AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Home Theater Computers › Intel's New "WMC" Alternative?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Intel's New "WMC" Alternative?

post #1 of 22
2/14/13 at 6:00pm
Thread Starter 
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6748/anands-thoughts-on-intel-tv-initiative
Quote:
What Is It?

At a high level Intel's unnamed TV play seems to work like this. Intel negotiates deals with content providers, said content lives on a server farm somewhere (likely running tons of Xeons courtesy of mother Intel). Using a box that Intel will sell you, you'll get access to this content over the Internet. The box will run an OS and software layer both developed by Intel. The content will include live TV, traditionally only available via a cable TV subscription. The box Intel will sell you won't act as a traditional PVR/DVR, instead you'll be able to activate a catch-up feature to pull down older episodes after they air, as well as live TV. How far back you'll be able to catch up will depend on the content license, it's technically feasible to go back as far as you'd like - but not all content owners will allow it. Intel's service will also include video on demand features to fill this gap. The goal is to provide one platform where you can get access to everything: live TV, episodes/content that have already aired, and even older content through VoD.

The content will be bundled together in some form. This isn't a purely á la carte TV service, but rather bundles put together by Intel Media rather than your cable company. Think cable channel/network bundling, but perhaps more granular than you're used to. Simply offering the same bundles at the same price as your cable company won't work, so I suspect the bundles will have to be more user friendly (more sensible, smaller, etc…).
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #2 of 22
2/14/13 at 6:27pm
If it doesn't have any DVR capacity, I'd say it's likely to be more like the "next" Roku or AppleTV. Except potentially without any of the content, since I don't think they've announced any content deals or even have anyone spearheading that part yet. But other than that it looks interesting. smile.gif
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 22
2/14/13 at 6:30pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkscout View Post

If it doesn't have any DVR capacity, I'd say it's likely to be more like the "next" Roku or AppleTV. Except potentially without any of the content, since I don't think they've announced any content deals or even have anyone spearheading that part yet. But other than that it looks interesting. smile.gif

I am wondering if the lack of DVR is because their hardware isn't going to ship with anything other than an OS drive to keep the price down.

I would think a DVR "add-on" hard drive or storage would be an instant source of revenue for Intel if this took off.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 22
2/14/13 at 8:02pm
I guess Intel hasn't head of data caps and introducing something like this is sure to make data caps suddenly go from 250GB to 100GB or less. There's no way Comcast is going to allow this to happen when they own the cable and internet. They'll just put the squeeze on -- unless of course you go with their IPTV solution (which is coming BTW).
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 22
2/15/13 at 4:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6748/anands-thoughts-on-intel-tv-initiative
Quote:
The content will include live TV, traditionally only available via a cable TV subscription. The box Intel will sell you won't act as a traditional PVR/DVR, instead you'll be able to activate a catch-up feature to pull down older episodes after they air, as well as live TV. How far back you'll be able to catch up will depend on the content license, it's technically feasible to go back as far as you'd like - but not all content owners will allow it.

This is a DVR deal-breaker for me, I routinely record many eps of a series until I see whether it's going to make it before I invest the time to watch. All of these cloud-based DVRs and on-demand net video services will take control out of the hands of the user and back into the content creators', which is exactly the way they want it. Same for not being able to skip commercials.

No thanks - I'll stick with recording my own stuff to watch as I want, when I want.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 22
2/15/13 at 7:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkscout View Post

If it doesn't have any DVR capacity, I'd say it's likely to be more like the "next" Roku or AppleTV. Except potentially without any of the content, since I don't think they've announced any content deals or even have anyone spearheading that part yet. But other than that it looks interesting. smile.gif

Competition is good, but does sound like hulu + service. We need more streaming sources to drive the cost down
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 22
2/15/13 at 8:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by StardogChampion View Post

I guess Intel hasn't head of data caps and introducing something like this is sure to make data caps suddenly go from 250GB to 100GB or less. There's no way Comcast is going to allow this to happen when they own the cable and internet. They'll just put the squeeze on -- unless of course you go with their IPTV solution (which is coming BTW).

Speaking of data caps, I get 5GB a month (not a misprint) so here's another cool thing I won't be getting mad.gif

Living in the country BLOWS!
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 22
2/15/13 at 8:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

I am wondering if the lack of DVR is because their hardware isn't going to ship with anything other than an OS drive to keep the price down.

I would think a DVR "add-on" hard drive or storage would be an instant source of revenue for Intel if this took off.

Why need DVR if you can instantly play web stream ??
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 22
2/15/13 at 8:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dropkick Murphy View Post

Speaking of data caps, I get 5GB a month (not a misprint) so here's another cool thing I won't be getting mad.gif

Living in the country BLOWS!

Where ?

What provider ?

What happens if you go over ?
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 22
2/15/13 at 8:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Why need DVR if you can instantly play web stream ??

Sometimes I'll record a new series and not watch it till the summertime when nothing else is on - if the web stream only allows the last 5 previous episodes - or even 1 episode - like most are known to do then that's one reason.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 22
2/15/13 at 8:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by StardogChampion View Post

I guess Intel hasn't head of data caps and introducing something like this is sure to make data caps suddenly go from 250GB to 100GB or less. There's no way Comcast is going to allow this to happen when they own the cable and internet. They'll just put the squeeze on -- unless of course you go with their IPTV solution (which is coming BTW).


Seems like BS. Pisses me off. Hope your not right. I'll get angry.

I hate Comcast strangle hold. I hate that you basically have to buy everything.

I'd sign up for limited live streaming and cancel cable in a second.

