PhoenixDown
-- Wants FIOS
Premium
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY
clubs:  
| Just a matter of time..
streaming internet radio has taken off thanks to shoutcast and as more people are able to get 10+ meg DL on thier connections - we will see the same thing happen to video.
--
NYC Pagans | NYC Pagan Resource |
|
Wills
join:2001-01-03
Port Charlotte, FL
| What he says isn't wrong.
quote:
Want to deliver the SuperBowl or American Idol in HD in realtime to 10s of millions of simultaneous viewers ? Not in this lifetime without some breakthrough technology that hasnt been invented yet.
There is nothing here, said by him, that is incorrect. If it was possible to be doing this, we'd be doing it.
We aren't...
The guy is a pompous ass, and usually so full of himself it stinks, but he's not wrong on this one. |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| He's not wrong, but he didn't say anything. All he said was that if there was no new technological innovation (which is, I guess what we'll get if the telco's get their way) then with today's technology you can't stream HD video to 10's of millions at the same time. Well, maybe with I2, but it's a dumb discussion because there will be technological advances, and there already are piles of improvements yet to be implemented. Of course if you let the duopoly restrict innovators from being able to do this, then yes he would be absolutely correct. |
|
SandShark
So it goes
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-23
Santa Fe, TX
clubs:
1 edit | reply to Wills
He's a self-made pompous ass that can put his money where his mouth is. That makes him different than most other pompous asses. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| reply to Wills
quote:
Want to deliver the SuperBowl or American Idol in HD in realtime to 10s of millions of simultaneous viewers ? Not in this lifetime without some breakthrough technology that hasnt been invented yet.
Bold is the part I find likely incorrect. And if live American Idol broadcasts are all broadband video needs to be on par with traditional cable television, consider me unimpressed with the argument. |
|
peter_m
Premium
join:2005-07-13
Canada, QC
2 edits | reply to Wills
Well the part of "Not in this lifetime without some breakthrough technology that hasn't been invented yet" pretty much covers all his bases. He will be right in all cases but he obviously is saying it WON'T happen. And like the original posting says, he is kissing up to cable companies.
The problem is that this breakthrough will probably come some time in the future... My personal opinion is that we will see it in this life time.
He probably just wants something from the big cable companies and just needs to sound credible to them. Has nothing to do with being technically right or wrong. Too bad he is arrogant about it. |
|
GigahertZ420
join:2001-10-02
Fairbanks, AK
| reply to Wills
we don't need breathrough technology to deploy video to tens of millions of customers. We just need the last mile providers to get off their asses and implement a minimum of XX (double digit) MB download speeds.
If were talking HD streams then yes, we need signifcantly more investment. If we can get away with standard resolution video we could implement quite literally now in several markets.
The only one's even remotely capable of doing this is Verizon. |
|
chemaupr
join:2005-06-06
Alexandria, VA
1 edit | Wrong Audince Cuban!!
People that see broadband video are not looking to see Idol Live or the Super Ball. This is a whole new different way to see video and a new and diff audience. I probably see 70% of my news online. I’m not interested in sticking to my TV at 6pm/7pm. When I’m ready and at any time during the day I will go to MSNBC or CNN … for my news… There is limited programming offering (comedy, music video, some shows) but it just keeps increasing.
He is right, but he is completing loosing sight or NOT??, as many other exec, of the dynamics and audience of broadband video. Many of broadband video/tv seekers are not interested in HDTV or PPV programming… they just one simple and free entertainment and that is what they DO NOT WANT???? |
|
Seaboogers
join:2004-11-01
Sarasota, FL
| Broadcast.com
Isn't he the one that sold broadcast.com to yahoo (for $5 billion)...maybe I'm wrong...but wasn't that streaming video over the internet...even before "broadband" made it to the big time so to speak not to mention about 8 years before even 2Mb was the "fastest" pipe available to consumers? |
|
op
join:2005-07-16
Smyrna, DE
| Bit the hand that feeds you
Well at least he's being smart to get cozy with the cable companies to ride on there backs to get his product out untill he bits them in there ass. I can't beleave Roberts with all that business experience can't see that Cuban is going to turn on him.  |
|
backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2 | reply to GigahertZ420
Re: What he says isn't wrong.
agreed...
most people don't have high def sets yet so why do they need to stream high def? normal would be fine thanks |
|
RodTag
join:2003-02-05
Kaufman, TX
| Wrong!
People want to watch what they want and when. Cuban is trying to put the padddles to a corpse. He has a business plan to be the purveyor of content and litter the content with ads to beef his pocket.
We want content how, when and where with as little cost. The American spirit - if money can be made, it will be created. We will have good live IPTV and soon. Cuban is a fool for posting his comments on the vehicle he condemns. |
|
grandpinaple
join:2006-01-03
New York, NY | Who is this idiot?
And why does he have a pulpit. |
|
amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
clubs:
| dude has a point
but this quote is a bit misguided:
"The reward for connecting a PC to an HDTV isnt worth the hassle and that wont change for years. Dare i say, not even in 10 years, if ever."
...one word: Gamers. I think it'd be worth it to game on a huge high def screen. Sure most don't want to see lo-fi video on a hi-fi screen.. like youtube, well no kidding.
...what about a downloaded netflix type movie though? I would hook up an HTPC in a second if I could rent super hi-fi movies for playback on a home theater setup.
Video across the net, in realtime, is a problem. It is still clunky on current technology. 350kbps isn't "Dvd quality" though... it's barely equal to VHS IMO...
