vegas eating some gross fast food burgers, and having 25 year old bottle of Merlot (or some shit). The $6000 burger. What a great commmercial to do right before you need to pass a screw-the-citizens-in-the-form-of-a-sales-tax-hike measure on the ballot.

    4. Re:Waste of taxpayer money by legallyillegal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One of those buildings is perhaps used 14 days out of the year. The Seahawks aren't the only tenants.

      --
      ?giS
  4. terminology change by cucucu · · Score: 3, Funny

    pitch: ping
    home run: tracert
    out: ttl expired

    you say...

    1. Re:terminology change by hadhad69 · · Score: 2, Funny

      and if your losing.. ipconfig /flushdns

      --
      If you can read this, it's already too late.
  5. Or they could just make the game more exciting.... by antifoidulus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I haven't watched baseball in a while(I'm from Pittsburgh, so maybe that explains why :P) but on a recent trip to Japan I was in Hiroshima and heard that you just HAVE to see a Hiroshima Carp game. So I plunked down the 2000 yen to get a pretty good seat on a bench(there are security guards there whose job it is to find people seats) and was amazed at just how much fun baseball really could be. From the cheers to the fast pace of the game(9 innings only took 2 hours and some change IIRC) it was an environment I had never seen in the US. It was organized chaos.

    Granted, the players in the US are probably better than the Japanese players, but damn the Japanese games are much more fun to watch.

  6. Tickets by cnorrisjr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    if your ticket was on your cellphone, you would never lose your ticket. BUT. if your cellphone is stolen, there goes your game, if not the whole series. And what if you wanted to sell your tickets or give them to a friend. would my friend have to take my cell phone?

  7. Advertising Overload by poormanjoe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ad technology that is.
    I agree although it probly won't be as obvious to an average person as it is to us that loath advertisments.

    People really still drag themselves to a stadium through all that traffic when HDTV exists?
    You can easily make it to Wrigly Field by way of "The L." Location is everything in bussiness.
      From the article:and pay to show them on the Jumbotron.
    For the /.er's who aren't baseball fans thats the equvilent of paying someone to boost your XBox Live score. If you want to get on the Jumboscreen you bring kids, a funny sign, paint your face, and just be a good fan. Paying does occur already for marriage proposels, but special occasions are different than some rich drunk slob who's just going to kiss a clients ass.

    --
    I want to be retired when I grow up.
  8. Corporate Dollars by wanax · · Score: 4, Informative

    First of all, I'd like to point people to: http://www.fieldofschemes.com/ which details how sports teams use public money. Although the editorial is certainly against stadiums, the numbers are about the best you can find.

    Since I've been following the A's stadium on the site mentioned above for over a year, I can tell you that it is by no means a done deal. Among other things, there aren't enough police to regulate games, and who's to pay for the increase necessary for that is absent in the current deal.

  9. You what ??? by sane? · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, lets get this straight. The local government pays for team stadia in the US? That's insane. In the UK not only is it private money, often the teams will have to bribe the local council with roads, housing etc. to be allowed to build in the first place.

    Sounds like someone is missing a trick

  10. So how much is all this going to cost? by The+Creator · · Score: 2, Funny

    Give me a ballpark figure.

    --

    FRA: STFU GTFO
  11. Dumbest. Ideas. Ever. by StikyPad · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It seems like the SSDD. Targeted advertising? Come on, this has been a pipe dream for years. Targeted advertising is about as useful as it is desirable -- which is to say, not very. Sure, it works for Google... because people are actively seeking something. Nobody goes to the ballpark to find out about a new car.

    Tickets on a cellphone? This is obviously change for change's sake. Two peices of paper are just fine as it. You can put them in your shirt pocket, give one to a friend, or sell them when you can't make a game. Why in the hell would I want to tie that to my cellphone? Even if it worked exactly as intended, it would be less functional than the existing solution. There's a reason e-books haven't caught on.

    Paying to show your face on the big screen? This has got to be the worst idea ever. Any and all excitement related to seeing yourself on the large display is directly related to the serendipity of the event (aside from those morons who propose at baseball games). People who don't want to pay will resent it, it will be abused by morons, and it's not like it couldn't be done just fine with existing technology. Call or log in up to a week in advance, give your seat number and CC#, and congratulations! You're on TV.

    Watching instant replays? Everybody who wants this feature carries a small TV. If you're going to go digital with this, how about streaming the entire game in HD to the internet at large. I bet far more people would be interested in that than there are people who want to watch laptops in the stadium.

    In short, adding a few new features that nobody wants and changing a perfectly working process would make this the Windows Vista of stadiums.

    T ujtw oolriserh y i
    hsluh arn oncbdit'at
    ehdsri itslgoo lhrt.
    yo tonhzacl raweee