I don't need 60 crappy channels I don't watch.

I think smaller bundles makes perfect sense.

I barely watch TV anyways so paying 100$ month plus isn't working for me anymore.

I'd consider a $25 plan like this one with a smaller amount of channels .
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 22
2/15/13 at 9:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Why need DVR if you can instantly play web stream ??

I used to think this about MP3s when I subscribed to the Rhapsody service many years ago. Lately though, lots of music I've listened to for years has suddenly disappeared -- gone. So now without my own copy I cannot listen to them any longer and most I cannot find in print/for download. Availability of content is subject to many whims that are renewed every so often.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 22
2/15/13 at 10:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Where ?

What provider ?

What happens if you go over ?

VA

ATT Mobile 4G

$10 per GB

The only other choice out here is Satellite which I had previously and on a good day I got 1.5 Mbps, but most of the time it was under 1. Try waiting 30+ minutes to download an album from iTunes and see if you don't want to strangle someone.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 22
2/15/13 at 12:48pm
The media companies aren't going to allow something like this to work until they are dragged into kicking and screaming. Its a neat idea and eventually TV will probably end up something like this. However the initial movement is going to have to be from companies that generate their own content and offer it only streaming. Both Netflix and Amazon are trying to go that route. Maybe once online stream channels are a serious threat the incumbent industry will reconsider.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 22
2/15/13 at 12:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dropkick Murphy View Post

VA

ATT Mobile 4G

$10 per GB

The only other choice out here is Satellite which I had previously and on a good day I got 1.5 Mbps, but most of the time it was under 1. Try waiting 30+ minutes to download an album from iTunes and see if you don't want to strangle someone.

I guess you weren't around in the 90's when dial up was the king. Even the ISDN was only 128 kpbs, but most people were using Napster with just dial up. You set up you stuff and let it run overnight, and then, in the morning you had some of your stuff... Hence the MP3 compression was invented, so you could download an album in one night, instead of a week.

Kids these days.... biggrin.gif
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 22
2/15/13 at 1:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiedgod View Post

I guess you weren't around in the 90's when dial up was the king. Even the ISDN was only 128 kpbs, but most people were using Napster with just dial up. You set up you stuff and let it run overnight, and then, in the morning you had some of your stuff... Hence the MP3 compression was invented, so you could download an album in one night, instead of a week.

Kids these days.... biggrin.gif
LOL. I remember when we could finally get more than 28 kbps via dial-up. ISDN was a pipe dream for me at the time. I eventually bit the bullet and paid Comcast $60 per month to get shared wideband. They sent me a nastygram telling me I was exceeding the allocated bandwidth amount and that if I continued down this path I'd need to find another provider. The thing that really pissed me off was the fact that their was no limitation specified anywhere in the service agreement and that it was basically up to their discretion as to what the actual cap was. Needless to say I dumped Comcast the day that FIOS became available in my neighborhood.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 22
2/15/13 at 7:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by staknhalo View Post

Sometimes I'll record a new series and not watch it till the summertime when nothing else is on - if the web stream only allows the last 5 previous episodes - or even 1 episode - like most are known to do then that's one reason.

I think you are talking hulu, hulu + allows you to play archived shows doesn't it?
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 22
2/15/13 at 7:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffkro View Post

I think you are talking hulu, hulu + allows you to play archived shows doesn't it?

Only certain shows. And then some only the past and/or current season, not the whole series. Their library availability is entirely fragmented and inconsistent. It's not Hulu's fault though, that was the best the studios/networks would give them. So depending on the particular show it might/might not be an issue.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 22
2/15/13 at 8:11pm
Oh yeah, well I remember when we got the 9600 baud dial-up into the school mainframe instead of 2400 baud. It was crazy fast. You could upload your Modula-2, COBOL and DG assembler code in just minutes, time enough to flip your cassette tape over and check your mullet in the mirror.

Kids these days...
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 22
2/15/13 at 9:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiedgod View Post

I guess you weren't around in the 90's when dial up was the king. Even the ISDN was only 128 kpbs, but most people were using Napster with just dial up. You set up you stuff and let it run overnight, and then, in the morning you had some of your stuff... Hence the MP3 compression was invented, so you could download an album in one night, instead of a week.

Kids these days.... biggrin.gif
Timeline is wrong and your chain of events are backward. The MP3 spec was finalized in 1994 and was inspired by the need to store non-instrument based music files (MIDI/Tracker are instrument based and very small compared to WAV audio) on the relatively small hard drives of the time. Napster operated between June 1999 and July 2001. The small size of MP3 files spurred Internet file sharing, not the other way around.

@StardogChampion/captain_video: don't make me go looking for my phone coupler.
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 22
2/15/13 at 11:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by vladd View Post

@StardogChampion/captain_video: don't make me go looking for my phone coupler.

Did anyone else have to split their phone line from their computer because their built-in modem put feedback on the line even when powered off?

And the days when nobody could contact you if you were using the internet but to cheap to pay for two phone lines :-)
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 22
2/16/13 at 6:03am
1. Intel wants you to "buy" this box. The cable companies spread out the cost over a much longer time.
2. No DVR vs DVR. uhh...
3. Intel says this won't be a whole lot cheaper than existing cable rates. uhhh....
4. Comcast, Verizon et al will instantly screw the customers with data caps. uhh...
5. We'll be at the mercy of the content owner as to when we can watch on older episode?? What are they smoking?
6. Intel's far too late to this game.

Hmm...short Intel stock?smile.gif
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Home Theater Computers

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Home Theater Computers › Intel's New "WMC" Alternative?