Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
@whiteflea: because most people get a box from their cable or satellite provider with a digital tuner so it's not a feature most people are asking for.
@whiteflea: I believe it's because they're all closed systems to greed rights and no one can put one in without handing all their profits over to the big three.
@diamonddnice: Well, see, these set-top boxes seem to me like an alternative to cable and satellite, as HTPCs are. Right now, the last touch my HTPC needs is a TV tuner, so that I can finally release myself from the onerous burden of a DirectTV contract. If I were in the market for one of these boxes, it would be for the same reason that I built my HTPC (except my HTPC doubles as my gaming rig, so bonus).
@whiteflea: i think most consumers are not like you. Most people don't have htpc and most don't see the need for it. And me personally, i don't even want one. i just want to watch my videos and music on my plasma. I don't want anything else on my computer there. And a tuner may add value to you but i'm not sure a tuner adds much value.
i'm not well versed in these things. But how does a tuner get shows. don't you still have to pay a cable company for a signal? Can you get specialty channels like showtime or setanta sports and stuff?
@diamonddnice: "But how does a tuner get shows. don't you still have to pay a cable company for a signal? "
No. Broadcast television is free and in HD in most areas, now. With a tuner card, you just hook it up to an antenna (you CAN hook most of them up to cable also, though, if you want to pay for cable). If you have a really new TV, you wouldn't need a tuner card (unless you want your computer to be a DVR for HD versions of network shows), because you could just hook the antenna up to the TV like the old days. If you have a slightly older TV (my 1080p, 42" LCD bought in 2008 is apparently old enough for this, sadly), then you need a digital tuner / tuner card. In this case (my case), you can either 1) buy a tuner card for an HTPC, 2) not watch network TV, or 3) buy a set-top digital tuner box (~$30), which for some reason is a totally separate device from a set-top media box even though it's something that can fit on a USB stick (many tuner cards are just little USB sticks, though these are lower quality than actual cards).
"Most people don't have htpc and most don't see the need for it."
You're right, but the same people that don't see a need for an HTPC also wouldn't see a need for a set-top box like the one in this article. Thus, it stands to reason that the people who want a set-top box are the same sort of people who want an HTPC. It just seems like common sense to me for a manufacturer of one of these set-top boxes to go "Oooh...if I put a tuner card in there, then this becomes a DVR on top of everything else - suck it, HTPC manufacturers!" And even though I already have an HTPC, it's really just my gaming rig hooked up to my TV. I would totally spend the $100 on a set-top box and another $30 on an antenna and have my gaming rig devoted totally to gaming and net-surfing if the set-top covered all of my needs. Admittedly, my need for over-the-air HD broadcasts is minimal, but certain shows my wife and I watch together (Big Bang Theory, for instance), cannot be watched online with any sort of regularity or convenience unless you are a pirate, which I'm very much against, and other shows we watch that CAN be accessed online (The Office, etc) are 1) not in HD if watched online and 2) now owned by Comcast, a business that really hates people watching ANYthing for free. So, that's why I'm currently shopping around for a tuner card.
@whiteflea:
"Broadcast television is free and in HD in most areas, now"
see that's the rub. other then 30 Rock i pretty much watch nothing on those channels. Viacom properties like MTV are not even in HD. But i like the foodtvs, discovery, ect. I watch mostly cable, and specialty cable channels Like showtime or FSC or Setanta for soccer games. And i didn't see those mentioned. So i'm not sure it would be perfect. I do get the dvr angle but then you have to consider this has no hard drive so the manufacture is probably thinking he'd have to add one. And doesn't #1, buy a tuner card for your pc accomplish the same thing in a less integrated form? Regardless i feel your pain on a need not being met. I don't listen to FM radio. i do like AM sports talk radio but Apple refuses to put an AM radio in ipod.
