What is wrong with TV these days!

[Audacity]

Originally Posted by jptheripper

It actually amuses me. I am 34, and rail against streaming and online media. I cant stand it, for tv, i just dont like the business model. Plus my internet connection stinks (1MB/s) so it is completely non0functional as well.

What specifically don't you like about streaming and online media business model?

[reggie14]

Originally Posted by jptheripper

It actually amuses me. I am 34, and rail against streaming and online media. I cant stand it, for tv, i just dont like the business model. Plus my internet connection stinks (1MB/s) so it is completely non0functional as well.

Like Audacity, I too am curious what you don't like about streaming. I think its great. In fact, I think its too good. I don't think its sustainable. I think content creators look at streaming revenue, including revenue from streaming deals with Netflix, as side income. If streaming becomes popular enough to seriously challenge traditional cable/satellite, I think prices will have to go way up. Somewhat similarly, I think prices will have to go way up for Netflix to air episodes shortly after they're broadcast. In the meantime, I think its great.

Also, 1MB/sec ought to be plenty fast to stream Netflix HD. 1Mbit/sec would be too slow, but 1Mbyte/sec should be more than fast enough.

[wayner]

I was recently on vacation in the caribbean and the DSL service that I had access to was 512 kbps. I was able to watch Netflix shows on it.

[jptheripper]

Sorry yes 1mbit/s. I always screw something simple up liuke that

And half that from vuze and its questionable.

The problem is the content:

1. If 500 channels of crap is too much, 100000 episodes of crap is worse (i dont use on-demand either,)
2. I most watch live tv (well, near live, time shifted). Like show ends at 9 we watch it at 915 (comskipped). Otherwise everyone at work ruins it.
3. I wonder how netflix would handle 10 million simultaneous streams for the super bowl. Until they figure that out, tv is not going anywhere.
4. Same thing with live news.

I am interested to see where house of cards will go. I like that change.

Until netflix/live tv timing syncs up, i will always choose live tv.

[Taddeusz]

A 1Mbit connection is pretty dang slow these days. I have cable Internet with their standard package and am supposed to get up to 15Mbit. I have had downloads at up to 1-2Mbyte/sec. Streaming of Netflix HD content works perfectly. It comes in handy when there are recording problems or the kid wants to watch something different

[wayner]

Originally Posted by jptheripper

3. I wonder how netflix would handle 10 million simultaneous streams for the super bowl. Until they figure that out, tv is not going anywhere.
4. Same thing with live news.

Handling live streaming is pretty easy for something like the SuperBowl as long as everyone is watching in real-time. You only have to send out one stream to the millions of viewers and you would likely use services like Akamai to distribute the load. Streaming of the NCAA B-Ball tournament is an example of this on a slightly smaller scale.

I am guessing that News will leave TV even sooner. I very rarely watch news on TV (I doubt that I am the only one) - I get my news from Google News, CNN.com, BBC.com, NHK.com etc. They have tons of streaming video on those sites - why wait until 6:30 pm to see what is going on? A news show is generally a talking head introducing video clips - I don't need the talking head, I can read the stories myself, and see the same clips that they show on TV. And live streaming of realtime events that everyone wants to see will be handled like I mentioned above for the Super Bowl

[jptheripper]

I agree on the news, except i watch for commentary. I already know what happened (google news). I want actual reporting, with research, etc..

And live streaming is great right until comcast throttles it b/c its on abc and they own nbc, but there is another thread for that.

My main issue is format. TV is the show, and show only. Streaming is the webpage, with all the crap and garbage around it, to get to the stream.

Even netflix, managing a queue for new shows , etc..

bah, get off my lawn.

[Taddeusz]

But in Netflix you don't have to manage a queue if you don't want to. Simply browsing to or searching for the shows or movies of your choice is sufficient.

[panteragstk]

Originally Posted by Audacity

Fringe is better than X-Files. There. I said it.

I really like both of those shows, but I was young when x-files started so I don't really remember if it was good or not. I've thought about trying to go back and watch the old episodes again, but don't want to spoil the memories. Let's just hope they don't make another x-files movie. The last one sucked big time.

