or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › Official AEREO Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official AEREO Discussion Thread - Page 11

post #301 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post


I'm not sure if you can have multiple tuners in Windows Media Center 7. I think people have done it, but I haven't tried it myself.

 

Native support for 4 with 8 after a little tweaking.

post #302 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

I don't know how many tuners Aereo provides for the monthly fee, so I can't compare.
It's detailed on their site, but there are two service levels: one for one tuner and a maximum of twenty hours stored at a time (no specification whether that's SD or HD or just total time regardless of bit rate), and a more expensive service level with two tuners that can be used simultaneously and something like sixty hours of maximum storage.
post #303 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

Native support for 4 with 8 after a little tweaking.
I have five: Two Clear QAM, Two ATSC and one connected to a PVR 1212 for satellite. Took some tweaking as you said, but WMC will record 4 programs at a time and switch sources if one isn't present. IE, if the cable goes out when a CBS program is supposed to start, it'll switch to the antenna. Rather fond of it.


On another matter, and roughly related to what our Minnesota friend is doing, just how far out of the ADI can one subscribe to Aereo? I know the service is only available inside of a particular market (You can't watch your NYC channels in Buffalo, for example) but I can't find anything saying what the - for lack of a better term - coverage area is.
post #304 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post

I have five: Two Clear QAM, Two ATSC and one connected to a PVR 1212 for satellite. Took some tweaking as you said, but WMC will record 4 programs at a time and switch sources if one isn't present. IE, if the cable goes out when a CBS program is supposed to start, it'll switch to the antenna. Rather fond of it.
That is pretty cool.

I just do one tuner since my primary TV is hooked to D* with a DVR. The laptop is just a backup and way to get around the rare tuner conflict.

Quote:
On another matter, and roughly related to what our Minnesota friend is doing, just how far out of the ADI can one subscribe to Aereo? I know the service is only available inside of a particular market (You can't watch your NYC channels in Buffalo, for example) but I can't find anything saying what the - for lack of a better term - coverage area is.
That will be an interesting thing to follow. I know stations get really touchy about distant network services through satellite. It's pretty hard to qualify these days and you pretty much have to prove you can't get OTA service where you are.

Of course, Aereo isn't doing this with permission from anyone anyway, so they might not care. However, they also might be more strict simply to avoid anything that could be one more thing that could cause them to lose the case in the ongoing lawsuit.

I'm not sure what their criteria would be for whether you qualify to receive a particular market's signals.
post #305 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post

On another matter, and roughly related to what our Minnesota friend is doing, just how far out of the ADI can one subscribe to Aereo? I know the service is only available inside of a particular market (You can't watch your NYC channels in Buffalo, for example) but I can't find anything saying what the - for lack of a better term - coverage area is.

If I'm understanding your question correctly, to determine service eligibility in the markets they are in, Aereo goes by the DMA map created and controlled by Nielsen. This, of course, is the same map and same principle DirecTV and Dish Network use to determine what local channels you are given access to via satellite. You can see which counties and ZIP codes Aereo serves by going to this page and clicking on any one of the cities in bold, which represent the markets Aereo has set up shop in at the present time. The most extreme example is without a doubt the Salt Lake City map. Since Nielsen has the entire state of Utah in the Salt Lake City DMA, by placing one of their antenna farms in the Salt Lake City area, Aereo can be available to anyone in Utah with broadband internet. There's also a separate page to see which stations Aereo streams in each of the currently available markets. By default, the stations in New York are shown, but there's a drop-down menu you can use to see what is available in other cities.
post #306 of 494
Just tried Aereo last night on a Roku3. I was disappointed by the number of (slow!) menu clicks needed just to get it to start playing a channel. Leaving it streaming non-stop with the TV off seems wasteful. Also, this morning it stopped playing the news when when the program "ended" at the hour mark instead of just continuing into the next segment.

1) Does the UI development progress quickly? It currently feels more like a proof-of-concept or a trade show demo product.
2) Is there any way to have Aereo remember the last live tv channel and jump straight into that when opened?
3) Is there any way to leave live TV running without Aereo exiting to the menu every 30-60 min?
post #307 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

You do understand that Aereo will provide you with exactly the same as you would get if you did use an antenna.
I certainly hope not!

