IPTV Trial

[NoonT]

Hi Edwin,
any words about how the IPTV trial going? When can we expect this
service to be expanded to more than mira mesa and tiera santa,
say...carmel valley.

Cheers,

[[e-mail]]

Post by NoonT
Hi Edwin,
any words about how the IPTV trial going? When can we expect this
service to be expanded to more than mira mesa and tiera santa,
say...carmel valley.
Cheers,

Is anybody using it? I certainly wouldn't pay a penny extra for it.
I've known about it ever since it was mentioned in this ng, and I've
checked it out twice. It's novel, but what's the point? Unless I'm
given the ability to record a program I can't think of any reason to use
it.

A computer makes for a lousy TV.

And even if I *were* inclined to use it:

1) I despise and distrust I.E. -- I would much rather be able to use
whatever browser *I* like.

2) Related to (1), I don't like having to use a proprietary plug-in.
Deliver the signal in an industry-standard format, so I can view it on
ANY Internet-enabled device -- and through a decoder device onto my TV.

3) Don't make me manually authenticate every danged time I try to
connect! Use a less obtrusive authentication method. In fact, why
require authentication at all? If you provide this service to all
customers, and only within the RR network, then what's the point of
authenticating? (Or is the plan to allow RR customers to view their
channels while at the office or on the road?)

What am I missing?

[Scott Lindner]

Post by ***@NOSPAMPUHLEEZschnapp.org
A computer makes for a lousy TV.

A computer makes for an awesome TV. When in the world are you making this
statement based on?

[from]

Post by Scott Lindner

Post by ***@NOSPAMPUHLEEZschnapp.org
A computer makes for a lousy TV.

A computer makes for an awesome TV. When in the world are you making this
statement based on?

I base it on the fact that I am not comfortable sitting at my desk. I
have tried watching video on my laptop and it is not comfortable.

A stationary, bigger tv is better.

That's my humble opinion.

[NoonT]

Post by from

Post by Scott Lindner

Post by ***@NOSPAMPUHLEEZschnapp.org
A computer makes for a lousy TV.

A computer makes for an awesome TV. When in the world are you making this
statement based on?

I base it on the fact that I am not comfortable sitting at my desk. I
have tried watching video on my laptop and it is not comfortable.
A stationary, bigger tv is better.
That's my humble opinion.

Most digital TV now a day has VGA input port so you can watch TV and
surf on the couch! I have no doubt that in a near future, there will be
no distinction between TV and computer. If you have a set top box at
home, it is a full fletch computer there.

I am only interested in the intial test result to see if TWC would plan
to go ahead with this free service as announced.

Cheers,

[JimBob]

NoonT wrote:
<snip>

Post by NoonT
I am only interested in the intial test result to see if TWC would
plan to go ahead with this free service as announced.

TWC :: 'free'

???

My money is on 'overpriced'

[Darren New]

Post by NoonT
If you have a set top box at
home, it is a full fletch computer there.

TiVo runs Linux. Plus, google for "Microsoft Windows Media Center Edition".

(PS, it's "fully fledged" or "full-fledged" :-)

[Scott Lindner]

Post by Darren New
TiVo runs Linux. Plus, google for "Microsoft Windows Media Center Edition".

I tried MCE on my HTPC I'm configuring right now. I ditched it for
Snapstream's Beyond Media instead. The UI and controls are a bit clunky in
comparison to MCE but there's a lot more capability especially with the more
robust plugins that have been developed for it. I've already replaced my
VCR, DVD player, and CD Player with my HTPC. As soon as digital high
definition tuner cards are available for the PC that allow for recording
I'll plunk on that and go with high definition digital cable and have one
sweet TiVo and beyond. What's awesome is that I made sure I got a video
card that support Svideo, Component, and DVI (converts perfectly to HDMI) so
the computer will naturally do progressive scan and line doubling regardless
what display I get. I hope to get a 1280p DLP soon. With that and a few
CODECs updates I'll be ready for any media format that comes at me. I love
it. I have DTS encoded DVDs but my receiver only decoded Dolby Digital. So
for the few that have DTS but not Dolby Digital in the past I had to listen
to in stereo. Now with a CODEC update I can listen to DTS and decode on the
HTPC and use the analog outputs to the pre-amp inputs on my receiver.

Anyway... this was more than I wanted to delve into. I mostly wanted to see
if there was some reason someone thought computers sucked as TVs. I was
wondering if D/A converters sucked compared to set top equipment or
something like that. Or maybe floating point conversions mangling the video
stream. Something specific that I haven't been able to personally observe
just yet. If this IPTV thing works out I might not need to get a tuner card
and subscribe to cable service. I could go straight to IPTV. Save me some
trouble and money.

Scott

[Scott Lindner]

Post by from
I base it on the fact that I am not comfortable sitting at my desk. I
have tried watching video on my laptop and it is not comfortable.

