23 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

One of the biggest channels that drive cable or satellite subscriptions, the sports network ESPN, has just announced that it will now sell its channels as a stand alone streaming service.

For those sports fans who have been eager to "cut the cord," this is a godsend. Now if only HBO were to hop on this bandwagon (or start releasing content through a service like Hulu), the world can cut its TV bill in half with zero remorse!


Huzzah!

EDIT: It turns out HBO plans on doing this in 2015 as well, sounding something bey close to a death toll for cable/satellite as we know it today.

[Fast Jimmy]

This might be one of their biggest moves.

This might be the death of cable.

[convergecultist3]

For those sports fans who have been eager to "cut the cord," this is a godsend. Now if only HBO were to hop on this bandwagon (or start releasing content through a service like Hulu), the world can cut its TV bill in half with zero remorse!
Huzzah!

HBO has already said they plan to do so in April of this year, standalone streaming service that is. You can catch most old hbo shows on amazon prime as well.

[Fast Jimmy]

HBO has already said they plan to do so in April of this year, standalone streaming service that is. You can catch most old hbo shows on amazon prime as well.

What HBO is doing stand alone this year?!

It's just as the prophecy foretold...

[AutumnWitch]

Man I love 2015 already.

Cable can die screaming.

 

I personally want cable companies to stay around. Although I do have issues with their business practices (no worse than most top tier companies tho) they still are usually the only company to offer the best internet speeds. DSL and all that crap is slow compared to over cable internet. Until there are more companies that can support the infrastructure that cable does as far as internet speeds go, I will still be depending on them. 

[Fast Jimmy]

I personally want cable companies to stay around. Although I do have issues with their business practices (no worse than most top tier companies tho) they still are usually the only company to offer the best internet speeds. DSL and all that crap is slow compared to over cable internet. Until there are more companies that can support the infrastructure that cable does as far as internet speeds go, I will still be depending on them.

Yet due to zero competition between themselves, they overcharge for their internet services and can get away with not investing in their networks to offer faster speeds or even basic service to more rural areas.

This won't kill the telecom giants, but it will begin to cripple the cable TV model, that's for sure.

[AutumnWitch]

Yet due to zero competition between themselves, they overcharge for their internet services and can get away with not investing in their networks to offer faster speeds or even basic service to more rural areas.

This won't kill the telecom giants, but it will begin to cripple the cable TV model, that's for sure.

 

 

You know you say this but I have lived in some ungodly rural areas in both the UK & US and have been able to get cable. In these places I was NOT able to get DSL tho. (Albeit this was about ten years back.)

 

I also don't mind cable telly now. The last five years it has got immensely better with tonnes of on demand and being able to access them 24/7 from any internet connection.

 

I am not saying they aren't screwing the hell out of us or anything but I like their products and their stability. The ONLY thing I really don't like is there is still no "a la cart" channel choosing but even saying that there are some channels here they we can hand pick one at a time now.

 

But I hear you. They are a monopoly in most areas and things do have to change.

[TheChosenOne]

One of the biggest channels that drive cable or satellite subscriptions, the sports network ESPN, has just announced that it will now sell its channels as a stand alone streaming service.

For those sports fans who have been eager to "cut the cord," this is a godsend. Now if only HBO were to hop on this bandwagon (or start releasing content through a service like Hulu), the world can cut its TV bill in half with zero remorse!


Huzzah!

EDIT: It turns out HBO plans on doing this in 2015 as well, sounding something bey close to a death toll for cable/satellite as we know it today.

[FraQ]

Welcome news! I hope alot of other networks follow suit. Especially HBO and AMC!

[SlottsMachine]

*Lives in Canada*  *Doesn't get ESPN*

[SlottsMachine]

Yeah, at least TSN is better than Sportsnet. 

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

Am I crazy, or was this thread not originally "BSN now a standalone service?"

 

'Cuz that would be funny.

[Fast Jimmy]

You actually make a good point, cable is a legacy system. Legacy systems usually truimph in areas that are not that technological advanced. These are be it houses, whole areas and what not. It is just simpler to set up as some of these systems still operate on a protocol that does not utilize internet bandwith at all. They are systems that use satellite transmission to exchange data from one place to another.

My ideal set up for a cable replacement, is an andriod type box that completely eliminates the dependency that regular cable has. Channels are completely replaced by apps that can be downloaded for a fee and in this way the user would have control over the scheduling,quality,the roster(without relying on packs) and the overhead that the hardware brings. An software update would just be a matter of patching it, however such a system would be really dependent on internet infrastructure and I am not sure if the world is ready for that transition yet.

I don't think it is a question of format or presentation, but bandwidth. Sending one stream of programming is much different than allowing each user to select their own content at any given time. It's a carryover from the antenna era, but the reason cable companies aren't stepping up to an all-streaming model is because it is more expensive for them to do so.

I think laying fiber optic cable is the best way to expand out fast speed internet, so in that regard the telecom companies can keep doing that (albeit at a faster rate, given they are getting competition from UVerse and Google Fiber). Once we have TVs all being released with more interactive programming and interface, I'm sure streaming services will take the cake over the standard cable model.

[Fast Jimmy]

Well it reiterates the point of the legacy systems. Legacy systems usually take advantage of the limited technology that is there, which would make sense cause satellite systems are less cheaper than an internet based systems at that point in time(cause old hardware usually goes up in price). The question comes on separating the user from the hardware. A station like netflix does exactly that but in result doesn't give the same experience that a TV would give. If there was a service that could bridge the gap between television as a service and actual cable then it would hit the gold mine in my opinion(although the execution of such a product would need to be at a amazing.)

One thing I think needs to be factored in is passive selection. Let me explain...

We all own movies and/or TV seasons usually. We can flip them on any time we wish. Yet how many times have we watched Lord of the Rings on TV, with full commercials, just because it was on? Or how many times would we listen to a song on the radio we normally wouldn't care about just because it was on?

It is much different to say "I am going to go onto Netflix and watch an episode of Big Bang Theory" versus turning on the TV and watching a marathon of it on syndication. Same for news or sports, where people turn on football because it's Sunday, not necessarily looking for a particular matchup like Cowboys vs. Packers.

I think a TV version of Pandora, where the user can just flip on the service and have choices be selected for them (with obviously the option to watch selected items as well) may be the ideal set up. Hulu is somewhat close to this, where it will automatically switch to the next episode unless the user chooses otherwise, or will move to another show if it moves through all episodes. If the selection could truly be random, with previous "likes" and selections guiding the choice process, I think this would actually be the best format. But that's just me.

The other question is do we need cable at all? Can't the idea of cable just be eliminated? It's archiac and they are better ways of presenting the data right about now. Which is a question I am not able to ask right about now because of the weak and inconsistent internet infrastructure.

I agree - at this juncture, cable is moving towards more benefit as a physical infrastructure than a service, as is exemplified by one of its most popular channels moving to a stand alone model. I'm curious what the future holds in the coming years.