When the wind blows, and especially if there are leaves on the trees or it's raining, three of our most-watched channels go straight into the crapper. Looking to Aereo as an alternative to erecting a 6-9 meter tower 30 meters from the house.

Jim
post #308 of 494
Aereo emailed those of us who had preregistered for the Chicago rollout saying it was delayed indefinitely: no reasons, no projected start date, just a vague mention of "working on it" or some comparable idiom.  I've a bad feeling about it and no longer expect ever to see Aereo in operation here, no matter which way the court rulings go.
post #309 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by dattier View Post

Aereo emailed those of us who had preregistered for the Chicago rollout saying it was delayed indefinitely: no reasons, no projected start date, just a vague mention of "working on it" or some comparable idiom.  I've a bad feeling about it and no longer expect ever to see Aereo in operation here, no matter which way the court rulings go.

Was looking forward to trying this, but I've now given up waiting and am moving on to something else. Seeing as how this is Illinois, I wouldn't be surprised if some sort of corruption was involved. Aereo probably couldn't put the antennas in the best location since they probably failed to make a necessary "donation" to the newly created "Department of Antenna Placement". tongue.gif
post #310 of 494
All I can say, LCDSpazz, is to agree that something that affects only one market can't be a technological issue, despite what Aereo says about having a team of local beta testers helping them work out the bugs.
post #311 of 494
It's up and running in the Detroit market. I finally received the pre-launch invite late yesterday.

Setup for our Roku box was straight-forward.

At first the app seemed really slow, and it hung at one point. After I exited back out to the Roku menu and restarted the app, it was fine rest of the evening--with only the occasional, fairly short response delay. Not one with the UI, yet, so I won't pass judgement on it. My initial impression was that it's sufficiently responsive so as not to be annoying.

Video quality seemed okay, tho my wife swears it's not as good as the OTA PQ. Sound: What can I say? It's stereo. (Thanks to the MPAA, RIAA and others: I wouldn't have digital from the Roku box even if Aero was sending it.) There did seem to be the occasional "hitch" in the feed, but it was the kind of thing where you'd think "did I just see the display momentarily freeze, then jump a fraction?" Saw that, or thought perhaps I did, maybe two or three times in... about two hours of messing with it? There were perhaps some motion artifacts. (I don't tend to examine PQ with a magnifying glass.)

They've got most of the channels we can receive OTA, save a couple .2s and .3s. No Windsor channels 9 or 32. No Flint stations. (No surprise wrt to either.) There's some other stuff they threw in there--kind of like most of the free streams the Roku box, itself, provides.

We'll be testing the DVR function tonight. We set it to record Person Of Interest last night. For the $8/mo. plan, you're limited to recording one show at a time.

So far the jury's still out. We weren't thrilled, but neither were we disappointed. Our first month is free, due to the pre-registration, and we've 90 days in which to return the Roku box, no questions asked, so we have time to decide.

Jim
post #312 of 494
Aereo finally published their Android app Beta release yesterday. Last night I installed it on my Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 10.1 (WiFi). Not bad for a Beta release. Watched a bit of a Big Bang rerun and scheduled a recording with it. It's particularly convenient for that latter task.

Jim
post #313 of 494
post #314 of 494
I shudder to think what TNT would do to the NFL.
post #315 of 494

Good! Let the NFL and MLB pull their stuff off broadcast TV. I don't watch sports on TV and my wife hates it. All sports broadcasts mean to us is delayed or preempted content we want to see.

That being said: Their argument is specious:
Quote:
The NFL and MLB warned in their brief that if Aereo isn't shut down, they could be forced to air games on cable channels like Disney-owned ESPN or TNT -- instead of the free networks -- "where Aereo-like services cannot hijack and exploit their programming without authorization."

How is Aereo "hijacking" or "exploiting" anything of theirs? Nobody can see anything that's not available OTA.