" the same people that don't see a need for an HTPC also wouldn't see a need for a set-top box like the one in this article. "
This is where i'd disagree. like i said. i like this. all i want is to stream video and music from a hard drive. And i don't want a HTPC for several reasons. And trust me i've seriously considered building them. Even researched different OS's and tuner cards. But one, it's time consuming, two, can't justify the cost now just to have it sit under my tv, three, noise, i don't want to hear the fans and drives, don't want to have to buy more remotes or recievers, they look large and ugly unless you buy an attractive case which is more money. Last, i've no interest in doing anything on my computer on my tv.
not to mention. i have a dvr, get most of my channels, Now i still hate the cable company but that's a different matter. i'm probably getting the WDtvhd but like the popcorn and the stuff with extra hard drives just add more things i don't need and elevate the price to a point i won't go. I think a tuner would be a similar item at least from the perspective of a buyer in my situation. i'm not saying your tuner idea is bad, or that nobody needs it, just offering an explanation as to why they may think they don't need to integrate one. All that being said, my cable company does have some way you can plug a hard drive into the cable box and access media. but i think it's only pictures. it's a start though. Sadly from your perspective it's still coming from a crappy cable company.
Good points. On the 'dumb pipes' angle, though, I've got to say that nobody who gets "just internet" service from the cable company pays $50. In NYC, Time Warner bills are like $75 for internet with no cable package. I feel like "future of TV" stories always overestimate the cost of a cable subscription. As part of a package with internet, it's really about $35 or $40.
The other thing is that this future full of "a la carte adults" may not materialize for one simple reason: Going a la carte (and buying content via iTunes, Amazon, whatever) is only economical for a single person. For a couple or family to do it, they'll likely pay more in individual micropayments than they would for a cable sub).
When you're in your 20s, waiting for 'Fringe' to hit Hulu or buying an episode over Xbox Live is convenient and cost-effective. But when you're 35 and need to sit the kids down in front of 'Dorah,' then 'Sponge Bob' and then 'Pooh,' those old-fashioned "all-you-can-eat" subs are going to be looking damned good.
@TheZolf: My Internet bill every month is $51.35, and that's for the mid-range speed (potentially 8k down, 600 up - actually about 6.5k down, 550 up). I could drop down to about 4-5k down, 400 up and only be paying $35.
My point being that it's entirely possible for people to pay just $50 for just Internet.
As far as the families with kids go, though, I think you're right. Tech-savvie parents like myself will have a media server with hundreds of hours of Dorah and the like, but most won't even in 10 years. Hulu and YouTube and others will move more toward having that programming, though, I guarantee it. My in-laws educational movie company already has a pretty nifty YouTube channel with just clips. I wouldn't be surprised if that was eventually replaced or augmented with some subscription or ad-based version.
I'm not sure why the hatefest on Comcast. I had directTV for a week and realized the OnDemand sucked compared to Comcast and that they had lied to me about being able to watch local sports that are offered on CSN if I got the MLB package. I ended up paying a huge fee to cancel that crap. meanwhile I can add and remove options or flat out cancel my cable anytime I want with Comcast. Plus its constantly improving with no cost to me. My biggest gripe with Comcast right now is if you want WiMax they make you use their USB modem. I have a lenovo and just wanted hand off my MAC to them. Went with Clear Instead. It would have been 15 dollars a month cheaper to go with Comcast, and I will probably change when the Clear.com 30 a month promotion ends in 6 months.
@owen.wall: 1) They've been raising their rates by around 8% each year.
2) They are leading the charge on getting rid of net neutrality so they can control what information you get and at what price.
3) They control an entire quarter of the ISP market.
4) They just bought NBC:Universal, meaning they control a good chunk of the information you receive and how you receive it.
why hasn't anyone mentioned vertical integration the same as oracle/sun is doing? or other aspects of this new venture beyond just the production of content and its delivery. i mean, i could see this giving them a strong arm when it comes to net neutrality arguments. (which won't be good for us) and then there is looming threat of monopolizing out other providers not the size of comcast or time warner. also, do you think they are going to be able to push companies like NetFlix around? i imagine this is going to turn into more than comcast hoping they bought a cash cow. i think they will start posturing soon and tangible changes will soon follow.
I think Brian Roberts just got sick of NBC covering every Notre Dame football game and this was his 15 billion dollar answer to the problem.
Considering the fact that Comcast has such a reach into American televisions, it seems highly unlikely that this deal would be a bad one for Comcast - it is certain to eventually be a money maker, one way or another. However, it is not a given that it will be approved.
