Yeah, that's it! Naw it's not. I shouldn't be embarassed to tell the truth. The 48" display is the lowest tech thing in the livingroom. It's an almost 10yr old Toshiba rear-projection TV, and the PC simply uses a TV out. So when Sam Tetherow says the stuff that uses 1/10th of the bandwidth are not made to be displayed on a 42" HD monitor, he's correct ... but Slingbox, LocationFree, and BeyondTV compressed recordings look just fine to me (about the same as analog cable looked).
Rich ----- Original Message ----- From: George Rogato To: WISPA General List Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 9:14 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPTV It wouldn't happen to be this one: http://www.samsung.com/Products/ProAV/Plasmas/PPM50M5HBXXAA.asp?page=Specifications I was thinking of buying this last year. Held off looking for lower pricing, so I can buy 2. George Rich Comroe wrote: >> I myself don't want to watch a movie on my pc monitor. I like the >> comfort of a big picture in my easy chair. When I can do that with >> internet tv, it will be a lot more popular. > > Yeah, but ... > My living room big picture that I watch from my easy chair happens to be my PC video server, not a TV. It's been over a year since I used a "TV" (which I define as a display box with a TV tuner built in). The living room PC has a couple TV tuner cards, Internet connection, and drives a big 48" display. Watch cable, programs previously recorded to disk (BeyondTV software is great with a half-terabyte drives), or Internet content. There's never even been a keyboard on this machine. If I wanna navigate there's a wireless mouse that sits on the hassock next to the tuner card remote controls. If I really need to type, I have to use a laptop with VNC. Essentially a TIVO on steroids. It's geek heaven! > >>>> Secondly, if we are talking about IPTV bandwidth needs, we need to >>>> forecast that a 1.25Mbps sustained stream is necessary for one >>>> stream. > > Yeah, but ... > Location Free, Slingbox, etc., do quite nicely on much much less BW. Is IPTV really that much of a hog that it needs 1.25Mbps? How could it possibly compete against products out there already that use only a tenth of this BW? > > Rich > ----- Original Message ----- > From: George Rogato > To: WISPA General List > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 9:28 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPTV > > > Nice easy reading here. > > http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=1264 > > Looks like the trend is towards video on demand. > > Here's a link: > > http://www.tv-links.co.uk/index.do/4 > > We have a long way to go before this stuff is mainstream for sure. But > there is a convergence happening. > I myself don't want to watch a movie on my pc monitor. I like the > comfort of a big picture in my easy chair. When I can do that with > internet tv, it will be a lot more popular. > > > > > > Travis Johnson wrote: > > I can say that I have always been a gadget freak. I almost always have > > the newest toys (cell phones, laptops, two-way radios, etc.) and I > > usually play with them for a few months, and then put them on ebay. I am > > a technology freak. I love new things (like our newest toy, an 18ghz > > Dragonwave AirPair100). Call me what you will, but I like new technology. > > > > However, I can also tell you that I have a regular POTS line at home > > (pay $35/mo for all features like vmail, call waiting, etc.) and I also > > have DISH network at home. I would never consider using an internet > > connection for TV... EVER. VoIP works for some people (I can always tell > > when I'm talking to someone on a VoIP phone), but I can never see using > > my internet connection for TV... here are a few reasons: > > > > (1) The internet is very unstable. When people want to watch TV, they > > don't want excuses on why it's not working. Imagine the calls you would > > get when a person's internet, telephone and TV are all down because one > > of their PC's is infected with the latest virus or spyware. > > > > (2) I like having things seperate. Seperate bills is a slight issue, but > > with automatic billing now, it all comes out of the checking account > > automatically anyway. > > > > (3) I'm not tied to a single provider. If I want to switch my phone > > service or TV service to something different, I can. > > > > (4) With the free DVR's and 4 rooms hooked up for free from DISH and > > only $29.99 per month for 60+ channels, who is going to compete with > > that? How can anyone provide a sustained 4-6Mbps for up to 4 TV's to > > _every_ subscriber across their network (including the cableco or > > telco's). Even in a small town (say 5,000 population), if the cable > > company had 500 customers, that would be up to 1Gbps of bandwidth needed > > (50% utilization of the 500 subs). There is nobody that can support that > > right now... or even 3-5 years from now. > > > > Before everyone gets too excited about IPTV, we need to look at reality. > > Sure companies like Verizon are doing fiber to the house... we will > > never compete with that... but why try? We will never dominate our > > region... instead, we are happy to pick up the customers that are > > unhappy with the telco or cableco or other wireless provider and want > > internet that just works. That's what we do. Internet. That works. > > > > Travis > > Microserv > > > > Marlon K. Schafer wrote: > >> sigh > >> > >> having no viable options vs. having one's head buried in the sand are > >> two totally different things. > >> > >> Boy I'm getting tired of being insulted for having a successful business! > >> marlon > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > >> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 5:08 PM > >> Subject: [WISPA] For George - just because you were thinking of me. > >> > >> > >>> All, > >>> > >>> Below is Ken's latest Blog post, still a work in progress, since > >>> George brought it up he felt it was appropriate. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Dawn DiPietro > >>> > >>> According to the A.C. Nielsen Co., the average American watches more > >>> than > >>> 4 hours of TV each day. > >>> http://www.csun.edu/science/health/docs/tv&health.html > >>> > >>> Now, I would be the first to admit that there is an unknown > >>> percentage of > >>> time that the TV is on but not being watched in any given family but > >>> even > >>> if we assume that percentage is close to 50% (which I would guess is > >>> high) > >>> we can see that from the estimated five minutes per day the average > >>> American spent watching internet video (according to the comScore study) > >>> we could very well see a jump of some nearly 50 times that amount once a > >>> full palette of subject matter is presented on the Internet for > >>> viewing on > >>> demand. > >>> http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=1264 > >>> > >>> And which of society's groups of will be eager to take advantage of free > >>> Video On Demand? Why the people who can't afford to pay for these high > >>> dollar services or would prefer not to. > >>> > >>> The next question is, what kind of bandwidth will it take to deliver VoD > >>> per user? Let me qualify this question by laying some of the assumptions > >>> that will need to be addressed in this answer. > >>> > >>> First off, on the average Friday night, at 6:00PM, more than 50% of > >>> American households have more than one TV set on (read as more than one > >>> continuous video stream playing) and I would suggest this trend will > >>> continue, if not increase as the net-centric services improve. > >>> > >>> Secondly, if we are talking about IPTV bandwidth needs, we need to > >>> forecast that a 1.25Mbps sustained stream is necessary for one > >>> stream. If > >>> we move into the realm of high definition we are now looking at a > >>> rate of > >>> 14Mbps (uncompressed) with perhaps a chance of delivering reasonable > >>> quality using a 4Mbps sustained stream - per video is use. That does not > >>> take into account any bandwidth for telephone or Internet access, should > >>> these services be required. > >>> > >>> What we can see is that any network that is only capable of > >>> delivering sub > >>> 1Mbps speeds (as measured in real throughput) is now obsolete - we > >>> simply > >>> refuse to admit it yet. > >>> > >>> Of course, we can still continue to bury our heads in the sand and wait > >>> for the inevitable crisis. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > >>> > >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >>> > >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > >> > > -- > George Rogato > > Welcome to WISPA > > www.wispa.org > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
