djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA | reply to benc
Re: TV on a Laptop?
Lots of people watch movies on video iPods. The screen on the touch or iphone is pretty decent for personal video viewing. |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | reply to benc
The problem is that if you have better quality, then the mobile phone's battery consumption becomes too high- this is why they can't just use existing OTA signals. |
|
benc
Premium
join:2007-06-17
Glen Carbon, IL
 ·Charter Pipeline
 ·Future Nine Corpor..
·Callcentric
 ·AT&T Midwest
| reply to wierdo
said by wierdo  :It wouldn't look very good on a laptop screen. The individual channels don't have a high enough bit rate. I didn't think of that, but you're right.
To get a good enough bit rate you'd need lots of speed, which isn't available on mobile networks.
I guess TV through a mobile really is almost useless. |
|
wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
| reply to benc
said by benc :If this means using a mobile as a method to show TV on your laptop, then I don't see what's so bad. After all, even the smallest laptop screens are much larger than the screens on mobiles. However, if all you can do is watch TV on that tiny 2-3" screen, then there's little to no point at all. It wouldn't look very good on a laptop screen. The individual channels don't have a high enough bit rate.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word.  |
|
benc
Premium
join:2007-06-17
Glen Carbon, IL
·Charter Pipeline
·Future Nine Corpor..
·Callcentric
·AT&T Midwest
| If this means using a mobile as a method to show TV on your laptop, then I don't see what's so bad. After all, even the smallest laptop screens are much larger than the screens on mobiles.
However, if all you can do is watch TV on that tiny 2-3" screen, then there's little to no point at all. |
|
