I will say only that you and I "suffer" from the same problem of having access to too many of tomorrow's TV toys at work. I was just trying to think more in terms of immediate feasibility, but then again, that is more along the lines of my job...
The 850Mhz systems haven't really paid for themselves yet, and you are proposing that some of the most expensive parts (the amps) would need to be replaced to make your solution 'almost' scale enough for widespread offering? Maybe if you're Charter and like to overbuild rural networks...
The "massive PVR" you mention is really more applicable to the ability to control a real-time video stream. You would still need massive amounts of storage to allow for user archival of content.
Anyway... I agree with most of your thoughts about the actual content owners, and the problems therein. I don't believe that a PVR-in-the-cloud scales effectivly, or is cost effective enough, for deployment anytime in the next several years.
By keeping the equipment client-side, you are able to better fully utilize your existing infrastructure (no need to replace amps/taps, no need for a mega-current 1Ghz+ system), and you can bill only the consumers that actually want the service (ie: you don't have to spread the cost of a massive headend investment across the 60% of your subscriber base that isn't interested in the service yet). BTW, I belive your average node estimate is way low. ~500 homes is what I'm used to...
Anyway... thanks for making some good counter arguments...
Massive' no, DTV can be delivered in about 4.5Mbps using current MPEG technology, which is hardly massive, and can be delivered over xDSL to about 3.5KM
3.5KM is about 2.1 miles. That is too much of a distance limitation to allow for decent penetration to make this service more than niche offering.
Additionally, if you want to offer real PVR features to every consumer, you are going to have excessive storage requirements to allow for everyone to archive their content for whatever duration they desire.
The webpage you mention looks like a VOD product, delivered over a physical layer that is only appropriate to densly populated areas, which are are prevalent in Europe than in the US.
You really haven't managed to shoot anything down, you've managed to post your companies vision of a niche product.
1000 Mhz is hardly a "typical" system. 850Mhz is more common for recently rebuilt or new systems.
A headend feeds thousands, not hundreds of homes.
A typical home has more than 1 TV, so yes, you would need/want at least 2 of these virtual channels per home.
Your argument assumes the entire (digital) system is setup for this dedicated PVR-in-the-sky system. How do you offer a good digital package to the users who are only willing to pay for a basic digital package, and/or still prefer a client-side PVR?
Or are you actually proposing that it's cost effective to put up this massive PVR backend in every HFC node?
The server side model is dependant on massive bandwidth, which doesn't exist. You'd lose the ability for all your users to access the PVR features simultaneously.
And what about pausing/rewinding live TV? There is no way that any existing, or forthcoming, CATV infrastructure can scale to support this to enough users to make it profitable.
There are many other flaws in your argument, but it doesn't even get off the ground to begin with, so I won't go into more depth...
When it comes right down to it, it's really not that much of an issue.
I'm on my 3rd house, which like the previous ones is automated and has several servers, switches, UPSs, etc running 24/7. The truth is that there is not *that* much excess heat generated in a typical scenario. Sure, you can pile up lots of servers to do odd jobs, just to try and make it look like some mini server-room, but that's hardly cost effective, or efficient.
Without knowing the size of the room, the approximate BTU output of the machines and devices, and the heat loss factors of the room, nobody can *really* make any informed decisions.
My sever room and wiring closet is about 6' x 12', which was also about the size of my previous room. I don't do anything special to control airflow or temp. I *do* have a temp sensor in there to monitor things, just in case, but I've found that it tends to stay at about 65F in the winter and about 77F in the summer. Hardly worth spending tons of money to try and regulate the temperature better, I'd rather invest in another lighting controller or touchscreen:)
In most Microsoft EULAs, it states you can't give the software to nations or individuals involved in making atomic, bacteriological, or chemical weapons.
If that is the case, then Microsoft's total lack of security, and lack of timely response to reported security holes should be regarded as "harboring a terrorist".
If we're going to make virus' a terrorist crime, then we need to follow through all the way.
No, you're thinking of reimbursments for easements.
The 1%-3% goes to the city, additionally cable companies also kick back additional funds that are used to fund the public access cable channel, and buy equipment.
The fees collected can be used for just about anything the city/community desires. Very rarely do they ever use these funds to compensate people directly for having poles in their yard, etc.
Although the cable company may no longer sponsor your little league team, cable companies *do* pay franchise fees (1%-3% of subscription, typ.) to the community they operate in. DBS/Satellite companies do *not* pay any fees to the communities that subscribe to the service.