No, Brian Roberts is not stupid. And I think he's aware of how consumers would love to prove some kind of evil plot at the big bad cable company.
I know it's popular to never trust the big corporate machine, but Comcast really hasn't given me any reason to hate them. In the last 6 months, my HD channel lineup has increased by like 70 channels, the on demand content has expanded, and my internet has gotten about 6 mbps faster, while my bill has stayed the same. I know that Comcast could theoretically choose to start screwing me, but I'm not under contract, and I'll just cancel if they do. More likely this deal will cause more behind the scenes changes to save them money, and the consumer won't notice the difference.
The knee-jerk big corporation hate is getting old, people. Substantiate your opinions!
@lolbrbnvm: I've had Comcast for over ten years now providing cable and internet, as well as phone for 2-3 years. I've had maybe 3-4 service issues that required technical attention in that timespan.
@Jeb_Hoge: Don't ruin our perfect image of Comcast as a bumbling fumbling corporation that can do no right, and yet somehow still makes massive amounts of dough every year!
Just for the record, I wouldn't mind having a Pandora-like pay option to skip the short adverts. Would a meager subscription fee be enough to offset advertising dollars?
@comrade_leviathan: I agree with everything you said about the reference. However Google comes up with about 207,ooo Results for IN and 3,130,00 for ON. So i figure On is the most regular usage.
12/18/09
I'm just sayin...
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
It's a shame that Comedy Central has approximately $0 in their budget most of the time, but this is absolutely the right move for them.
Bravo!
12/15/09
12/15/09
12/15/09
12/15/09
12/16/09
12/16/09
i'm not well versed in these things. But how does a tuner get shows. don't you still have to pay a cable company for a signal? Can you get specialty channels like showtime or setanta sports and stuff?
12/17/09
No. Broadcast television is free and in HD in most areas, now. With a tuner card, you just hook it up to an antenna (you CAN hook most of them up to cable also, though, if you want to pay for cable). If you have a really new TV, you wouldn't need a tuner card (unless you want your computer to be a DVR for HD versions of network shows), because you could just hook the antenna up to the TV like the old days. If you have a slightly older TV (my 1080p, 42" LCD bought in 2008 is apparently old enough for this, sadly), then you need a digital tuner / tuner card. In this case (my case), you can either 1) buy a tuner card for an HTPC, 2) not watch network TV, or 3) buy a set-top digital tuner box (~$30), which for some reason is a totally separate device from a set-top media box even though it's something that can fit on a USB stick (many tuner cards are just little USB sticks, though these are lower quality than actual cards).
"Most people don't have htpc and most don't see the need for it."
You're right, but the same people that don't see a need for an HTPC also wouldn't see a need for a set-top box like the one in this article. Thus, it stands to reason that the people who want a set-top box are the same sort of people who want an HTPC. It just seems like common sense to me for a manufacturer of one of these set-top boxes to go "Oooh...if I put a tuner card in there, then this becomes a DVR on top of everything else - suck it, HTPC manufacturers!" And even though I already have an HTPC, it's really just my gaming rig hooked up to my TV. I would totally spend the $100 on a set-top box and another $30 on an antenna and have my gaming rig devoted totally to gaming and net-surfing if the set-top covered all of my needs. Admittedly, my need for over-the-air HD broadcasts is minimal, but certain shows my wife and I watch together (Big Bang Theory, for instance), cannot be watched online with any sort of regularity or convenience unless you are a pirate, which I'm very much against, and other shows we watch that CAN be accessed online (The Office, etc) are 1) not in HD if watched online and 2) now owned by Comcast, a business that really hates people watching ANYthing for free. So, that's why I'm currently shopping around for a tuner card.
12/17/09
"Broadcast television is free and in HD in most areas, now"
see that's the rub. other then 30 Rock i pretty much watch nothing on those channels. Viacom properties like MTV are not even in HD. But i like the foodtvs, discovery, ect. I watch mostly cable, and specialty cable channels Like showtime or FSC or Setanta for soccer games. And i didn't see those mentioned. So i'm not sure it would be perfect. I do get the dvr angle but then you have to consider this has no hard drive so the manufacture is probably thinking he'd have to add one. And doesn't #1, buy a tuner card for your pc accomplish the same thing in a less integrated form? Regardless i feel your pain on a need not being met. I don't listen to FM radio. i do like AM sports talk radio but Apple refuses to put an AM radio in ipod.