So the problem is the location of where you put your computer you want to
watch TV on. To me that's not a problem with IPTV but where you choose to
use it. I ask because I wanted to know specifically why since to me it
seems like a great idea.

Post by from
A stationary, bigger tv is better.

You can use your computer on a TV on any type. To me a monitor and TV are
no different except a TV includes a tuner. I have friends using $11,000 TVs
as a computer monitor and others using computer monitors as a TV.

Post by from
That's my humble opinion.

That's what I was after. If there was an indisputible technical fact that
I'm missing or if it is the way you feel about it based on the way you tried
using it. Thanks for posting the reasons.

Scott

[Daniel Damouth]

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 14:44:49 GMT, "Scott Lindner"

Post by Scott Lindner

Post by ***@NOSPAMPUHLEEZschnapp.org
A computer makes for a lousy TV.

A computer makes for an awesome TV. When in the world are you
making this statement based on?

I base it on the fact that I am not comfortable sitting at my
desk. I have tried watching video on my laptop and it is not
comfortable.

Computers don't have to be at desks. Mine is by my couch. I can sit
comfortably, legs outstretched on the low table that also suppots my
19" monitor, cordless keyboard on my lap, and also have my TV in
front of me beyond the table. Often I'm operating the computer while
paying half attention to the TV.

A stationary, bigger tv is better.
That's my humble opinion.

I watch TV shows on my computer all the time and I love it. One
advantage is that a monitor is much higher resolution than a normal
TV, which is good for DVDs and high-def downloads. Another advantage
is that it's closer to my face (I'm nearsighted). A third advantage
is that I have better control over the show when I'm playing a file
than when I'm watching a broadcast: I can stop, back up to re-view a
few seconds that I didn't hear well, randomly move around, etc.

One advantages of the TV over the monitor: the TV is better for
multiple people watching at the same time, because it's bigger. This
doesn't usually apply to me, because I am currently a hermit.

It's quite possible that I will never buy a dedicated TV again. Just
bigger computer monitors.

-Dan Damouth

[rtr]

Just one question about IPTV

Why?

rtr

Post by NoonT
Hi Edwin,
any words about how the IPTV trial going? When can we expect this
service to be expanded to more than mira mesa and tiera santa,
say...carmel valley.
Cheers,

[Edwin Kruse]

Hi,
The trial is going well- the bandwidth needs on the routers and our
pipes sure go up! The top - top management of TWC is watching us to
see how we're doing.

I haven't heard anything about increasing the scope of the trial yet,
but it could happen. I have a big router upgrade for the Carmel Valley
area about 6 months out- so I know the trial wouldn't expand to CV until
after that upgrade.

Customers seem to be using the technology. I used it quite a bit at
first, but have tapered off.



Edwin Kruse
Network Services Manager
TWC San Diego

Post by NoonT
Hi Edwin,
any words about how the IPTV trial going? When can we expect this
service to be expanded to more than mira mesa and tiera santa,
say...carmel valley.
Cheers,

[v***@despammed.com]

Post by Edwin Kruse
Customers seem to be using the technology. I used it quite a bit at
first, but have tapered off.

I'm in Tierrasanta. I used it a little when I first got the email, a day or
so into the trial I suppose...but I haven't used it since unless there's
something else on TV at the same time as a Padre's game and not always then
because I'm a channel flipper ! But anyways, I'm not too happy with the
performance and I HATE Realplayer. I go to bed every night wondering if God is
going to strike me dead for still having it on my PC.

[--Larry]

Post by Edwin Kruse
Hi,
The trial is going well- the bandwidth needs on the routers and our
pipes sure go up! The top - top management of TWC is watching us to
see how we're doing.
I haven't heard anything about increasing the scope of the trial yet,
but it could happen. I have a big router upgrade for the Carmel Valley
area about 6 months out- so I know the trial wouldn't expand to CV until
after that upgrade.
Customers seem to be using the technology. I used it quite a bit at
first, but have tapered off.
Edwin Kruse
Network Services Manager
TWC San Diego

Post by NoonT
Hi Edwin,
any words about how the IPTV trial going? When can we expect this
service to be expanded to more than mira mesa and tiera santa,
say...carmel valley.
Cheers,

I am in the trial area and considered playing with it but decided against
for 3 reasons:
3) there is already a cable connected TV in the computer room.
2) I read that I could NOT use the software to record the incoming signal
1) I had to install Real Player (RP).

I would have played with it, and maybe used it despite #3 and #2, but #1
was a show stopper. Ever since I installed RP on a Win98 system I refuse
to ever install RP again. RP insists on installing many unnecessary
modules and changing file associations without asking the user.

RR should either select another, less predatory player or assure the user
that only the necessary modules are installed and no other file
associations are changed. I doubt they will do either.

I have yet to find any web video important enough to convince me to install
RP on my XP system.

[Darren New]

Post by --Larry
I have yet to find any web video important enough to convince me to install
RP on my XP system.

Real Alternative plays .ra and .ram files, and doesn't hork up your
system like real Real does, just FWIW.

[Scott Lindner]

Real Alternative plays .ra and .ram files, and doesn't hork up your system
like real Real does, just FWIW.

That's an awesome tip!

[relic]

Post by Scott Lindner

Post by Darren New
Real Alternative plays .ra and .ram files, and doesn't hork up your
system like real Real does, just FWIW.

That's an awesome tip!

There's also a Quicktime alternative.

[Kenyon Ralph]

Post by relic

Post by Scott Lindner

Post by Darren New
Real Alternative plays .ra and .ram files, and doesn't hork up your
system like real Real does, just FWIW.

That's an awesome tip!

There's also a Quicktime alternative.

Real Player for Linux is actually better than the Windows version, I think.
Doesn't try to do all that tricky file association stuff and doesn't
install any unnecessary garbage (like the update checker and "message
center" on Windows).

[v***@despammed.com]

Post by Darren New

Post by --Larry
I have yet to find any web video important enough to convince me to install
RP on my XP system.

Real Alternative plays .ra and .ram files, and doesn't hork up your
system like real Real does, just FWIW.

Yeah Real Alt. is cool, but it doesn't work with the IPTV (or at least it didn't
for me). Plus over the last couple of years I've just decided to steer clear of
any Real files. Their quality is way below everything else.

[Scott Lindner]

Post by --Larry
I would have played with it, and maybe used it despite #3 and #2, but #1
was a show stopper. Ever since I installed RP on a Win98 system I refuse
to ever install RP again. RP insists on installing many unnecessary
modules and changing file associations without asking the user.

That's not exactly true. You can install RP without automatically changing
your file associations. The trick they play on you is how they hide the
automatic associations they pick for you. They show a list of four
associations that are not associated by default. You see the next button
and click it thinking you're safe. But you didn't notice the scroll bar.
If you scroll the list everything that wasn't displayed to you in those top
four items are selected by default.

There are other things. Ther'e sa registry setting to remove but when RP
starts it'll re add it. There's a hack to prevent this from happening.

Post by --Larry
RR should either select another, less predatory player or assure the user
that only the necessary modules are installed and no other file
associations are changed. I doubt they will do either.

I agree completely. RP is extremely intrusive and I see no reason why it's
not targetted for legal action.

Post by --Larry
I have yet to find any web video important enough to convince me to install
RP on my XP system.

I agree completely again.

Scott

[stevech]

Now tell me that TWC feels pressure to offer FIOS and I'll get excited.
But with the TWC monopoly here, it a'int likely.
My friends in Ventura County, CA are lovin' it. Verizon.

"without competition there is no excellence".

[Scott Lindner]

Post by stevech
Now tell me that TWC feels pressure to offer FIOS and I'll get excited.
But with the TWC monopoly here, it a'int likely.
My friends in Ventura County, CA are lovin' it. Verizon.

FIOS?

Come on now. We all know there are viable alternatives to the TWC monopoly
that's granted by the government and protected from competition by the
government. You see people posting about it all of the time. Surely you
haven't looked into the other cable company options available to you.

Post by stevech
"without competition there is no excellence".

What do you mean? TWC is the best in the region. The worst too. :P

[stevech]

You say: "We all know there are viable alternatives to the TWC monopoly"
Huh?
As if I have a 2nd choice in a cable TV company?
Or a comparably fast 2nd choice for RoadRunner?
Huh?

Post by Scott Lindner

Post by stevech
Now tell me that TWC feels pressure to offer FIOS and I'll get excited.
But with the TWC monopoly here, it a'int likely.
My friends in Ventura County, CA are lovin' it. Verizon.

FIOS?
Come on now. We all know there are viable alternatives to the TWC monopoly
that's granted by the government and protected from competition by the
government. You see people posting about it all of the time. Surely you
haven't looked into the other cable company options available to you.

Post by stevech
"without competition there is no excellence".

What do you mean? TWC is the best in the region. The worst too. :P

[Scott Lindner]

Post by stevech
You say: "We all know there are viable alternatives to the TWC monopoly"
Huh?
As if I have a 2nd choice in a cable TV company?
Or a comparably fast 2nd choice for RoadRunner?
Huh?

I'm mocking the people that flame me for being critical of TWC enjoying no
competition because of government regulations. It was a sarcastic post.

[Never anonymous Bud]

Using a finger dipped in purple ink, --Larry

Post by --Larry
1) I had to install Real Player (RP).

Check out RealAlternative.

OR Jet Audio.

[Scott Lindner]

Post by Never anonymous Bud
Check out RealAlternative.
OR Jet Audio.

You guys rock. I had no clue there was a way to NEVER have that Real Time
barbage on my computer. I can't wait to rip that crap off my computers. As
another poster noted, the RealTime media streams suck compared to the other
ones anyway. I don't know why they are still around. The QuickTime and WMP
implementations are much better.

Scott