Aereo - OTA from the Internet - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 54 Old 03-02-2012, 05:35 PM
 
eric12341's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Don't know why anyone would want it anyway. Can get any local channel for free with a good antenna provided that they don't live in a bad reception area like I do.
eric12341 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 54 Old 03-02-2012, 10:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
olyteddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric12341 View Post

Don't know why anyone would want it anyway. Can get any local channel for free with a good antenna provided that they don't live in a bad reception area like I do.

They've added a TV antenna jack to the iPad? Wonderful news....
olyteddy is online now  
post #33 of 54 Old 03-04-2012, 02:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,010
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by olyteddy View Post

They've added a TV antenna jack to the iPad? Wonderful news....

This side of the pond they have : http://www.elgato.com/elgato/int/mai...Mobile.en.html

There is also this : http://www.elgato.com/elgato/int/mai...ivizen.en.html

(And neither need an internet connection or use your 3G data allocation)
sneals2000 is offline  
post #34 of 54 Old 03-17-2012, 11:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
keyboard21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric12341 View Post

Don't know why anyone would want it anyway. Can get any local channel for free with a good antenna provided that they don't live in a bad reception area like I do.

Maybe the included Basic DVR functions and 40 hours of record time.
keyboard21 is offline  
post #35 of 54 Old 03-17-2012, 11:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HDMI Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,070
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
For about $10 more per month you could get basic cable with ESPN etc... since you must have internet access to use this and most cable companies reduce the price of the internet when you subscribe to basic cable.
HDMI Guy is offline  
post #36 of 54 Old 03-17-2012, 01:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
keyboard21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMI Guy View Post

For about $10 more per month you could get basic cable with ESPN etc... since you must have internet access to use this and most cable companies reduce the price of the internet when you subscribe to basic cable.

With DVR functions? I think not
keyboard21 is offline  
post #37 of 54 Old 03-17-2012, 01:55 PM
Advanced Member
 
Rory Boyce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Fair Oaks, CA
Posts: 861
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
If a user is really using an individually assigned antenna in the array as Aereo indicates, it would naturally follow that disabling that single antenna should result in a loss of service to the assigned user and no one else. For that to be the case each antenna must separately feed a receiver to demodulate the signal received by the assigned antenna. It would follow that they will need thousands of receivers because one is required for every user. It would seem that if for example five thousand people are watching a given channel that five thousand receivers must be tuned to the same channel no matter how inefficient this would be. I seriously doubt that any of this is the case. It would follow that the entire premise of their argument is a fiction.

Rory
Rory Boyce is offline  
post #38 of 54 Old 03-17-2012, 04:04 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
bwam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Cumming,GA,USA
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rory Boyce View Post

If a user is really using an individually assigned antenna in the array as Aereo indicates, it would naturally follow that disabling that single antenna should result in a loss of service to the assigned user and no one else. For that to be the case each antenna must separately feed a receiver to demodulate the signal received by the assigned antenna.

Aereo has mentioned that a user isn't assigned a specific antenna. It may be antenna # 1002 Monday and antenna # 2537 Tuesday. "Purchasing" an antenna means using any one of those slots randomly over time.

However I have a hard time believing that those little thingies they call user antennas can in and of themselves receive signals. I tend to believe that it is the aggregate - thousands of those "antennas" collectively that act as one big antenna - in which case there would only be one cable\
eceiver leaving the antenna.

I notice from their pictures, that all these "antennas" are in place from the get go - that there are no gaps where these "antennas" have not been purchased. Their "antenna grid" has thousands of these little antennas already in place whether there are thousands of subscribers or not. A good test of their reception facilities would be to remove each little antenna from the grid that does not represent a client and only keep those little thingies on the grid that have actually been "purchased". Then one could see how well their reception works with gaps in the grid...

An antenna without a tuner is useless. So shouldn't the user be buying both an antenna and a tuner at their facilities?
bwam is offline  
post #39 of 54 Old 03-17-2012, 04:15 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
bwam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Cumming,GA,USA
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwam View Post

Aereo has mentioned that a user isn't assigned a specific antenna. It may be antenna # 1002 Monday and antenna # 2537 Tuesday.

