Of those, I'd pay 50 cents or a dollar a month each for Comedy Central and VH1 Classis. For the rest of them - good riddance. I have them filtered from my channel list anyway.
Heck, if they would offer channels on a per-channel basis, I could cut my bill even more than I already did switching to Dish Network. VH1 Classis is the only reason I would consider the Top 150 package over the Top 100.
That's really what this dispute is all about. Dish Network only wants to carry the "good" channels, which Viacom wants to sell channels in multi-channel packs that can't be broken up.
The vast majority of commericals on cable channels come from the content supplier. Roughly only 1 to 3 minutes of ad time per hour (depending on what channel we're talking about) goes to the signal distributor.
I'm not happy about this either, but from I was told by management, Dish wants to pick and choose what they want to air, instead of taking packages. (ie they want MTV MTV2, Nick, and Comedy central but not Spike and cmt, Im not sure if the exact grouping though...) and Viacoms stance is its a package, they want some they take them all. This has started a pissing contest.
Viacom basically wants the right to say "We started this new Nicktoons channel. You have to take it (and pay for it) or lose all of the MTV Networks package channels." Dish Network sees Nicktoons as having no value to them since it at this point consists of only programs that have already run on the main Nick network.
Because what EV1 provides is a server that comes preinstalled with Linux, Apache, and several other useful programs. They also have licensing deals with several major webhost control pannel programs designed to make it easy to operate your own web hosting service if that's what you want to do with your server.
Anytime a customer seriously ruins their setup, they can pay to get a new HD image that takes them back to the way the server was delivered. (The customer, however, is on their own for getting that reset server back to what it had on when it went down.)
Why these channels are going away is because they're all covered by the same contract, which is about to expire. Dish and Viacom cannot come to terms on a renewal deal.
Reportedly, Viacom wants to increase prices accross the board at 7% a year, and wants Dish to pick up the new Nicktoons channel which it presently doesn't carry. DirecTV signed a deal remarkably similar to this not to long ago, but Dish considers the price increases too high for them. (Historically, Dish is the last one to cave to demands from content suppliers, leading to some deals that just never get done.)
However, at that time, only the ABC O&O channels were at risk. This would be the first time a wholesale slate of cable channels gets pulled at once rather than just one channel at a time...
Last I heard, Viacom wants Dish to carry Nickelodeon's GAS channel or some such... and Dish said no, so Viacom said you can't carry anything then unless you pay us more money.
Dish already carries Nick GAS. It's Nicktoons that DirecTV recently added but Dish seems to be refusing to.
BTW, you will still get WBZ and WSBK so long as you're not local to Boston. The distant rights to those stations are granted by law, Viacom can't take those stations away.
Dish Network holds about 8% of the TV audience. What that means is that there will be an instant drop in the audience by 8% on all of the affected stations.
Viacom does not own any distribution arms other than OTA TV stations. Their entire cable empire stands at risk if they can't make deals with outside distributors. Viacom needs Dish more than Dish needs Viacom.
It's true that Viacom owns SpikeTV and its former sister network CMT, but I'm having trouble confirming that they're covered by the contract that currently is in dispute. (The two may be covered by a contract that's a holdover from the days that SpikeTV was The Nashville Network they were owned by a freestanding Nashville-based company.)
I know for sure that Viacom's Showtime and The Movie Channel properties are definitely under other contracts and therefore won't be involved in this situation.
Dish Network is trying to hold the line on the wholesale price of content. DirecTV, by comparison, just raised prices for their main content packages.
So, if you want to get your content from the low-price supplier, you want to be with Dish Network and put up with these occasional squabbles. If you want a distributor that has a history of bending over whenever the prices go up, you go to DirecTV or your local cable company. Competition in a marketplace is good that way...
The annoying crawls are not just limited to Dish Network. Viacom has no way to force a crawl onto only Dish Network feeds of their networks, so they have to put the crawls onto the network's backhaul feeds and therefore everybody sees them.
I've been told that DirecTV's call centers have also been geting calls from their own consumers who don't read the whole ticker and are wondering if they're at risk too. (DirecTV's contracts are not lapsing right now, only Dish's.)
Here's the list of channels that will fall off of Dish Network if there's no deal by 11:59:59 PM ET tonight:
BET Comedy Central MTV MTV2 Nick Games & Sports Nickelodeon/Nick at Night (Both East and West versions) Noggin/The N VH1 VH1 Classic All CBS O&O stations (listed here) within their local markets. (Those seeing WCBS, KCBS, or WBZ as a distant CBS service outside of their natrual zones will not be affected.) All UPN O&O stations (listed here) within their local markets. (Those seeing WSBK as a superstation outside of Boston will not be affected.) KCAL in the Los Angeles area.
I think the SEC thinks we are a bunch of miscreants trying to cause trouble.
I wouldn't doubt that there are some people who have tried to report SCO to the SEC despite not having any true facts that could be used. Such people are just harming any true investigation into SCO by drowning out the actual signals...