These guys, the networks and the local broadcasters best wake up and smell the coffee. The old model of content distribution is dying. Fast. You can get on the train or be left in the dust.

Jim
post #316 of 494
MLB has already years ago removed its content from free TV, except for the rare weekend game .
So obviously AEREO did not provide the reason for MLB to do that.
But it looks like Aereo will help ensure MLB removes the final 2% of its games from free/OTA TV.

NFL is indisputably one of the most popular things on free TV, with >90% of the games available there.
It will be very annoying when NFL disappears from free OTA TV and becomes pay-only, and it sucks that Aereo is providing a strong motivation for NFL to do that.

Maybe it's becoming time to become more of a NASCAR & college-football fan, because there is no way I'm going to get into golf or downtown abbey or reality shows.
Also I hear there are things called "books" that people "read", maybe will have to investigate that when all the good sports on free TV disappear.

sincerely cancelled my aereo free trial yesterday,

/e
post #317 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by tveli View Post

MLB has already years ago removed its content from free TV, except for the rare weekend game .
So obviously AEREO did not provide the reason for MLB to do that.
Obviously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tveli View Post

But it looks like Aereo will help ensure MLB removes the final 2% of its games from free/OTA TV.

NFL is indisputably one of the most popular things on free TV, with >90% of the games available there.
It will be very annoying when NFL disappears from free OTA TV and becomes pay-only, and it sucks that Aereo is providing a strong motivation for NFL to do that.
I think their complaint is bogus. I suspect the networks put them up to this. Otherwise: Please explain how Aereo is "hijacking" or "exploiting" sports broadcasts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tveli View Post

Maybe it's becoming time to become more of a NASCAR & college-football fan, because there is no way I'm going to get into golf or downtown abbey or reality shows.
Yeah, can't abide those, either. Nor golf. Nor Downton Abbey. Nor most "reality" shows. (You know: There actually is some decent content on OTA TV.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tveli View Post

Also I hear there are things called "books" that people "read", maybe will have to investigate that when all the good sports on free TV disappear.
Do it all the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tveli View Post

sincerely cancelled my aereo free trial yesterday,
Is that because you weren't getting value for it, or as a political statement?

We're probably going to keep it. It has already happened several times, since we signed-up, that OTA TV was unwatchable, due to weather, and Aereo saved the day. If Aereo hadn't been there: We would've had to have forgone watching TV those evenings.

Then again: Maybe not so much downside in that. Books are better, anyway.

Jim
post #318 of 494
hi Jim,

I cancelled my aereo free trial because I'd used it enough to get a sense of its capabilities and usability,
and because I avoid paying for free stuff like OTA content or TV-guide-data.

As for explaining why aereo is exploiting/hijacking/whatever,
I probably can't add anything amazing or new to that discussion on a legal basis, but maybe on an engineering basis I can shed some light.
(Part of my opinion about Aereo is because I am an electrical engineer who really enjoyed antenna theory & signal processing, including learning about phased arrays, and the awesome snipe hunt known as "SETI".)

Aereo's grid of tiny antennae is a phased array - acting as a single antenna - a phased array.
The aereo phased-array antenna receives all the OTA signals all the time.
It's absurd to think that each tiny antenna can be tuned individually,
or that any single one of them can provide a signal strong enough to be amplified/demodulated/decoded/rendered properly.
The only way their technology can work is for Aereo to decode the signals from their phased-array-antenna *once per TV channel*. Not once per tiny-antenna.
Then they duplicate the rendering of the demodulated&decoded audio/video across multiple IP unicast streams and/or IP multicast streams.
So I believe that aereo is inaccurately reporting how their antenna works, and that their explanation egregiously violates E&M physics and can be rejected summarily on that basis.
Analogously, the elements/segments of my YAGI antenna are not separate antennae - they are all part of the same antenna.
It doesn't matter whether they are in physical contact with one wire-pair to the receiver, or they are closely spaced and wired separately to the receiver/demodulator/decoder:
Magnetic induction ensures that they will act as if they are in physical contact when they are merely "nearby" to each other, and not in physical contact.