Hate to say it, but analog broadcast is still one of the best solutions, hands down, for video. Even with a high def signal, it is still entirely possible to do in analog form. Granted, it fell flat because all the computer geeks came along and wanted to digitize it (HDTV), compress the ever living life out of it, and then glean a few more channels out of the available (analog) bandwidth. It's 2006 and besides a few channels on cable, a few on sat's, it's still taking awhile to transistion to an all digital signal, let alone high def channels.
Sadly, sometimes re-MPEG-ing video does terrible things to it, and when it finally gets to cable, gets re-MPEG'd again, the color shifting, jitter, and resolution are worse than a 10 year old VHS that's been rented a thousand times...
The other problem with video online, is the notion of "streaming" ...well no kidding, you cant put a cruise ship (high def) on a stream (a few megabits of current avg. cable modem speed...).
If everyone had 100 Megabit fiber, or faster, it might be possible. As it is now, we already have solutions in place for real time delivery of smooth motion, full screen, wide screen, digitized or analog, high definition television... Satellites, and cable tv. Unless you have guaranteed links in place, real time high def is a joke. Video conferencing is tricky enough on the 'net, Internet2 solved some of those problems. ...Gee I wonder why.
So, this guy might be right about a couple things, but he has totally ignored internet2's accomplishments in the world of realtime video through IP networking. |
|
GigahertZ420
join:2001-10-02
Fairbanks, AK
| reply to RodTag
Re: Wrong!
said by RodTag  :Cuban is a fool for posting his comments on the vehicle he condemns. This is a great post right here. Cheers to you for summing up his BS in a single sentence...  |
|
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
 ·AT&T Midwest
 ·Comcast
| reply to Karl Bode
Re: What he says isn't wrong.
said by Karl Bode : quote:
Want to deliver the SuperBowl or American Idol in HD in realtime to 10s of millions of simultaneous viewers ? Not in this lifetime without some breakthrough technology that hasnt been invented yet.
Bold is the part I find likely incorrect. And if live American Idol broadcasts are all broadband video needs to be on par with traditional cable television, consider me unimpressed with the argument. I agree Karl
Broadband is a very young technology when you think about it. The first homes were being outfitted with broadband back in 1995. In 1996 is when @Home really started deploying to home in major cities. Gee, thats only 10 years ago. Who knows what will come in the next 10 years or 50 years for that matter.
He is right that HDTV is growing. People want to see more and more broadcasts of shows in high quality picture and sound. He is also right that we can't do that right now to millions of american homes over existing broadband. However, there are solutions that are being deployed such as fiber. New technology is on the horizon that will make bringing these things into the home a reality in the coming years.
Just not right now....
On a side note, am I the only one who actually admires Mark Cuban? True, he may be someone who overinflates himself, but the guy has a great business sense to him. Plus, I think of him as a pretty good entertainer.
Just my .02 cents.
--
My Domain
Nightfall's Hockey and Life Journal |
|
LBDSL
Lightning Bolt
VIP
join:2002-01-07
Auburn Hills, MI
| reply to Seaboogers
Re: Broadcast.com
said by Seaboogers :Isn't he the one that sold broadcast.com to yahoo (for $5 billion)...maybe I'm wrong...but wasn't that streaming video over the internet...even before "broadband" made it to the big time so to speak not to mention about 8 years before even 2Mb was the "fastest" pipe available to consumers? Broadcast.com was the first/leader in broadcasting live AUDIO over the net, and yes he and a partner (David Wagner) sold it to yahoo, for 5-6 Billion
--
Lightning Bolt Technologies |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | reply to Karl Bode
Re: What he says isn't wrong.
Anyone besides me see irony in the technical quality increasing while the program quality decreases at an even faster rate? If I want "reality" I'll look out my window.
Cuban's a tool, but until someone figures out how to efficiently broadcast real HD content to millions of Internet receivers at a time at a cost comparable to current television he's right. Even cable companies have come to this realization, pushing their digital distribution deeper into the network to save bandwidth. Broadcast technology (yeah, even good old OTA) is far superior to individual connections to each receiver since it costs the same to transmit to one viewer as it costs for ten million. Imagine HBO having to run a separate cable to every subscriber. That's essentially what we've got now for Internet video. It is grossly inefficient.
True multicast would help. Where'd that end up anyway?
edit: word order
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
drslash
Goya Asma
Premium
join:2002-02-18
Marion, IA
| Cuban is selling
Cuban is selling. He is looking for buyers. I guess he has HDNet. Looks like another cable channel to me. What have his recent published comments said? I can't tell, they are all over the board. He speaks and acts like he is a regular guy. However, a regular guy does not own HD equipment because the HD content is a monthly charge that he does not want to pay for. Does he really think his tiny blog audience is at all interested in watching Dan Rather do news stories in HD? That's a joke.
--
Save water...drink beer! |
|
bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA
| reply to Ahrenl
Re: What he says isn't wrong.
I have the idea on how to broadcast the Superbowl without clogging the entire internet with everyone trying to connect to server banks streaming but I have yet to find someone to work with. Ironically I emailed Mr. Cuban two days ago and now it appears in a blog....
I can get it to work if I had three smart people and a bucket of cash. Instead I would prefer to get a utility patent and probably have some big oligopoly buy it up (like Network television).
It is simple solution too.
Just my 2 cents...Flame Lightly |
|