So, your community *is* getting money from the cable company that is roughly tied to the size of the subscriber base (if they're not getting this money, then your community employs the most ignorant contract negotiators in the world.)
The TV UI comes in handy if you've got a Bunch O' MP3's or digital music files stored and you want to call up a particular one quickly/easily.
My Sony CD changer (CDCX450) has a video out that puts the song name/album name on the TV. I think it's handy so you can tell what song is playing, if you care to know when it's in random mode.
Also, with concert DVD's you can get 5.1 surround sound, plus see that footage on TV, if you like.
There's lotsa reasons to have the TV interface, you just need to think about it.
Ucentric has a home networking server platform that is available now. Initial availability is limited to trials customers/ beta users, but they are signing up OEM's and a retail implementation of the Ucentric software should be available from Netgear by the end of the year. It can play MP3's to your current stereo system, via a built-in FM modulator/broadcaster, and could also stream Internet audio content on the same FM channel. Obviously you would use your FM tuner to get all the other stations, but a tuner could be built in to the box if you wanted to digitally record the FM broadcasts for later listening.
The Ucentric box goes further by allowing you to control the music and other features from a TV UI, or any browser interface. So, you don't need to overhaul the technology that is currently in your home in order to take advantage of New Things. The screen shots on info on Ucentric's homepage isn't very end-user friendly, but if you poke around enough there are some screen shots and additional informations.
There is also DHCP/firewall/router/etc functions built into the box, and the ability to interact with a video feed, plus a handful of other applications built-in.
And, of course, the Ucentric box is based on linux:)
I guess some of it comes down to a mindset of the end-user. Personally, I've got a few nice stereo's or boom boxes in my house, I'd hate to have to buy a new compoent (Hi-Muse, Kerbango, whatever) for *each* one, the Hi-Muse seems like a set-top box for your stereo. Not for me, but maybe others will go for it.
Yes, there are a few LCD monitors that support an all-digital interface, and the number of these monitors is likely to increase over time. This will drive down the cost of analog-interface LCD's, which is likely to make even more of them show up in the corporate world, where the product this article describes is focused. The majority of LCD monitors available today are using an analog interface. To imply, as the original poster did, that this product isn't compatible with LCD monitors is silly and incorrect.
For bleeding edge or high-performance use this isn't the best solution. For a corporation full of Joe Beancounter's it's very viable.
That solution isn't really cheaper, because now you've got 2 PC's to build/maintain, and your traffic is now going over the LAN, which is shared by all users. A switched LAN would certianly help, but may not alleviate the problem entirely.
Yes, but you're (probably) speaking from a Gamer perspective. This is really more of a corporate product, where better video cards and bigger monitors are seldom the highest priority.
It all depends at what you are trying to do with your computers, and what form of measurement you use to arrive at the "cost".
By putting all the computers in a central environment, you can save on cost in a number of ways. One, is that the techs can stay more centralized, rather than roaming around a largish building, chasing problems. Also, by keeping the desktops in an environment that is (hopefully) climate controlled with conditioned power, you prolong the life of the unit, and increase its overall reliability and uptime. You could also have "hot spares" in the rack and quickly switch a user to another unit in the event of a failure, and then diagnose/replace the failed unit at your leisure.
Even though hardware can be depreciated, it is not free as in software or beer. Real money is used to pay for hardware and for support costs.
There is also something to be said for the fact that the weekend PC Jockey in Accounting can't try and "upgrade" his system for you, or load some rogue software into it easily.
Yes, like many technologies, these may not be well suited for corporations that can't get their basic infrastructure and labeling scheme under control.
PC/104 is cool for wearble computers, or embedded applications. But it is *damn* expensive, and the base hardware is always a bit behind the times. For what you would pay for a half-way decent PC/104 system, you could build a full-blown gaming PC *and* have money left over to hire someone to carry it around for you.
However, if you imagine a large convention center full of bluetooth cell phones, computers, pdas, and miscellaneous
peripherals, all sharing a common transmission medium, anything that worked remotely like Ethernet is going to fail: too
many devices waiting to talk -- no guarantee of fair queueing -- no defined physical LAN extent.
Even leaving aside issues of cost, complexity, and power consumption, 802.11 would be a poor choice. It might work
well in a SOHO or small LAN environment where there wasn't much interference from nearby wireless LANs.
Part of the reason that bluetooth could or would work well in the convention center environment is because it is very low power. The typical range would be something like 10-15 feet, not the 150 feet you can get out of 802.11B.
So, your wireless collision domain is controlled by virtue of the low power transmitter.