One way Aereo could convince me that their tiny antennae each act separately, and that all physics textbooks have to be rewritten, and Schrodinger needs to be exhumed and sent back to the equation-drawing-board, is to demonstrate a tiny demonstration grid of 4 of their tiny antennas feeding 4 ATSC DTVs via 4 separate tiny coax cables or tiny-wire-pairs.

I hear you on the weather affecting OTA. Lately my OTA setup is susceptible to weather since my preamp died. In summer without a preamp, OTA is unusable at my location.
With the previous preamp, the setup was essentially immune to weather even though my antenna is >50 miles from xmitters and in a river-valley.
That wasn't true in the early-adopter-days, before the Boston xmitters all went to "full power".
Anyway, I'll be installing the new preamp Real Soon Now.
And I plan to keep comcast 7Mbps-downstream internet at $49/month for a while before considering the local DSL offerings.

regards,

/e
post #319 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by tveli View Post

As for explaining why aereo is exploiting/hijacking/whatever,
I probably can't add anything amazing or new to that discussion on a legal basis, but maybe on an engineering basis I can shed some light.
(Part of my opinion about Aereo is because I am an electrical engineer who really enjoyed antenna theory & signal processing, including learning about phased arrays, and the awesome snipe hunt known as "SETI".)

Aereo's grid of tiny antennae is a phased array - acting as a single antenna - a phased array.
Do not agree. I, also, have extensive background in antenna, transmission line and propagation theory and practice. If the signals are strong enough, you don't need tuned antennas. Heck: A bit of coat hanger will do the trick. It won't be optimal, but neither does it need to be.

In fact: A few years ago, at my employer's, we had two buildings, separated by about 1/4 mile. They were line-of-sight to one another. Rather than pay for the rights to run cable between the two buildings, I used licensed microwave. They had to use special "negative gain" antennas to prevent receiver front-end overload, because the distance was so little. We never had rain fade, I can tell you that wink.gif

I am curious about the antenna cabling, though. If they're telling the truth, that would be something to see.

I have to believe the broadcasters' engineers are every bit as smart as you and I, so I have to believe this argument has occurred to them, and, if there was anything to it, they'd have been all over Aereo like a bad suit.

Jim
post #320 of 494
hi Jim,

A coat-hanger antenna is actually tuned pretty close to the exact size for DTV frequencies.
But the Aereo micro-antennae are waaaaaaaay mistuned.
And they are stuck being a phased-array rather than individual antennae, due to their physical proximity to each other.

We could bust out things like the 1/R^2 law and model the situation on the back of an envelope (calculate received power level for DTV freq from a single 1mm antenna 1/4 mile from a 50,000 watt DTV xmitter, and see if that received signal has sufficient power to be resolved/tuned/decoded, according to the specs for the best ATSC tuner available.)
Along the same lines, we could calculate exactly how close to the xmitter a single Aereo 1mm antenna would have to be in order to receive enough 1/R^2 power for the ATSC tuner to work.

And yes indeed, the broadcaster's RF engineers have raised similar points in some of their court briefs, from what I've read/understood along the way.

Alrighty then... It will be interesting to see the US courts get bamboozled by Aereo's bullshyte.

cheers...

/e
post #321 of 494
Hi. So I am located in Manhattan, trying Aereo for a second time. As this is AVS Forum, not the Endgadget comments section, I am confused as to the general consensus regarding Aereo image quality for AVS Forum members. I assume the context for viewing in this forum is a "large screen", ie: something bigger than 32", possibly as large as 120".

On my 80" screen, via iScan video processor and JVC 1080P projector, I've seen CBS-HD via OTA that is absolutely the best I've ever seen broadcast television. I've also seen CBS-HD via Time Warner Cable-- very good, not quite as good as OTA, but very good. Aereo in comparison seems SUPER COMPRESSED when there is any movement. I mean, a severe reduction in image quality-- at the High quality setting. Am I the only one who perceives this? Aereo likes to quote resolutions like 720P and 1080P but in reality, their "definition' of 720P is horrible in comparison to even Time Warner.

