Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Are there any companies that...

2»

Comments

  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 12,474 Mod ✭✭✭✭icdg


    Play the ball not the man please. You can argue against posts but please don't attack posters.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,461 ✭✭✭✭watty


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    In some people's eyes Kris. Technology can explode overnight - and that's what's going to happen. And Watty - which one of us needs to get out more?:)

    No. Technology doesn't explode over night unless it's Broken

    I posted earlier about a system I designed and tested for apartments that on two coax per outlet could deliver
    • UPC Cable (TV, Broadband, phone and shortly IPTV/VOD)
    • Digiweb Metro (Broadband + phone)
    • Terrestrial: FM Radio, Dab, Analogue TV and Digital TV
    • Satellite: Four Satellite positions with Sky & Freesat
    I recommended it have also 2x Cat5e for FTTC, FTTH, VDSL2, ADSL and/or eircom/magnet services etc.

    That gives 100% choice to the Apartment owner/Tenant.

    Your posts are just ill-informed rant about the value of Broadband vs Broadcast. Broadband costs money to receive. Versions that have IPTV/VOD are much more expensive than Sky and always will be. UPC's IPTV/VOD next year will be a premium service. Over 85% of broadcast content can be viewed without subscription. It's 10,000 times at least cheaper to deliver than real IPTV/VOD.
    Broadband and Broadcast are complimentary. Convergence is not about replacing Broadcast with IPTV. But Convergence is about TVs and setboxes with Real Broadcast and Broadband support, integrated in one GUI.

    I've done development on a very Nice Motorola HD PVR that has Terrestrial or cable tuner and ethernet for Internet and dedicated IPTV/VOD integrated into the Broadcast TV EPG/Planner. That's convergence. But unlike Broadcast only, it will never be free. About 10% to 20% will never sign up to subscription TV, broadcast or Broadband/IPTV/VOD based.

    Current "free" TV over internet is not true IPTV or true VOD and never will be. It's rubbish and a technical dead end. Magnet, Verizon and UPC have real IPTV/VOD that can deliver true HD. But it won't ever be free.

    I get out and I know what real Families, teenagers, children and adults want. I design this stuff, so I know what is possible and what is wishful thinking. Broadband won't be free in foreseeable future. An Internet that supports reliable HD IPTV over public Internet may never exist. Do the sums on data transit costs and QOS. Real IPTV and VOD for foreseeable future is an addon product on your ISP's private network at a premium price using local video servers (BT vision servers at exchanges, Cable such as Virgin or UPC at the CMTS fibre fed cabinets).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    watty wrote: »
    I get out and I know what real Families, teenagers, children and adults want.

    That makes two of us Watty. I have three adult children, some 30-odd nieces and nephews, and it is truly fascinating to see the diversity of their requirements. it is actually astonishing TBH. An insight into the future as it were.:)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    STB wrote: »
    What I said was that a management company of an apartment complex should not restrict their apartment owners and dwellers to a PAY ONLY television service no matter HOW it is delivered.

    What you actually said (from your earlier post):

    "Using cable for broadband over its traditional use for television is tail wagging the dog scenario. Thats not why apartments are prewired in the first place. They are prewired for TV. There are plenty of methods for broadband delivery".


    Or, in plain language, restrict a platform to what it was originally designed to deliver. Madness. The platform that you continually castigate is (after Casey Cablevision in Dungarvan) is the provider of the fastest broadband in the state (barring FTTH).

    Do you ACTUALLY advocate preventing such a company from developing such innovative technology? And an ACTUAL alternative, independent, phone network? i'm now paying less for my TV, Internet, and phone (together) than what I was paying for a phone a few short years ago. Thank God for convergence.

    It's mind-blowing to see this even SUGGESTED in the first instance.

    Regarding apartments, I know an apartment owner who had a FTA system installed for several years, and the apartment is now being supplied by (I presume) UPC with all their services.

    The residents, according to him, are delighted with the change. Different strokes for different folks.

    Myself? in my early 50s; used to watch a lot of Telly and use Ceefax, Aertel, etc. Not so much nowadays. I reckon i would use the Internet more. The introduction of DVRs has made things so easy regarding TV.

    Don't get me wrong, the option of FTA will be good for some people. But there ain't half some shyte on it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,178 ✭✭✭STB


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    What you actually said (from your earlier post):

    "Using cable for broadband over its traditional use for television is tail wagging the dog scenario. Thats not why apartments are prewired in the first place. They are prewired for TV. There are plenty of methods for broadband delivery".