The question also is how does Aereo track antenna assignments - via software? For example, can Aereo state which specific antenna a user has been assigned and is using when that user logs in? Can a log be printed that shows which antennas are in use by which users? And demonstrate how the signal from that one specific antenna travels to that one specific user out the Internet pipe...
bwam is offline  
post #40 of 54 Old 03-19-2012, 07:52 AM
Member
 
Mizzou!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 73
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think the real question is how they can change modulation scheme and delivery of the signal and charge for doing such and claim that they have no duty to pay the broadcaster.
Mizzou! is offline  
post #41 of 54 Old 03-19-2012, 09:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HDMI Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,070
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizzou! View Post

i think the real question is how they can change modulation scheme and delivery of the signal and charge for doing such and claim that they have no duty to pay the broadcaster.

+1
HDMI Guy is offline  
post #42 of 54 Old 03-19-2012, 09:27 AM
Senior Member
 
ADTech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: St Louis
Posts: 421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 27
I think the real question is how long it will take until they are sued into oblivion...

Tech support for Antennas Direct
ADTech is offline  
post #43 of 54 Old 03-20-2012, 05:36 PM
Senior Member
 
cgmv123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/20/a...-streaming-se/

Max Vrany
All opinions are my own unless otherwise specified.
I make no guarantees as to the accuracy of any information given.
GO Pack GO! On Wisconsin! Go Brewers!
cgmv123 is online now  
post #44 of 54 Old 03-21-2012, 07:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kenglish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Posts: 5,390
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 31
More B.S. from the comments on the story:

"mkhpalm 4 hours ago
Stifling innovation and squelching out competition sure is a funny way of saying "thanks" to us tax payers for buying them new equipment and antennas for the digital transition.

Ken English, Sr. Engineer, KSL-TV.
"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent the Company positions, strategies or opinions."
kenglish is offline  
post #45 of 54 Old 04-17-2012, 05:50 AM
Thread Ender
 
WS65711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Covington, LA OTA & Charter CableCard
Posts: 4,124
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 61
From CNN Money -

http://money.cnn.com/video/technolog.../?iid=HP_River

Don't ever make the MISTAKE of buying a Samsung TV..
They consider THIS
normal on a two month old set..
WS65711 is offline  
post #46 of 54 Old 05-24-2012, 12:10 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 45,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
From Broadcast Engineering

Quote:
Broadcasters lose round one against Aereo internet service

By Michael Grotticelli

Aereo, the hotly debated service that uses mini-antenna arrays to beam local stations to New York City viewers on the Internet, has won its first round in a court case against several of New York’s local stations and broadcast networks that are trying to stop the company from operating.

Aereo began streaming over-the-air television broadcasts in New York City a couple months ago in spite of a series of lawsuits.

In the first action in the case, a federal judge dismissed an unfair competition claim against Aereo. The company had argued that the anti-competition claim by broadcasters was actually an attempt to vindicate the broadcasters’ rights to control the performance of their copyrighted materials.

Because those rights are granted under federal law, the state law claim by the broadcasters was preempted and dismissed by U.S. District Judge Alison J. Nathan from the case pursuant to the Copyright Act.

Despite the initial victory, Aereo still faces a copyright claim by broadcasters next week in the same court.

“It’s disappointing,” a representative for Fox, one of the broadcasters whose claim was dismissed, told the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/). “But we look forward to our day in court to prove that Aereo’s unauthorized streaming of our content constitutes copyright infringement.”

Aereo, backed by media mogul Barry Diller, began streaming broadcast signals in March over the Internet to New York City residents for $12 a month. Major broadcasters sued to shut the service down, claiming copyright infringement and unfair competition. The broadcasters are not being paid for Aereo’s use of their signals.

Aereo uses micro-sized antennas to pick up television signals off the air and combines the signals with a software-based VCR. The company claims the service is no different from a subscribers purchasing a television antenna at Radio Shack.