I am very puzzled how there can be any such enthusiasm for Aereo from the home theater market when the image quality, as I am seeing it, is so far inferior to other options. I understand the cost arguments in the broader market (ie: watching TV on an iPad) but I fail to understand how the home theater community has any affinity for Aereo as it currently exists. Even Netflix streams 1080P content via Chromecast that looks far superior to anything Aereo streams...

Is my assessment correct here or are other Aereo users getting true image quality comparable to their cable provider?
Edited by JayNYC - 11/30/13 at 9:54am
post #322 of 494
I agree that the picture quality can be inferior, but, for the price Aereo seems to be the only game in town for getting OTA programming in NYC. Antennas simply don't work in the Naked City. I find that the picture quality is significantly better using the Roku app than that of the aereo app via AirPlay on Apple tv. Until there is a better alternative other than the usurious cable bundles, I'll stick with Aereo.
post #323 of 494
On the Topic of Aereo on Xbox One

Through Xbox One IE
Aereo on Xbox One is a no go, so far. Seems IE does not support location services -1. Even after allowing for pop ups in setting, the option to allow access does not appear. Seems at this point Aereo is still not an option on Xbox. I've asked for location services to be added to both the console and apps in hope getting past what appears to be the last hurdle of utilizing Aereo on Xbox, determining my geographic location.
post #324 of 494
Just got this in my inbox, thought it was worth sharing. I just bought a Roku, primarily bc of Aereo, and I want them to succeed.
Quote:
Dear XXXXXX,

Today marks a significant step in our fight to modernize television access and protect consumer rights. This afternoon, Aereo filed a brief in response to the broadcasters' petition to the U.S. Supreme Court. We've decided not to oppose this cert petition.

While the law is clear and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and two different federal courts have ruled in favor of Aereo, broadcasters appear determined to keep litigating the same issues against Aereo in every jurisdiction that we enter. We want this resolved on the merits rather than through a wasteful war of attrition.

Consumers have the right to use an antenna to access the over-the-air television. It is a right that should be protected and preserved and in fact, has been protected for generations by Congress. Eliminating a consumer's right to take advantage of innovation with respect to antenna technology would disenfranchise millions of Americans in cities and rural towns across the country.

We are unwavering in our belief that Aereo's technology falls squarely within the law and we look forward to continuing to serve our customers.

As I've said before, an Aereo win is a consumer win. This is an ongoing battle but together we can protect innovation, progress, and consumer choice. Thank you for your continued support and loyalty.

Sincerely,

Chet Kanojia

Founder & CEO
post #325 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmgene View Post

I agree that the picture quality can be inferior, but, for the price Aereo seems to be the only game in town for getting OTA programming in NYC. Antennas simply don't work in the Naked City. I find that the picture quality is significantly better using the Roku app than that of the aereo app via AirPlay on Apple tv. Until there is a better alternative other than the usurious cable bundles, I'll stick with Aereo.
You bring up an interesting point: Aereo does not sell its dime-sized copper "antennas" to the public. These are about the same size as a "paper-clip" antenna. If I understand correctly, Aereo claims that each Aereo subscriber is "renting" use of a single antenna to receive OTA broadcast signals, and there seem to be very, very few complaints from Aereo subscribers about reception-related technical problems.

I tried to bring this issue up on the general AVS HDTV Technical topic - about why Aereo's unique antenna design isn't available for purchase by non-Aereo subscribers (particularly in areas like Seattle where Aereo is not currently available) - but was abruptly shut down.

It's fair to ask: why doesn't Aereo, or its vendor, sell these "miracle antennas"?? Is the truth that these Aereo antennas actually retransmit to individual subscribers the signal received by an Aereo "master antenna"? Or is it literally true that Aereo has designed a type of "miracle antenna" which is able to accomplish something other antennas cannot: receiving consistently high-quality signal from each local OTA transmitter in a given community, regardless of the various directional coordinates of each of those individual transmitters?