Fringe is awesome though.

[pjpjpjpj]

Originally Posted by Audacity

I'm starting to understand why some people have a hate-on for Netflix: it makes it too easy for them to re-watch some of their much-loved shows for decades ago, and learning that those shows actually sucked was not welcome news.

+1, and same with Hulu. Just about every TV show from the 80s did NOT age well.

Not that I was a HUGE fan (though I watched it - I was like 10 at the time), but my wife watched an old episode of "Charles in Charge" a few weeks ago, and WOW, that had the worst acting I've ever seen. Scott Baio was the only person with any acting skills at all on that entire show, and there were about 6 other key characters in every episode.

[tvmaster2]

in reality, what's wrong with TV is the people watching it. If we request better programming, they will supply it.
If we do not, they will supply Snooki, as it is cheap.
I started a poll for BBC HD - 550 people looked at the poll - only 30 answered it.
There's your answer.
Now, I have to go and watch Jackass followed by Jersey Shore, and then get some news from Fox.

[jptheripper]

Originally Posted by tvmaster2

in reality, what's wrong with TV is the people watching it. If we request better programming, they will supply it.
If we do not, they will supply Snooki, as it is cheap.
I started a poll for BBC HD - 550 people looked at the poll - only 30 answered it.
There's your answer.
Now, I have to go and watch Jackass followed by Jersey Shore, and then get some news from Fox.

Well I am originally from the jersey shore, so i watch the jersey shore. Its entertaining. So is band of brothers.

I want better programming, but i don't feel the need to require that all programming is better programming. If the mtv crowd supplements viewership to justify "better" content, so be it. That is why we have dvrs. We can watch what we want, when we want.

I have never sat down in from of my tv (since i got replaytv/beyondtv/wmc/sagetv) and been unable to find some content that fit my entertainment needs at that moment. If you don't like realitytv, there are 100 other networks/content providers accessible via the chl+/- buttons, plus netflix, etc..

Basically all i mean is the content is not mutually exclusive. And b/c we have taken the steps to ensure we choose our content at our own time, it shouldnt matter.

*this comment is fair and balanced

[tvmaster2]

Originally Posted by jptheripper

Well I am originally from the jersey shore, so i watch the jersey shore. Its entertaining. So is band of brothers.

Basically all i mean is the content is not mutually exclusive. And b/c we have taken the steps to ensure we choose our content at our own time, it shouldnt matter.

*this comment is fair and balanced

do you email, write, call your content providers with requests or complaints? If so, that is good, regardless of what kind of programs you request. My point is that if we don't interact with the providers, it's hard to complain with what they send us.

[pjpjpjpj]

Originally Posted by jptheripper

I agree on the news, except i watch for commentary. ... I want actual reporting, with research, etc..

I think you are looking for a contradiction in terms. You want commentary (which is all you get) and you want reporting with research (of which you get little, if any).

National news TV today is akin to telling a racist joke at a Klan rally. You can be as outrageously slanted as you want, because your entire audience completely agrees with your viewpoint.

I get my national news online (which is slanted too, but at least I don't have to read opinions), and watch local news because I enjoy the personalities (and, you know, to see what the weather will be )

[jptheripper]

Actually, i watch both FOX and CNN. Try to listen to both sides.

[wayner]

Originally Posted by jptheripper

Actually, i watch both FOX and CNN. Try to listen to both sides.

And I listen to both kinds of music - Country and Western!

[jptheripper]

Originally Posted by wayner

And I listen to both kinds of music - Country and Western!

Hmm, i didn't realize either of those were kinds of music.

[tvmaster2]

BBC World news, and CBC - they TRY to be objective

[pjpjpjpj]

Originally Posted by jptheripper

Actually, i watch both FOX and CNN. Try to listen to both sides.

Tried that, couldn't stand how two channels could make every story completely different.
I'm so sick of politics, I don't even try to keep up with it anymore....

[wayner]

Originally Posted by jptheripper

Hmm, i didn't realize either of those were kinds of music.

That's a bastardized joke from Blues Brothers.