Bluetooth will fade away, IMO. 802.11b could easily adopt a low-power mode to limit itself to Bluetooth-y application use, while also allowing for larger-range use.
The question we don't know the answer to is: What are they doing with the money from selling the viewing data? If selling the data keeps the cost of the service down, then it's probably still a good thing (providing that all other statements about it being anonymous, etc are true). If selling the data allows them to develop Newer and Kewler software without making me have to pay for the upgrade, then it's probably a good thing.
Keep in mind that above all else, Tivo, and any other for-profit company exists for one main reason: To Make Money. If you think that any company that has the ability to gather stats and data that can generate money isn't likely to sell that data at some point, then you're fooling yourself. Perhaps not every company *will* sell the data, but I can guarantee that the thought crosses all of their minds. I knew this when I bought the Tivo service 2 years ago, and it's a risk I accept.
I'd be more concerned if they were selling data that is *personal*, ie: what shows I specifically record, how/when I watch TV, how long I pause when surfing on the Nudie Channels, etc. But even that is a possibility. Bottom line, vote with your wallet, and let them know how/why you "voted". It's good to discuss these things on/., but if your tirade ends here, you've only wasted your time.
Slashdot Mirror
Enjoy!
The "massive PVR" you mention is really more applicable to the ability to control a real-time video stream. You would still need massive amounts of storage to allow for user archival of content.
Anyway... I agree with most of your thoughts about the actual content owners, and the problems therein. I don't believe that a PVR-in-the-cloud scales effectivly, or is cost effective enough, for deployment anytime in the next several years.
By keeping the equipment client-side, you are able to better fully utilize your existing infrastructure (no need to replace amps/taps, no need for a mega-current 1Ghz+ system), and you can bill only the consumers that actually want the service (ie: you don't have to spread the cost of a massive headend investment across the 60% of your subscriber base that isn't interested in the service yet). BTW, I belive your average node estimate is way low. ~500 homes is what I'm used to...
Anyway... thanks for making some good counter arguments...
3.5KM is about 2.1 miles. That is too much of a distance limitation to allow for decent penetration to make this service more than niche offering.
Additionally, if you want to offer real PVR features to every consumer, you are going to have excessive storage requirements to allow for everyone to archive their content for whatever duration they desire.
The webpage you mention looks like a VOD product, delivered over a physical layer that is only appropriate to densly populated areas, which are are prevalent in Europe than in the US.
You really haven't managed to shoot anything down, you've managed to post your companies vision of a niche product.
1000 Mhz is hardly a "typical" system. 850Mhz is more common for recently rebuilt or new systems.
A headend feeds thousands, not hundreds of homes.
A typical home has more than 1 TV, so yes, you would need/want at least 2 of these virtual channels per home.
Your argument assumes the entire (digital) system is setup for this dedicated PVR-in-the-sky system. How do you offer a good digital package to the users who are only willing to pay for a basic digital package, and/or still prefer a client-side PVR?
Or are you actually proposing that it's cost effective to put up this massive PVR backend in every HFC node?
The server side model is dependant on massive bandwidth, which doesn't exist. You'd lose the ability for all your users to access the PVR features simultaneously.
And what about pausing/rewinding live TV? There is no way that any existing, or forthcoming, CATV infrastructure can scale to support this to enough users to make it profitable.
There are many other flaws in your argument, but it doesn't even get off the ground to begin with, so I won't go into more depth...
I have a personal 1-800 fax number, and yes, it does get fax spams frequently enough to be annoying.
I'm on my 3rd house, which like the previous ones is automated and has several servers, switches, UPSs, etc running 24/7. The truth is that there is not *that* much excess heat generated in a typical scenario. Sure, you can pile up lots of servers to do odd jobs, just to try and make it look like some mini server-room, but that's hardly cost effective, or efficient.
Without knowing the size of the room, the approximate BTU output of the machines and devices, and the heat loss factors of the room, nobody can *really* make any informed decisions.
My sever room and wiring closet is about 6' x 12', which was also about the size of my previous room. I don't do anything special to control airflow or temp. I *do* have a temp sensor in there to monitor things, just in case, but I've found that it tends to stay at about 65F in the winter and about 77F in the summer. Hardly worth spending tons of money to try and regulate the temperature better, I'd rather invest in another lighting controller or touchscreen
"We have put software on top of Ethernet that basically synchronizes those packets to a master clock"
In most Microsoft EULAs, it states you can't give the software to nations or individuals involved in making atomic, bacteriological, or chemical weapons.