" the same people that don't see a need for an HTPC also wouldn't see a need for a set-top box like the one in this article. "
This is where i'd disagree. like i said. i like this. all i want is to stream video and music from a hard drive. And i don't want a HTPC for several reasons. And trust me i've seriously considered building them. Even researched different OS's and tuner cards. But one, it's time consuming, two, can't justify the cost now just to have it sit under my tv, three, noise, i don't want to hear the fans and drives, don't want to have to buy more remotes or recievers, they look large and ugly unless you buy an attractive case which is more money. Last, i've no interest in doing anything on my computer on my tv.
not to mention. i have a dvr, get most of my channels, Now i still hate the cable company but that's a different matter. i'm probably getting the WDtvhd but like the popcorn and the stuff with extra hard drives just add more things i don't need and elevate the price to a point i won't go. I think a tuner would be a similar item at least from the perspective of a buyer in my situation. i'm not saying your tuner idea is bad, or that nobody needs it, just offering an explanation as to why they may think they don't need to integrate one. All that being said, my cable company does have some way you can plug a hard drive into the cable box and access media. but i think it's only pictures. it's a start though. Sadly from your perspective it's still coming from a crappy cable company.
12/15/09
12/07/09
12/04/09
12/04/09
The other thing is that this future full of "a la carte adults" may not materialize for one simple reason: Going a la carte (and buying content via iTunes, Amazon, whatever) is only economical for a single person. For a couple or family to do it, they'll likely pay more in individual micropayments than they would for a cable sub).
When you're in your 20s, waiting for 'Fringe' to hit Hulu or buying an episode over Xbox Live is convenient and cost-effective. But when you're 35 and need to sit the kids down in front of 'Dorah,' then 'Sponge Bob' and then 'Pooh,' those old-fashioned "all-you-can-eat" subs are going to be looking damned good.
12/04/09
My point being that it's entirely possible for people to pay just $50 for just Internet.
As far as the families with kids go, though, I think you're right. Tech-savvie parents like myself will have a media server with hundreds of hours of Dorah and the like, but most won't even in 10 years. Hulu and YouTube and others will move more toward having that programming, though, I guarantee it. My in-laws educational movie company already has a pretty nifty YouTube channel with just clips. I wouldn't be surprised if that was eventually replaced or augmented with some subscription or ad-based version.
12/04/09
12/04/09
2) They are leading the charge on getting rid of net neutrality so they can control what information you get and at what price.
3) They control an entire quarter of the ISP market.
4) They just bought NBC:Universal, meaning they control a good chunk of the information you receive and how you receive it.
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
Considering the fact that Comcast has such a reach into American televisions, it seems highly unlikely that this deal would be a bad one for Comcast - it is certain to eventually be a money maker, one way or another. However, it is not a given that it will be approved.
12/03/09
I know it's popular to never trust the big corporate machine, but Comcast really hasn't given me any reason to hate them. In the last 6 months, my HD channel lineup has increased by like 70 channels, the on demand content has expanded, and my internet has gotten about 6 mbps faster, while my bill has stayed the same. I know that Comcast could theoretically choose to start screwing me, but I'm not under contract, and I'll just cancel if they do. More likely this deal will cause more behind the scenes changes to save them money, and the consumer won't notice the difference.
The knee-jerk big corporation hate is getting old, people. Substantiate your opinions!
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
Right?
12/03/09
12/03/09
[www.youtube.com]
12/03/09
Just for the record, I wouldn't mind having a Pandora-like pay option to skip the short adverts. Would a meager subscription fee be enough to offset advertising dollars?
12/03/09
12/03/09
Or did you mean something else? I can't tell.
12/03/09
12/03/09
Google search actually has the words "in the cards idiom" as a suggested search, but "on the cards" doesn't auto-drop at all.
[dictionary.reference.com]
12/03/09
12/03/09
Good to know.
12/03/09