If Aereo has truly "built a better mousetrap" in terms of a receiving antenna design which is vastly superior to most of what's available to ordinary consumers, why are they not being candid about this? Why aren't they reaping the profits of selling this "master antenna" to folks like myself who would genuinely like the best possible OTA reception at our houses?

P.S. See closed thread at http://www.avsforum.com/t/1505979/aereos-miniature-dime-sized-copper-antenna - the thread was specific to what Aereo implies is an extraordinary antenna technology which allows them to provide near-flawless OTA signal to individual subscribers using thousands of tiny individual OTA antennas, not the legal or commercial issues around the Aereo service.
post #326 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by tveli View Post

Aereo's grid of tiny antennae is a phased array - acting as a single antenna - a phased array. The aereo phased-array antenna receives all the OTA signals all the time. It's absurd to think that each tiny antenna can be tuned individually, or that any single one of them can provide a signal strong enough to be amplified/demodulated/decoded/rendered properly.

The only way their technology can work is for Aereo to decode the signals from their phased-array-antenna *once per TV channel*. Not once per tiny-antenna. Then they duplicate the rendering of the demodulated&decoded audio/video across multiple IP unicast streams and/or IP multicast streams.

So I believe that aereo is inaccurately reporting how their antenna works, and that their explanation egregiously violates E&M physics and can be rejected summarily on that basis.

Analogously, the elements/segments of my YAGI antenna are not separate antennae - they are all part of the same antenna. It doesn't matter whether they are in physical contact with one wire-pair to the receiver, or they are closely spaced and wired separately to the receiver/demodulator/decoder: Magnetic induction ensures that they will act as if they are in physical contact when they are merely "nearby" to each other, and not in physical contact.

One way Aereo could convince me that their tiny antennae each act separately, and that all physics textbooks have to be rewritten, and Schrodinger needs to be exhumed and sent back to the equation-drawing-board, is to demonstrate a tiny demonstration grid of 4 of their tiny antennas feeding 4 ATSC DTVs via 4 separate tiny coax cables or tiny-wire-pairs. /e
You provided a fairly convincing explanation of where I think Aereo is "walking on thin ice". At no point has Aereo publicly described the objective, measurable, verifiable performance of their individual dime-sized copper antennas as compared with other small outdoor antennas. Nor at any point has Aereo offered to sell their dime-sized copper "antennas" to the general public.

If Aereo has developed a "better mousetrap" in terms of a revolutionary type of receiving antenna for OTA television - one which as you indicated would overcome basic principles of physics - then why don't they offer to sell these apparently miraculous antennas to members of the general public, such as myself, who would like to receive the very best possible reception on OTA broadcast television? If they have designed a "miracle antenna", don't ya think Aereo could make some HUGE profits from selling these to the general public??

Much as I don't like the antics of local broadcasters and their fellow travelers, who are behaving like crack-cocaine addicts who have become utterly hooked upon the retransmission-consent-fee gravy train, I am deeply questioning whether the signal provided via the Internet to individual Aereo subscribers is in fact the unadulterated OTA signal received by an individual dime-sized copper antenna.
post #327 of 494
Make of this what you will, but the ruling that denied the injunction against Aereo found that the antennas operate independently rather than as a unit. Even though they originally disagreed, the broadcasters did not contest that finding on appeal.

(http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/Aereo102813.pdf, pages 58-60)
post #328 of 494
One interesting aspect of the lawsuit you cited: OTA broadcasters are asserting "copyright" to the programming which they transmit over the public airwaves which they have been granted by the Federal Government for free (other than some de minimus costs filing periodic pro forma renewal documentation and reports to the FCC). Based on an interpretation of a 1992 law they are demanding and getting payment "retransmission consent fees", yet they are NOT sharing those "retransmission consent fees" with the FCC. In other words, arguably, OTA broadcasters are ripping off the American people by demanding financial compensation (above and beyond the income derived from commercial advertising) for retransmission of telecasts for which the American people have granted those broadcasters FREE use of the spectrum bandwidth.

If I understood the points in the brief, the appellants are apparently not contesting Aereo's representation that each individual Aereo subscriber is in fact "renting" a dime-sized copper antenna which, apparently, is able to receive satisfactory OTA reception on its own without "signal boosting" by an Aereo master antenna system.