Do they mean *besides* the US?
Please, stop, you're making me excited ;)
Many of the airlines are near-bankrupt, or at the very least, their balance sheets show them to be just-about bankrupt.
I don't think that anyone could really declare Microsoft to be "cash-strapped" by any sense of the imagination.
No offense, but I don't believe your analogy holds water
If that is the case, then Microsoft's total lack of security, and lack of timely response to reported security holes should be regarded as "harboring a terrorist".
If we're going to make virus' a terrorist crime, then we need to follow through all the way.
No, you're thinking of reimbursments for easements.
The 1%-3% goes to the city, additionally cable companies also kick back additional funds that are used to fund the public access cable channel, and buy equipment.
The fees collected can be used for just about anything the city/community desires. Very rarely do they ever use these funds to compensate people directly for having poles in their yard, etc.
So, your community *is* getting money from the cable company that is roughly tied to the size of the subscriber base (if they're not getting this money, then your community employs the most ignorant contract negotiators in the world.)
That being said, I still prefer DBS...
My Sony CD changer (CDCX450) has a video out that puts the song name/album name on the TV. I think it's handy so you can tell what song is playing, if you care to know when it's in random mode.
Also, with concert DVD's you can get 5.1 surround sound, plus see that footage on TV, if you like.
There's lotsa reasons to have the TV interface, you just need to think about it.
The Ucentric box goes further by allowing you to control the music and other features from a TV UI, or any browser interface. So, you don't need to overhaul the technology that is currently in your home in order to take advantage of New Things. The screen shots on info on Ucentric's homepage isn't very end-user friendly, but if you poke around enough there are some screen shots and additional informations.
There is also DHCP/firewall/router/etc functions built into the box, and the ability to interact with a video feed, plus a handful of other applications built-in.
And, of course, the Ucentric box is based on linux :)
I guess some of it comes down to a mindset of the end-user. Personally, I've got a few nice stereo's or boom boxes in my house, I'd hate to have to buy a new compoent (Hi-Muse, Kerbango, whatever) for *each* one, the Hi-Muse seems like a set-top box for your stereo. Not for me, but maybe others will go for it.
For bleeding edge or high-performance use this isn't the best solution. For a corporation full of Joe Beancounter's it's very viable.
That solution isn't really cheaper, because now you've got 2 PC's to build/maintain, and your traffic is now going over the LAN, which is shared by all users. A switched LAN would certianly help, but may not alleviate the problem entirely.
Yes, but you're (probably) speaking from a Gamer perspective. This is really more of a corporate product, where better video cards and bigger monitors are seldom the highest priority.
By putting all the computers in a central environment, you can save on cost in a number of ways. One, is that the techs can stay more centralized, rather than roaming around a largish building, chasing problems. Also, by keeping the desktops in an environment that is (hopefully) climate controlled with conditioned power, you prolong the life of the unit, and increase its overall reliability and uptime. You could also have "hot spares" in the rack and quickly switch a user to another unit in the event of a failure, and then diagnose/replace the failed unit at your leisure.
Even though hardware can be depreciated, it is not free as in software or beer. Real money is used to pay for hardware and for support costs.
There is also something to be said for the fact that the weekend PC Jockey in Accounting can't try and "upgrade" his system for you, or load some rogue software into it easily.
The LCD itself requires different driver circuitry, but that is inside the monitor.
I predict that you will soon do more research before you post...
Part of the reason that bluetooth could or would work well in the convention center environment is because it is very low power. The typical range would be something like 10-15 feet, not the 150 feet you can get out of 802.11B.
So, your wireless collision domain is controlled by virtue of the low power transmitter.
Bluetooth will fade away, IMO. 802.11b could easily adopt a low-power mode to limit itself to Bluetooth-y application use, while also allowing for larger-range use.
Keep in mind that above all else, Tivo, and any other for-profit company exists for one main reason: To Make Money. If you think that any company that has the ability to gather stats and data that can generate money isn't likely to sell that data at some point, then you're fooling yourself. Perhaps not every company *will* sell the data, but I can guarantee that the thought crosses all of their minds. I knew this when I bought the Tivo service 2 years ago, and it's a risk I accept.
I'd be more concerned if they were selling data that is *personal*, ie: what shows I specifically record, how/when I watch TV, how long I pause when surfing on the Nudie Channels, etc. But even that is a possibility. Bottom line, vote with your wallet, and let them know how/why you "voted". It's good to discuss these things on /., but if your tirade ends here, you've only wasted your time.