'Better Living Through Modern, Expensive, Electronic Devices'

Ken H is offline  
post #47 of 54 Old 07-12-2012, 10:13 AM
Advanced Member
 
SowegaBowler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Albany, GA
Posts: 856
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
A N.Y. federal judge yesterday declined to issue a temporary injunction against Aereo. Read about it here:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/838060/hot-off-the-press-the-latest-tv-news-and-information/80820#post_22210864

Scott

Been there, done that, got the T-shirt...
Hot Off the Press / Philips and Magnavox DVD Recorders

SowegaBowler is offline  
post #48 of 54 Old 07-12-2012, 05:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ProjectSHO89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,539
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 60
She basically kicked it "upstairs".
ProjectSHO89 is offline  
post #49 of 54 Old 07-17-2012, 03:32 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
bwam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Cumming,GA,USA
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
This might be decided by John Roberts one day...
bwam is offline  
post #50 of 54 Old 08-30-2012, 04:18 PM
Member
 
if200's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 94
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
They are offering $80 for 15 months which seems reasonable if you get rid of your cable. My only concern is that they won't be in business that long. Since my brilliant building removed the antenna off the roof an inside antenna that works and isn't too large seems to be a pain. I bought a winegard flatwave at Costco which is small and light and works great except for the VHF channels of abc, wpix and pbs.

Worth the price for the dvr and being able to access it from my roku or pc.

BTW they say it is only for Apple products but if you have safari on your pc it will work
if200 is offline  
post #51 of 54 Old 06-28-2013, 05:50 AM
Advanced Member
 
nyctveng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location:
Posts: 776
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMI Guy View Post

For about $10 more per month you could get basic cable with ESPN etc... since you must have internet access to use this and most cable companies reduce the price of the internet when you subscribe to basic cable.

Basic cable with local channels cost anywhere from $10-$25. Now where in this country can one get a cable package for $20 that includes ESPN? License fees for ESPN suite of channels is around $7 per month from operator to programmer. Minimum $50 package required to get channels like ESPN, USA, TNT, etc.
nyctveng is offline  
post #52 of 54 Old 06-28-2013, 08:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jtbell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Clinton, SC
Posts: 3,822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I think he's talking about the difference between Internet-only service from a cable company, and Internet + "basic cable" which usually includes ESPN.
jtbell is offline  
post #53 of 54 Old 07-10-2013, 10:47 AM
Senior Member
 
ADTech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: St Louis
Posts: 421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Not surprisingly, a Boston station owner has sued Aereo in Boston (different judicial circuit than NY):

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-07-09/aereo-sued-by-hearst-tv-station-wcvb-in-boston-over-copyright
Quote:
Aereo Sued by Hearst TV Station WCVB in Boston on Copyrights

Aereo Inc., the online television service facing lawsuits by broadcast TV networks in New York for copyright infringement, was sued in Boston by a Hearst-owned television station over similar claims.

Hearst Stations Inc. said that Aereo has infringed the copyrights of its WCVB station by capturing its signals and retransmitting the programming to its subscribers without a license, according to federal court records.

“If Aereo is permitted to profit from the unauthorized retransmission of copyrighted television programming, WCVB will be deprived of existing and potential revenue streams from advertising and authorized retransmissions,” Hearst said in its complaint.

The broadcast TV networks, including CBS Corp. and Walt Disney Co.’s ABC, sued Aereo in New York in March 2012. U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan rejected the networks’ motion for an injunction that would have shut down the service, and a panel of New York appeals judges upheld that ruling in April. Immediately after that, Aereo announced plans to expand to Boston and other cities.

In May Aereo sued CBS Corp. (CBS:US) in New York after published reports said CBS might sue in Boston to try to shut down its service there. Aereo has filed a motion in New York to dismiss the networks’ suits, while the networks have petitioned the full appeals court to re-hear the arguments for an injunction.

Virginia Lam, a spokeswoman for New York-based Aereo, said the company declines to comment on the Boston suit.

WCVB produces more than 43 hours of original local programming a week from studios in Needham, Massachusetts, according to the court filing. Its shows include “Chronicle” and “On the Record.”

Hearst Stations is part of New York-based Hearst Corp.

The new case is Hearst Stations v. Aereo, 13-cv-11649, U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts (Boston).

To contact the reporter on this story: Don Jeffrey in New York at djeffrey1@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net

Tech support for Antennas Direct
ADTech is offline  
post #54 of 54 Old 07-10-2013, 05:00 PM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 12,555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 222
Continue discussion here: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1467819/official-aereo-discussion-thread/180#post_23515672

Since we've gone from a purely technical discussion to the same things being posted in that thread, I'm locking this one.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is offline  
Closed Thread HDTV Technical

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off