That's not so easy. EV1 doesn't have root over its customers boxes. They're not a managed hosting service. Therefore, forcing customers who don't want to switch OSes would be a messy process.
It's not surprising that anything SCO would sign would contain limited disclosure clauses. But, since Darl has clearly tried to claim that EV1 gave SCO $1,000,000+ in cash, and EV1 seems to want to stomp that down... can't EV1 sue SCO for breach of the agreement just a few days after it was signed?
"The European Commission is considering new regulation which could order McDonalds corporation to bundle french fry from the rival Burger King restaurant chain. This will ensure that Burger King fries are as easy to access for customers, as McDonalds own proprietary fries."
Seriously, why would the above be considered a joke, while people are actually seriously considering a comparable ruling against MS?
Because neither McDonalds nor Burger King has ever been ruled to have a monopoly in the fast food market, or even the hamburger market.
It's not illegal to obtain a monopoly. However, once you do have a monopoly, the rules change. You're not allowed to bundle your monopoly product with any other product that is in an area that does have competition. That's what Real is calling the foul over, and the EU seems to be agreeing with.
Since when is a media player a core component of an operating system?
I'd say somewhere around Windows 1.0. There's always been a media player of some kind of simple.wav player, it just got more and more complex as time went on until we got the bloatware that WMP is today. Some people long for the "old style" WMP, which is exactly why MPlayer2.exe is still in windows.
There's the example Microsoft can point to very easily. Apple has bundled a web browser that has forced IE to get out of the Mac game, and Apple bundles a media player of its own into their OS... has a media player program become a standard feature of the OS?
Because the ulitmate sin in anti-trust law is the use of a monopoly in one thing to try to move into another thing where there used to be competition.
Being forced to include third-party software is simply the punitive action to punish MS for a past misdeed and help the companies who were the victim of that cheating.
They're really a specialised use entry more than anything else. Because this service has a 20 GB download and 5 GB upload cap before you start paying through the nose for bandwidth, both cable and DSL broadband seem like a better deal.
You'd have to be quite a road warrior to need your broadband access to follow you all over town. Wouldn't it be easier to just rely on wired access being where you need it, and then putting it up with WiFi?
Comcast hasn't been that bad with their latest network upgrades. They say "Up to 3 MB/s down" but I've actually clocked some downloads from a server I control at 3.75 MB/s. 25% overdelivery, not bad.
Slashdot Mirror
Of those, I'd pay 50 cents or a dollar a month each for Comedy Central and VH1 Classis. For the rest of them - good riddance. I have them filtered from my channel list anyway.
Heck, if they would offer channels on a per-channel basis, I could cut my bill even more than I already did switching to Dish Network. VH1 Classis is the only reason I would consider the Top 150 package over the Top 100.
That's really what this dispute is all about. Dish Network only wants to carry the "good" channels, which Viacom wants to sell channels in multi-channel packs that can't be broken up.
The vast majority of commericals on cable channels come from the content supplier. Roughly only 1 to 3 minutes of ad time per hour (depending on what channel we're talking about) goes to the signal distributor.
I'm not happy about this either, but from I was told by management, Dish wants to pick and choose what they want to air, instead of taking packages. (ie they want MTV MTV2, Nick, and Comedy central but not Spike and cmt, Im not sure if the exact grouping though...) and Viacoms stance is its a package, they want some they take them all. This has started a pissing contest.
Viacom basically wants the right to say "We started this new Nicktoons channel. You have to take it (and pay for it) or lose all of the MTV Networks package channels." Dish Network sees Nicktoons as having no value to them since it at this point consists of only programs that have already run on the main Nick network.
There's the core source of the dispute.
However, the message doesn't list SpikeTV by name, nor does Dish Network's site.
Because what EV1 provides is a server that comes preinstalled with Linux, Apache, and several other useful programs. They also have licensing deals with several major webhost control pannel programs designed to make it easy to operate your own web hosting service if that's what you want to do with your server.
Anytime a customer seriously ruins their setup, they can pay to get a new HD image that takes them back to the way the server was delivered. (The customer, however, is on their own for getting that reset server back to what it had on when it went down.)
Why these channels are going away is because they're all covered by the same contract, which is about to expire. Dish and Viacom cannot come to terms on a renewal deal.
Reportedly, Viacom wants to increase prices accross the board at 7% a year, and wants Dish to pick up the new Nicktoons channel which it presently doesn't carry. DirecTV signed a deal remarkably similar to this not to long ago, but Dish considers the price increases too high for them. (Historically, Dish is the last one to cave to demands from content suppliers, leading to some deals that just never get done.)
However, at that time, only the ABC O&O channels were at risk. This would be the first time a wholesale slate of cable channels gets pulled at once rather than just one channel at a time...
Last I heard, Viacom wants Dish to carry Nickelodeon's GAS channel or some such... and Dish said no, so Viacom said you can't carry anything then unless you pay us more money.
Dish already carries Nick GAS. It's Nicktoons that DirecTV recently added but Dish seems to be refusing to.
BTW, you will still get WBZ and WSBK so long as you're not local to Boston. The distant rights to those stations are granted by law, Viacom can't take those stations away.
And let's not forget their own investors.
Dish Network holds about 8% of the TV audience. What that means is that there will be an instant drop in the audience by 8% on all of the affected stations.
Viacom does not own any distribution arms other than OTA TV stations. Their entire cable empire stands at risk if they can't make deals with outside distributors. Viacom needs Dish more than Dish needs Viacom.
You forgot Spike TV.
It's true that Viacom owns SpikeTV and its former sister network CMT, but I'm having trouble confirming that they're covered by the contract that currently is in dispute. (The two may be covered by a contract that's a holdover from the days that SpikeTV was The Nashville Network they were owned by a freestanding Nashville-based company.)
I know for sure that Viacom's Showtime and The Movie Channel properties are definitely under other contracts and therefore won't be involved in this situation.
Dish Network is trying to hold the line on the wholesale price of content. DirecTV, by comparison, just raised prices for their main content packages.
So, if you want to get your content from the low-price supplier, you want to be with Dish Network and put up with these occasional squabbles. If you want a distributor that has a history of bending over whenever the prices go up, you go to DirecTV or your local cable company. Competition in a marketplace is good that way...
The annoying crawls are not just limited to Dish Network. Viacom has no way to force a crawl onto only Dish Network feeds of their networks, so they have to put the crawls onto the network's backhaul feeds and therefore everybody sees them.
I've been told that DirecTV's call centers have also been geting calls from their own consumers who don't read the whole ticker and are wondering if they're at risk too. (DirecTV's contracts are not lapsing right now, only Dish's.)
Here's the list of channels that will fall off of Dish Network if there's no deal by 11:59:59 PM ET tonight:
BET
Comedy Central
MTV
MTV2
Nick Games & Sports
Nickelodeon/Nick at Night (Both East and West versions)
Noggin/The N
VH1
VH1 Classic
All CBS O&O stations (listed here) within their local markets. (Those seeing WCBS, KCBS, or WBZ as a distant CBS service outside of their natrual zones will not be affected.)
All UPN O&O stations (listed here) within their local markets. (Those seeing WSBK as a superstation outside of Boston will not be affected.)
KCAL in the Los Angeles area.
Just because Darl's starting to act paraniod is not proof that there aren't people out to get him.
I think the SEC thinks we are a bunch of miscreants trying to cause trouble.
I wouldn't doubt that there are some people who have tried to report SCO to the SEC despite not having any true facts that could be used. Such people are just harming any true investigation into SCO by drowning out the actual signals...
That's not so easy. EV1 doesn't have root over its customers boxes. They're not a managed hosting service. Therefore, forcing customers who don't want to switch OSes would be a messy process.
It's not surprising that anything SCO would sign would contain limited disclosure clauses. But, since Darl has clearly tried to claim that EV1 gave SCO $1,000,000+ in cash, and EV1 seems to want to stomp that down... can't EV1 sue SCO for breach of the agreement just a few days after it was signed?
"The European Commission is considering new regulation which could order McDonalds corporation to bundle french fry from the rival Burger King restaurant chain. This will ensure that Burger King fries are as easy to access for customers, as McDonalds own proprietary fries."
Seriously, why would the above be considered a joke, while people are actually seriously considering a comparable ruling against MS?
Because neither McDonalds nor Burger King has ever been ruled to have a monopoly in the fast food market, or even the hamburger market.
It's not illegal to obtain a monopoly. However, once you do have a monopoly, the rules change. You're not allowed to bundle your monopoly product with any other product that is in an area that does have competition. That's what Real is calling the foul over, and the EU seems to be agreeing with.
Since when is a media player a core component of an operating system?
.wav player, it just got more and more complex as time went on until we got the bloatware that WMP is today. Some people long for the "old style" WMP, which is exactly why MPlayer2.exe is still in windows.
I'd say somewhere around Windows 1.0. There's always been a media player of some kind of simple
There's the example Microsoft can point to very easily. Apple has bundled a web browser that has forced IE to get out of the Mac game, and Apple bundles a media player of its own into their OS... has a media player program become a standard feature of the OS?
Because the ulitmate sin in anti-trust law is the use of a monopoly in one thing to try to move into another thing where there used to be competition.
Being forced to include third-party software is simply the punitive action to punish MS for a past misdeed and help the companies who were the victim of that cheating.
Because there's no big commercial interest left pushing a web browser, but Real is still alive and big enough to complain about WMP...
They're really a specialised use entry more than anything else. Because this service has a 20 GB download and 5 GB upload cap before you start paying through the nose for bandwidth, both cable and DSL broadband seem like a better deal.
You'd have to be quite a road warrior to need your broadband access to follow you all over town. Wouldn't it be easier to just rely on wired access being where you need it, and then putting it up with WiFi?
Comcast hasn't been that bad with their latest network upgrades. They say "Up to 3 MB/s down" but I've actually clocked some downloads from a server I control at 3.75 MB/s. 25% overdelivery, not bad.
You'd have the most insecure network ever. The posiblity for man-in-the-middle attacks would be endless...