From the viewpoint of the American people, I'd really like disclosure of the technical details of these Aereo antennas. I am well aware that in locations which are literally within 3 miles line-of-sight of a transmission tower, acceptable reception can be obtained by a paper clip, but the problem here is that in the vast majority of U.S. media markets, the transmission towers are not ALL in the same location and therefore received at any single antenna location reception of each individual transmitter is not uniform at the exact identical level of unwavering signal strength and unwavering signal quality.

If Aereo has in fact developed for use a dime-sized copper antenna which exceeds the day-to-day performance of other miniature receiving antennas - such as the very humble "paper clip antenna" - the American people have a right to know technical details of these miniature receiving antennas.

I like much about the Aereo service and actually wish it was available in the Seattle media market, so my intention here is not to trash-talk the company's business model. Rather, I genuinely believe that for the same reasons that the OTA broadcasters (and their fellow appellate "fellow travelers") should be called out on their hypocrisy, I think the American people have a legitimate interest in knowing Aereo's technology, which I suspect is more than just having their "bank" of thousands of mini-antennas placed in the absolute best "sweet spot" in a given media market.

So: Why can't non-Aereo subscribers purchase these antennas, or at the very least, why can't independent technology reviewers be allowed to objectively evaluate the real-life performance of the Aereo antennas on a stand-alone basis, and publish their findings for the benefit of the American people who have been giving away free access to OTA spectrum and who are not getting a "piece of the action" financially?
post #329 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by seatacboy View Post

One interesting aspect of the lawsuit you cited: OTA broadcasters are asserting "copyright" to the programming which they transmit over the public airwaves which they have been granted by the Federal Government for free (other than some de minimus costs filing periodic pro forma renewal documentation and reports to the FCC). Based on an interpretation of a 1992 law they are demanding and getting payment "retransmission consent fees", yet they are NOT sharing those "retransmission consent fees" with the FCC. In other words, arguably, OTA broadcasters are ripping off the American people by demanding financial compensation (above and beyond the income derived from commercial advertising) for retransmission of telecasts for which the American people have granted those broadcasters FREE use of the spectrum bandwidth.

Sorry, but broadcasters can no longer survive on the money we get for commercials. Too many competing, unregulated services out here are taking away the ad dollars (now being measured in "ad cents").
Additionally, ad-skipping, such as with the DISH Hopper", make commercials far less valuable to the sponsors. And, even the "non-commercial" broadcasters are running what appear to be full-blown commercials.

As for they "free spectrum" argument, stations pay huge amounts of money in order to comply with FCC rules and regulations, especially the ones that are ordered by overzealous Congressmen. Most stations budget hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for such things as licensing fees, lawyers fees, special equipment used to demonstrate compliance with certain laws (such as the CALM Act), consultant fees, frequency coordination services, music licensing, etc.

If AEREO wins, and the programming resellers manage to stop paying retrans fees to the broadcasters, you'll see very little in the way of useful programming over the air in the near future. It will all be reruns, minority-language programs, religion and infomercials.
The rest of your viewing will be dependent on the size of your bank account.
post #330 of 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenglish View Post


If AEREO wins, and the programming resellers manage to stop paying retrans fees to the broadcasters, you'll see very little in the way of useful programming over the air in the near future. It will all be reruns, minority-language programs, religion and infomercials.
The rest of your viewing will be dependent on the size of your bank account.

....and I find that very very sad. I live in an area where our OTA reception is consistently better pq-wise than either cable or sat, at least in our neighborhood. There's no need for us to pay outrageous fees to the pay-tv operators because we can get what ever else we want via streaming. I think where Aereo could be a useful service is in areas where OTA is not possible due to terrain and/or interference. But doesn't Aereo deliver their content via your internet connection? If that's the case, then you'll need a fast, reliable connection wouldn't you? And what's to stop Aereo from turning into just another pay-tv operator down the road if they win all of their lawsuits?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › Official AEREO Discussion Thread