    Or, in plain language, restrict a platform to what it was originally designed to deliver. Madness. The platform that you continually castigate is (after Casey Cablevision in Dungarvan) is the provider of the fastest broadband in the state (barring FTTH).

    Do you ACTUALLY advocate preventing such a company from developing such innovative technology? And an ACTUAL alternative, independent, phone network? i'm now paying less for my TV, Internet, and phone (together) than what I was paying for a phone a few short years ago. Thank God for convergence.

    It's mind-blowing to see this even SUGGESTED in the first instance.

    Regarding apartments, I know an apartment owner who had a FTA system installed for several years, and the apartment is now being supplied by (I presume) UPC with all their services.

    The residents, according to him, are delighted with the change. Different strokes for different folks.

    Myself? in my early 50s; used to watch a lot of Telly and use Ceefax, Aertel, etc. Not so much nowadays. I reckon i would use the Internet more. The introduction of DVRs has made things so easy regarding TV.

    Don't get me wrong, the option of FTA will be good for some people. But there ain't half some shyte on it.

    You can talk about the advantages of bundled products all you like. Not allowing cable companies exclusive service contracts is little to do with preventing "a company from developing such innovative technology". It is consumer protection against having no choice but subscription TV. Allowing a Pay only operator in regardless of whether the offer threeplay fiveplay fiftyplay etc is a no no if it is to the detriment of not allowing free/non pay services.

    I know plenty of apartment owners that have had problems with TV supply companies and the EXCLUSIVE contracts they will only work under (as does google). As do the Irish Competition Authority (TCA). Infact the TCA were so inundated with complaints they issued a guidance note on the matter not so long ago. I think you may understand the point I have being trying to get through if you read the following.

    2009-08-14 Pay-TV Exclusivity Guidance Note.pdf (application/pdf Object)

    This is the reason I said it is NOT a very good idea to allow any such private company into your complex. Cable companies will not go in unless it is worth their while after all! Certainly the experience in the US is the same and it is infact illegal for cable companies to have such exclusive contracts. Whilst Wattys suggestion for a system that does all is an ideal scenario its cost prohibitive, most management companies need to make a choice that offers choice and more importantly one that allows access to non pay services.

    As regards FTA which is in your words "shyte" you are talking from a personal viewing point AS the general consensus does not seem to be that way with 9 out of the 10 most channels watched in Ireland are actually free to air channels (whether they are watched FTA or by the ill informed who pay for these FREE channels) . Hence for the majority their viewing habits are adequately served. Something UPC or Sky might not want to hear but good news for consumers many of whom do not realise that they need not subscribe to PAY companies. The forthcoming budget isnt going to bring any good news after all.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 12,474 Mod ✭✭✭✭icdg


    Can we maybe keep some of the heat that recent posts have generated down please. I'm reluctant to close a thread about an interesting topic but I want to see less of the attacking and stress I'm going to close this thread and people can continue it via PM.

    This is the second warning I've given and it'll be the last.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,679 ✭✭✭Freddie59


    icdg wrote: »
    Can we maybe keep some of the heat that recent posts have generated down please. I'm reluctant to close a thread about an interesting topic but I want to see less of the attacking and stress I'm going to close this thread and people can continue it via PM.

    This is the second warning I've given and it'll be the last.

    Understood, ICDG.

    STB, I've now asked you to clarify this statement on three occasions:

    "Using cable for broadband over its traditional use for television is tail wagging the dog scenario. Thats not why apartments are prewired in the first place. They are prewired for TV. There are plenty of methods for broadband delivery".


    You still have not.

    Are you standing by the belief that platform owners/operators (whoever they may be) should be prevented from developing additional (cutting edge in some cases) services on their existing platforms.

    If so, why?:confused:

    This has nothing to do with exclusivity agreements.

    I can't wait to hear the explanation.:)

    And BTW I said 'half some shyte'. Yes there are a number of reasonable channels on it, but nothing that comes close to Sky/UPC. It is being promoted as something that can replace them. It cannot. Full stop.


  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 12,474 Mod ✭✭✭✭icdg


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    Understood, ICDG.

    Apparently not.

    Freddie59, STB, you can continue this via PM if you want. Thread's gotten too heated at this stage. When things are calmer maybe someone can start a thread on convergence. Preferably not in this forum - Broadcasting might be a better bet.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement