Giving Up Cable TV
Maaxx
show you want to watch off the internet?
JamesL
"Maaxx" <ma...@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> show you want to watch off the internet?
Of sorts yes!
I refused to buy Cable TV for years and downloaded what I wanted to watch.
For all the hype it still is NOT as good downloaded as it is live broadcast.
Not to mention the time, the hassle, the drive space, the cost (DVD's,
labels, etc.)
I still refuse to buy cable given the terrible attitude and ridiculous cost
of my local cable company but I finally gave in a got DishNetwork Satellite.
WELL WORTH IT!
James
Simon Robson
Simon
"JamesL" <forgedd...@spamblock.duh> wrote in message
news:ZyoVd.9624$MY6....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
harri...@home.com
to ditigal TV.
Maaxx
news:ZyoVd.9624$MY6....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:
> "Maaxx" <ma...@xrs.net> wrote in message
> news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
>
>> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>> show you want to watch off the internet?
>
> Of sorts yes!
>
> I refused to buy Cable TV for years and downloaded what I wanted to
> watch. For all the hype it still is NOT as good downloaded as it is live
> broadcast. Not to mention the time, the hassle, the drive space, the
> cost (DVD's, labels, etc.)
I don't even bother with all that. I watch the show on my computer and
then delete it.
James Gassaway
> show you want to watch off the internet?
No, because I want the people who make the shows I like to get paid, thereby
giving them the incentive to keep making shows I like.
--
Multiversal Mercenaries. You name it, we kill it. Any time, any reality.
Mike
"Simon Robson" <Simon.J...@Blueyonder.Co.Uk> wrote in message
news:uCoVd.211671$B8.1...@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> What's the website to download all The Simpsons episodes then?
>
> Simon
>
show me a channel that has all the Simpsons episodes!
Mike
"James Gassaway" <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:jVoVd.8961$m31.1...@typhoon.sonic.net...
> "Maaxx" <ma...@xrs.net> wrote in message
> news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
>> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>> show you want to watch off the internet?
>
> No, because I want the people who make the shows I like to get paid,
> thereby
> giving them the incentive to keep making shows I like.
>
shows are free on tv, aside from being annoyed by ads
I don't see how a free download affects that...
ANIM8Rfsk
3/2/05 12:28 PM:
> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> show you want to watch off the internet?
Sure, same as I considered knocking over a liquor store or getting the
season 6 Buffy DVDs. But I didn't do any of these things. Why? "Because
it's wrong"
Bishkek+10
> news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
> > Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> > show you want to watch off the internet?
>
> No, because I want the people who make the shows I like to get paid,
thereby
> giving them the incentive to keep making shows I like.
That may very well be one of the most naive things I have ever read in any
newsgroup.
Bruins72
> show you want to watch off the internet?
Not really. I dislike most what's on regular TV (Lost and Simpson being the
main exceptions) and can't be bothered to spend the time downloading
episodes of what I want. I have started renting seasons of shows on DVD
rather than watching them on tv at their scheduled time. I can't be bothered
with commercials or coordinating my life around a tv schedule.
--
-
--
-
Bruins72
CSIS Agent (formerly steven blue)
> show you want to watch off the internet?
If every person did this TV shows wouldn't be on air. And it is affecting
shows that are currently on broadcast to. Shows such as "24" and "Alias"
have one of the highest rates of downloads for episodes. (as well as TIVO
which is a whole other subject matter). If a show got cancelled such as say
Veronica Mars a very small audience to begin with - people with that
attitude would be the main reason why the show died. Simply because a few
key "nieslen" viewers weren't watching the show would lose maybe a hundred
or two hundred thousand viewers - a big enough difference to keep the show
on for another season.
stonej
I wonder what it would be like to drop cable TV and go back to watching
just what you can get with over the air TV? I like the many choices
of
cable TV but I find myself not really enjoying it all that much more
than
when I had only about 5 over the air channels.
I had ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox and PBS. Not a lot to choose from but it kept
me
entertained. If money became a really serious issue I could always go
back.
My dad is probably one of the few holdouts these days that refuses to
get
cable TV. He watches local news, Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy and
whatever is
on PBS that night. Nothing else. Sounds dull but he likes it.
David Johnston
What makes it so naive? Cable providers do in fact pay the people who
they get their shows from.
harri...@home.com
Galactica. It had a very high download rate months before it debuted on
SciFi, having been aired on British TV. The producers posted a message
on the message board pleading with people to not download it as it
would hurt ratings. However, it got great ratings on SciFi and has been
renewed for a second season.
So, downloads do not hurt ratings. The ratings system is flawed and
there is nothing the average person can do to affect them.
harri...@home.com
or two. Most of that is available over the air, and will continue to be
available over the air on HDTV after analog broadcasts are gone.
Bishkek+10
"David Johnston" <rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote in message
news:4225d677...@news.telusplanet.net...
Oh, boy. Next.
David Brewer
> What's the website to download all The Simpsons episodes then?
Get a BT vlient and hit isohunt.com.
--
David Brewer
David
<harri...@home.com> wrote:
>I don't buy the story that downloads hurt ratings.
It doesn't because not enough people are doing it. "24" is the most
pirated show and it's downloaded by 100,000 people worldwide. Odds are
few if any of them are nielsen families.
otoh HBO does look at the number of subscribers who sign up or cancel
services depending on which original shows are airing so there may be
a small possibility that enough people cancel their premium services
to get shows online they could end up canning their favorite shows.
nimue
> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading
> any show you want to watch off the internet?
Not in a million years would I consider such a thing.
--
nimue
"If I had created reality television I would have had a much greater
influence, but then I would have had to KILL MYSELF." Joss Whedon
"There are two types of women -- those who like chocolate and complete
bitches." Dawn French
JamesL
"CSIS Agent (formerly steven blue)" <steve...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:JPpVd.34391$hN1.18799@clgrps13...
Nielsen ratings are crap. I suspect TV Networks will soon come to realize
this. Proof of this: On several occasions American Idol received several
times the number of call in votes then the Nielsen Ratings claimed were
watching. Proving far more people were watching American Idol that night
then Idol was rated.
And the claim that people call multiple times is discounted. Idol's vote
system uses caller ID to identify the call and only accepts the first vote
from that phone number.
Also, the satellite TV companies actually track what customers really watch
and there is NO correlation between those statistics and Nielsen ratings.
James
CSIS Agent (formerly steven blue)
<harri...@home.com> wrote in message
news:1109799250....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Oh I agree completley it doesn't hurt shows - but its a growing trend its
just the beginning of this.
David
<forgedd...@spamblock.duh> wrote:
>
>"CSIS Agent (formerly steven blue)" <steve...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:JPpVd.34391$hN1.18799@clgrps13...
>>
>> "Maaxx" <ma...@xrs.net> wrote in message
>> news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
>>> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>>> show you want to watch off the internet?
>>
>> If every person did this TV shows wouldn't be on air. And it is affecting
>> shows that are currently on broadcast to. Shows such as "24" and "Alias"
>> have one of the highest rates of downloads for episodes. (as well as TIVO
>> which is a whole other subject matter). If a show got cancelled such as
>> say Veronica Mars a very small audience to begin with - people with that
>> attitude would be the main reason why the show died. Simply because a few
>> key "nieslen" viewers weren't watching the show would lose maybe a hundred
>> or two hundred thousand viewers - a big enough difference to keep the show
>> on for another season.
>>
>
>Nielsen ratings are crap. I suspect TV Networks will soon come to realize
>this.
They do realize this but it's the best system they have and since all
the networks use it it's still a level playing field so there's no
reason for them to change.
Julia M. White
>Maaxx wrote:
>> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading
>any
>> show you want to watch off the internet?
>
>
>just what you can get with over the air TV? I like the many choices
>of
>cable TV but I find myself not really enjoying it all that much more
>than
>when I had only about 5 over the air channels.
>
>I had ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox and PBS. Not a lot to choose from but it kept
>me
>entertained. If money became a really serious issue I could always go
>back.
>
>My dad is probably one of the few holdouts these days that refuses to
>get
>cable TV. He watches local news, Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy and
>whatever is
>on PBS that night. Nothing else. Sounds dull but he likes it.
I don't have cable either, but I do get HBO. Works out nicely. Lost, West
Wing, weekend Buffy and Angel reruns, CSI, L&O SUV, that's about all I can
watch anyway ....
David Johnston
<griffey5...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >That may very well be one of the most naive things I have ever read in
>any
>> >newsgroup.
>>
>> What makes it so naive? Cable providers do in fact pay the people who
>> they get their shows from.
>
>Oh, boy. Next.
What mental malfunction makes you incapable of articulating your point
of view?
David Johnston
<forgedd...@spamblock.duh> wrote:
Like hell they do. They take as many calls as you want to make.
>
>Also, the satellite TV companies actually track what customers really watch
>and there is NO correlation between those statistics and Nielsen ratings.
Cite.
Jette Goldie
"JamesL" <forgedd...@spamblock.duh> wrote
> Nielsen ratings are crap. I suspect TV Networks will soon come to
realize
> this. Proof of this: On several occasions American Idol received
several
> times the number of call in votes then the Nielsen Ratings claimed
were
> watching. Proving far more people were watching American Idol that
night
> then Idol was rated.
Not like anyone called several times in an attempt to "stuff the
ballot" for a particular contestant, huh? Nobody would do
that, would they?
<please note there is no smiley for "irony">
--
Jette Goldie
je...@blueyonder.co.uk
Some people are like Slinkies . . . not really good for anything, but
you
still can't help but smile when you see one tumble down the stairs.
Bishkek+10
It was articulated, If you didn't get the point the first time, you won't
get it the second either genius.
David Johnston
>I don't buy the story that downloads hurt ratings. Example :Battlestar
>Galactica. It had a very high download rate months before it debuted on
>SciFi, having been aired on British TV. The producers posted a message
>on the message board pleading with people to not download it as it
>would hurt ratings. However, it got great ratings on SciFi and has been
>renewed for a second season.
> So, downloads do not hurt ratings.
Very few people download. That's why it won't hurt ratings.
Simon Robson
Simon
"nimue" <cup_o...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:qxqVd.21269$rB3.3...@twister.nyc.rr.com...
dre...@yahoo.com
blue\)" <steve...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Shows such as "24" and "Alias"
>have one of the highest rates of downloads for episodes.
And also some of their best ratings ever.
dre...@yahoo.com
<forgedd...@spamblock.duh> wrote:
>And the claim that people call multiple times is discounted. Idol's vote
>system uses caller ID to identify the call and only accepts the first vote
>from that phone number.
>
Sure.
dre...@yahoo.com
>Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>show you want to watch off the internet?
Why do you hate sports ?
Richard DeLuca
"Bishkek+10" <griffey5...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Well then, I'm studid too, cuz your remark made no sense to me, either.
Karrde
"JamesL" <forgedd...@spamblock.duh> wrote in message
news:hEqVd.3661$L17....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Nielsen ratings are crap. I suspect TV Networks will soon come to realize
> this. Proof of this: On several occasions American Idol received several
> times the number of call in votes then the Nielsen Ratings claimed were
> watching. Proving far more people were watching American Idol that night
> then Idol was rated.
>
> And the claim that people call multiple times is discounted. Idol's vote
> system uses caller ID to identify the call and only accepts the first vote
> from that phone number.
No they don't. You can vote continuously for two hours provided there is
not a busy signal.
--
--Karrde - ATAI Bragging Rights Champion
ATAI Faces Page: http://afssmugglersalliance.tripod.com/ataifaces.htm
Submit pictures to: dal...@charter.net
ANIM8Rfsk
rgo...@telusplanet.net wrote on 3/2/05 3:41 PM:
>> And the claim that people call multiple times is discounted. Idol's vote
>> system uses caller ID to identify the call and only accepts the first vote
>> from that phone number.
>
> Like hell they do. They take as many calls as you want to make.
In point of fact, last night Ryan said VOTE AS MANY TIMES AS YOU'D LIKE!
Multiple calls are not only allowed, they're encouraged.
ANIM8Rfsk
rgo...@telusplanet.net wrote on 3/2/05 3:40 PM:
>>>> That may very well be one of the most naive things I have ever read in
>> any
>>>> newsgroup.
>>>
>>> What makes it so naive? Cable providers do in fact pay the people who
>>> they get their shows from.
>>
>> Oh, boy. Next.
>
> What mental malfunction makes you incapable of articulating your point
> of view?
The same malfunction that made him invent/believe/post the original silly
contention?
JamesL
They receive the calls, but they only count the first one. They made that
clear when they had the season when someones home town had the phone company
helping them out with a phone bank.
>
>>
>>Also, the satellite TV companies actually track what customers really
>>watch
>>and there is NO correlation between those statistics and Nielsen ratings.
>
> Cite.
>
Actually... I saw this on a recent show discussing the proliferation of
pornography. The satellite companies can actually tell which channel you
have on. And the funny statistic: the average porn viewer only watches the
show for 7 minutes.
James
Reasoned Insanity
"Maaxx" <ma...@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> show you want to watch off the internet?
I already did. Luckily the filter they put on my line doesn't block the
scifi channel along with a few other channels I am not supposed to get. If
Cox's filter worked like it was supposed to, I would be doing a whole lot
more downloading.
Jack Ak
Hmm, how do the satellite companies determine which channel you are
watching? It seems Nielsen Media Research would want this
information.
ANIM8Rfsk
harri...@home.com at harri...@home.com wrote on 3/2/05 2:34 PM:
> I don't buy the story that downloads hurt ratings.
So?
Example :Battlestar
> Galactica. It had a very high download rate months before it debuted on
> SciFi, having been aired on British TV. The producers posted a message
> on the message board pleading with people to not download it as it
> would hurt ratings. However, it got great ratings on SciFi and has been
> renewed for a second season.
> So, downloads do not hurt ratings.
That's idiotic. You don't have any idea what the ratings would have been
without the downloads.
The ratings system is flawed
The only accurate thing you said
and
> there is nothing the average person can do to affect them.
>
If one person with a neilsen box downloads and then doesn't watch, that
translates to something like a hundred thousand lost viewers, ratings wise.
Kittyn
>>
>Actually... I saw this on a recent show discussing the proliferation of
>pornography. The satellite companies can actually tell which channel you
>have on. And the funny statistic: the average porn viewer only watches the
>show for 7 minutes.
>
>James
>
*Ninja*
"Maaxx" <ma...@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> show you want to watch off the internet?
Internet eh? That thing still around? I hear they have it on computers
now....
(Sorry - you walked right into that one!) ;-)
DENTAL PLAN!!!
Nightspirit
<snip>
>> Cite.
>>
> Actually... I saw this on a recent show discussing the proliferation
> of pornography. The satellite companies can actually tell which
> channel you have on. And the funny statistic: the average porn
> viewer only watches the show for 7 minutes.
>
> James
7 minites is that how long it takes the guy's wife or Girlfriend to
come in and lower the room tempture absolute Zero?
--
---
Have Fun,
Night Spirit
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~hipdale2/Riverton_Common.HTML
BSG Blog: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cylon12/
I am ready to meet my maker, but whether my maker is prepared for the
great ordeal of meeting me is another matter
David Johnston
<griffey5...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>"David Johnston" <rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote in message
>news:4225e709...@news.telusplanet.net...
>> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 16:37:34 -0500, "Bishkek+10"
>> <griffey5...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> >That may very well be one of the most naive things I have ever read
>in
>> >any
>> >> >newsgroup.
>> >>
>> >> What makes it so naive? Cable providers do in fact pay the people who
>> >> they get their shows from.
>> >
>> >Oh, boy. Next.
>>
>> What mental malfunction makes you incapable of articulating your point
>> of view?
>
>It was articulated,
"Oh boy"? That was it? The only thought in your vacant brain?
Les B. Labbauf
>
> "Maaxx" <ma...@xrs.net> wrote in message
> news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
>> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>> show you want to watch off the internet?
>
> Internet eh? That thing still around?
I just put that as the sound effect for incoming mail this morning :)
David Johnston
<forgedd...@spamblock.duh> wrote:
>>>And the claim that people call multiple times is discounted. Idol's vote
>>>system uses caller ID to identify the call and only accepts the first vote
>>>from that phone number.
>>
>> Like hell they do. They take as many calls as you want to make.
>
>They receive the calls, but they only count the first one. They made that
>clear when they had the season when someones home town had the phone company
>helping them out with a phone bank.
This is the first I've ever heard of it. Can anyone who watches
American Idiol confirm?
>>
>>>
>>>Also, the satellite TV companies actually track what customers really
>>>watch
>>>and there is NO correlation between those statistics and Nielsen ratings.
>>
>> Cite.
>>
>Actually... I saw this on a recent show discussing the proliferation of
>pornography.
Well actually what I was looking for was some place where I could find
out whether it was true that there was no correlation.
Robert Morrisette
<harri...@home.com> wrote in message
news:1109792655.8...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> This is what I'm going to do when analog TV goes away. I refuse to go
> to ditigal TV.
>
Why?
Richmond
"Jette Goldie" <j...@blueyonder.com.uk> wrote in message
news:8jrVd.27236$8B3....@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> "JamesL" <forgedd...@spamblock.duh> wrote
>> Nielsen ratings are crap. I suspect TV Networks will soon come to
> realize
>> this. Proof of this: On several occasions American Idol received
> several
>> times the number of call in votes then the Nielsen Ratings claimed
> were
>> watching. Proving far more people were watching American Idol that
> night
>> then Idol was rated.
>
>
> Not like anyone called several times in an attempt to "stuff the
> ballot" for a particular contestant, huh? Nobody would do
> that, would they?
>
Richmond
"Simon Robson" <Simon.J...@Blueyonder.Co.Uk> wrote in message
news:2qrVd.279713$K7.1...@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Bet it would cost a lot of money anyway
>
easily do that, for no more than the cost of my DSL bill. There are times,
though, when you just want to channel-surf, not to mention that there are
still shows that don't get distributed online.
B.
Richmond
<dre...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f5hc2153208nortub...@4ax.com...
That's a whole 'nother issue, dude.
B.
Dirty Redpool
> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading
> any show you want to watch off the internet?
Yes, that's exactly what I've done.
--
Richmond
"JamesL" <forgedd...@spamblock.duh> wrote in message
>> show you want to watch off the internet?
>
>
> I refused to buy Cable TV for years and downloaded what I wanted to watch.
> For all the hype it still is NOT as good downloaded as it is live
> broadcast. Not to mention the time, the hassle, the drive space, the cost
> (DVD's, labels, etc.)
>
> I still refuse to buy cable given the terrible attitude and ridiculous
> cost of my local cable company but I finally gave in a got DishNetwork
> Satellite. WELL WORTH IT!
>
> James
>
On the whole, the viewing experience is better on a TV--bigger screen
(usually), no compression glitches, no having to hunt for the right codec,
and if you don't like it, you can flip around until you find something you
do like. But on the other hand, I hate having to be at the mercy of the TV
schedule (since I don't have TiVO yet), and if I download a show I can watch
it as many times as I want, without commercials, and I can usually find it
in HD, at a higher resolution than broadcast.
I think rather than all the constant hand-wringing over downloading (and
TiVO), the nets need to figure out a way to work with the net. Say you
missed last night's LOST. Go to ABC.com, watch a commercial or two (I know,
I know, but they do have bills--and actors--to pay), and download the ep or
watch a stream.
Apparently Sci-Fi is already doing something like that with the first
episode of Battlestar Galactica. Great! Once they can figure out a way to
make it pay (either with ads, or a pay-per service like iTunes), they'll be
onto something.
Michael Walker
have them when dvds are so much better? I can see a movie in widescreen and
I
don't have to worry about a channel drowning out the end credit music score
like Starz does to promote upcoming movies. >:(
Jonathan Ridell (London)
Maaxx wrote:
> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> show you want to watch off the internet?
Only for DIRECTV!!! :-D
Jonathan Riddell (London)
Mike wrote:
> "Simon Robson" <Simon.J...@Blueyonder.Co.Uk> wrote in message
> news:uCoVd.211671$B8.1...@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
>>What's the website to download all The Simpsons episodes then?
>>
>>Simon
>>
>
> try emule, torrent.. many others...
>
> show me a channel that has all the Simpsons episodes!
>
>
I have Morpheus.
Jonathan Riddell (London)
nimue wrote:
> Maaxx wrote:
>
>>Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading
>>any show you want to watch off the internet?
>
>
> Not in a million years would I consider such a thing.
>
A lot of people would rather take public transportation than give up
their cable/satellite.
Democracy Proponent, Ian J. Ball
"Robert Morrisette" <writ...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
I'll tell you why I refuse - because (right now) it's an inferior
technology:
- It takes longer to switch channels with digital than analog (what is
*with* the pause before channels come up on digital cable?!).
- There are problems with recording something on one channel, while
watching another, with digital.
- The issue of "visual artifacts" is *worse* with digital than with
analog. (I'll take 'ghosting' over 'pixelation' or full image 'dropout'
any day.)
Etc.
Bottom line - digital strikes me as a very immature technology at this
point.
--
I didn't get to vote in Iraq on Jan. 30, but I wish I could have.
Jonathan Riddell (London)
dre...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:28:04 +0000 (UTC), Maaxx <ma...@xrs.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>>show you want to watch off the internet?
>
>
> Why do you hate sports ?
I'm gay. :-D
Democracy Proponent, Ian J. Ball
wrote:
More to the point, *how* can you "download" the cable news channels
(esp. during 'breaking news')?!
Matt Garvey
> "James Gassaway" <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote in message
> news:jVoVd.8961$m31.1...@typhoon.sonic.net...
> > "Maaxx" <ma...@xrs.net> wrote in message
> > news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
> >> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> >> show you want to watch off the internet?
> >
> > No, because I want the people who make the shows I like to get paid,
> > thereby
> > giving them the incentive to keep making shows I like.
> >
>
> shows are free on tv, aside from being annoyed by ads
> I don't see how a free download affects that...
Where do you live where cable TV is free? I'd like to move there and subscribe
to your newsletter.
Matt Garvey
> Nielsen ratings are crap. I suspect TV Networks will soon come to realize
> this. Proof of this: On several occasions American Idol received several
> times the number of call in votes then the Nielsen Ratings claimed were
> watching. Proving far more people were watching American Idol that night
> then Idol was rated.
>
> And the claim that people call multiple times is discounted. Idol's vote
> system uses caller ID to identify the call and only accepts the first vote
> from that phone number.
This has already been negated several times, but consider also that even with
that rule in place, people could still use friends' phones (or just ask them to
call as a favor), even if those friends weren't watching, or even shit-giving
about it all.
nimue
Well, I ONLY take public transportation -- New Yorker, you know.
--
nimue
"If I had created reality television I would have had a much greater
influence, but then I would have had to KILL MYSELF." Joss Whedon
"There are two types of women -- those who like chocolate and complete
bitches." Dawn French
JamesL
"Richmond" <rsb...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:UKtVd.34936$hN1.1674@clgrps13...
include the commercials, even run a banner ad across the bottom of the
screen. If they flooded the lists with their copies you would watch that
rather than waste time sifting for the edited ones.
James
Reasoned Insanity
"nimue" <cup_o...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:epuVd.21542$rB3.3...@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> Jonathan Riddell (London) wrote:
>> nimue wrote:
>>
>>> Maaxx wrote:
>>>
>>>> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading
>>>> any show you want to watch off the internet?
>>>
>>>
>>> Not in a million years would I consider such a thing.
>>>
>>
>> A lot of people would rather take public transportation than give up
>> their cable/satellite.
>
> Well, I ONLY take public transportation -- New Yorker, you know.
I actually only use public transportation or my bicycle, kansas here.
Quiet Desperation
<ijball***SPAM-No***-7DB9D4.175...@orngca-news02.socal.rr.com>,
Democracy Proponent, Ian J. Ball <ijball***SPAM-No***@mac.com.invalid>
wrote:
> - It takes longer to switch channels with digital than analog (what is
> *with* the pause before channels come up on digital cable?!).
The decoder is suddeny presented with a new data stream. It takes a
moment to decode enough to make sense of it and display a frame. This
willgo away as the processors get faster.
> - There are problems with recording something on one channel, while
> watching another, with digital.
My Tivo does that fine. In fact, I can record TWO shows and play back a
third. You just need multiple tuners, same as with analog. Eventually
they'll have multiple tuners on a chip. Maybe they'll sell DVRs with
slots where you can plug in as many tuners as you'll need.
Quiet Desperation
<rsb...@telus.net> wrote:
> I think rather than all the constant hand-wringing over downloading (and
> TiVO), the nets need to figure out a way to work with the net. Say you
> missed last night's LOST. Go to ABC.com, watch a commercial or two (I know,
> I know, but they do have bills--and actors--to pay), and download the ep or
> watch a stream.
I think it was the PBS site, but I watched the whole show on
superstring theory called "The Elegant Universe" via free download.
Quiet Desperation
<mike...@despammed.com> wrote:
> I'm seriously considering unsubscribing from all the premium channels. Why
> have them when dvds are so much better?
I'm close to that now. Even the series like Sopranos show up on DVD.
David B
> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> show you want to watch off the internet?
No.
James Gassaway
news:8%oVd.92682$vO1.5...@nnrp1.uunet.ca...
>
> "James Gassaway" <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote in message
> news:jVoVd.8961$m31.1...@typhoon.sonic.net...
> >> show you want to watch off the internet?
> >
> > thereby
> > giving them the incentive to keep making shows I like.
> >
>
> shows are free on tv, aside from being annoyed by ads
> I don't see how a free download affects that...
>
income to make the shows. Internet downloads remove ads.
--
Multiversal Mercenaries. You name it, we kill it. Any time, any reality.
Dillon Pyron
>
>"David Johnston" <rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote in message
>news:4225e709...@news.telusplanet.net...
>> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 16:37:34 -0500, "Bishkek+10"
>> <griffey5...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> >That may very well be one of the most naive things I have ever read
>in
>> >any
>> >> >newsgroup.
>> >>
>> >> What makes it so naive? Cable providers do in fact pay the people who
>> >> they get their shows from.
>> >
>> >Oh, boy. Next.
>>
>> What mental malfunction makes you incapable of articulating your point
>> of view?
>
>It was articulated, If you didn't get the point the first time, you won't
>get it the second either genius.
>
Big deal. Get that?
--
dillon
"When the French are against it, you know we can't
be far wrong." - Adm. Bobbie Ray Inman
Dillon Pyron
>in article d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi, Maaxx at ma...@xrs.net wrote on
>3/2/05 12:28 PM:
>
>> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>> show you want to watch off the internet?
>
>Sure, same as I considered knocking over a liquor store or getting the
>season 6 Buffy DVDs. But I didn't do any of these things. Why? "Because
>it's wrong"
One's a crime, the other one is just plain stupid. Or at least
robbing a liquor store is stupid around here.
m1t0s1s
>Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>show you want to watch off the internet?
Sure, once I get off dialup. I really don't watch tv ever, really.
It's such a huge waste of time. I wish there was some way to pay for a
digital quality stream of the simpsons over the internet. That way I
could benefit my favorite shows directly rather than advertisers.
Everyone should go a month without watching tv. You'll feel better.
==============================================================
remove monkey to email
Democracy Proponent, Ian J. Ball
Quiet Desperation <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
You may be right on both counts. But my point is that the tech isn't
"there" yet. It's just not good enough.
Sparky
> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> show you want to watch off the internet?
Nope. Any other questions?
Democracy Proponent, Ian J. Ball
"James Gassaway" <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> "Mike" <mi...@poolsters.on.ca> wrote in message
> news:8%oVd.92682$vO1.5...@nnrp1.uunet.ca...
> >
> > "James Gassaway" <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote in message
> > news:jVoVd.8961$m31.1...@typhoon.sonic.net...
> > > "Maaxx" <ma...@xrs.net> wrote in message
> > > news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
> > >> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> > >> show you want to watch off the internet?
> > >
> > > No, because I want the people who make the shows I like to get paid,
> > > thereby giving them the incentive to keep making shows I like.
> >
> > shows are free on tv, aside from being annoyed by ads
> > I don't see how a free download affects that...
>
> TV (and Radio) 101. Ads are what pay for shows. Remove ads and there
> is no income to make the shows.
Not completely true - HBO, et al. disprove your contention.
> Internet downloads remove ads.
The future of all programming is *subscriber-based*, not
advertiser-supported. The internet may be the path to that (see:
internet & satellite radio).
Maaxx
news:OEtVd.38734$Vf6.1...@news20.bellglobal.com:
> Maaxx wrote:
>
>> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>> show you want to watch off the internet?
>
> Only for DIRECTV!!! :-D
You mean exchanging 70 channels you never watch for 300 channels you never watch?
Maaxx
news:ijball***SPAM-No***-B78421.180...@orngca-news02.socal.rr.com:
> In article <bBtVd.34934$hN1.8@clgrps13>, "Richmond" <rsb...@telus.net>
> wrote:
>
>> "Simon Robson" <Simon.J...@Blueyonder.Co.Uk> wrote in message
>> news:2qrVd.279713$K7.1...@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>>> Bet it would cost a lot of money anyway
>>
>> In what way? Between binaries groups, P2P programs, and bittorrent, I
>> could easily do that, for no more than the cost of my DSL bill. There
>> are times, though, when you just want to channel-surf, not to mention
>> that there are still shows that don't get distributed online.
>
> More to the point, *how* can you "download" the cable news channels
> (esp. during 'breaking news')?!
If you have the internet you don't need cable news. Plus, if the story is big
enough it will be on network news.
Maaxx
news:_RtVd.38744$Vf6.1...@news20.bellglobal.com:
> Mike wrote:
>
>> "Simon Robson" <Simon.J...@Blueyonder.Co.Uk> wrote in message
>> news:uCoVd.211671$B8.1...@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>>> What's the website to download all The Simpsons episodes then?
>>
>> try emule, torrent.. many others...
>>
>> show me a channel that has all the Simpsons episodes!
>
> I have Morpheus.
You're behind the times.
Maaxx
news:422670B2...@po.cwru.edu:
Network TV, where the vast majority of good shows are, is free.
Maaxx
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:28:04 +0000 (UTC), Maaxx <ma...@xrs.net> wrote:
>
>> Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>> show you want to watch off the internet?
>
> Why do you hate sports ?
Fnord!
Maaxx
Are you the new self-appointed spokesman for the planet?
Maaxx
So does TiVo and my VCR.
Maureen Goldman
>I'm seriously considering unsubscribing from all the premium channels. Why
>I
>don't have to worry about a channel drowning out the end credit music score
>like Starz does to promote upcoming movies. >:(
My local cable system has two tiers in addition to a basic package of
major networks, news, and weather. A few weeks ago I opted out of the
tier that mostly included movies (usually at least a year old). Like
you, I found that I enjoyed widescreen DVDs so much than I just wasn't
watching movies on cable any more. As well, since we had no access to
a Warner Bros. or science fiction channel, I've been downloading some
shows on the internet. I kept the tier that includes A&E, Discovery,
some older series, that sort of thing.
Funky
David Johnston
<ijball***SPAM-No***@mac.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Internet downloads remove ads.
>
>The future of all programming is *subscriber-based*, not
>advertiser-supported.
So you foresee a massive economic collapse of television as they are
no longer able to support the costs of making so many shows and the
studios mostly go bust?
David Johnston
>>
>> TV (and Radio) 101. Ads are what pay for shows. Remove ads and there
>> is no income to make the shows. Internet downloads remove ads.
>
>So does TiVo and my VCR.
Your point being?
David Johnston
>On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:28:04 +0000 (UTC), Maaxx <ma...@xrs.net> wrote:
>
>>Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>>show you want to watch off the internet?
>Sure, once I get off dialup. I really don't watch tv ever, really.
>It's such a huge waste of time. I wish there was some way to pay for a
>digital quality stream of the simpsons over the internet. That way I
>could benefit my favorite shows directly rather than advertisers.
>
>Everyone should go a month without watching tv. You'll feel better.
I've gone a month without watching TV. I didn't feel better.
nobody
> "Maaxx" <ma...@xrs.net> wrote in message
> news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
> > Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> > show you want to watch off the internet?
>
> If every person did this TV shows wouldn't be on air.
Good thing every person doesn't do this, then. (Duh.)
PS. The number of people downloading TV/music/etc. is tiny, in spite of
industry whining and propaganda. When Napster was still alive, the client
software reported an average of 1-3 million users online at any given time.
Compared to the 300 million population of the US, that was a minuscule 0.3%
to 1%. Versus the 6 billion world population, 0.03%. Even if modern P2P
networks cumulatively had 25 million users "doing great harm to 'Brittney
Spears', '24', and 'The Simpsons'", that's still just 1% of the world's
english speaking population (1.9 billion).
> And it is affecting
> shows that are currently on broadcast to. Shows such as "24" and "Alias"
> have one of the highest rates of downloads for episodes.
24 and Alias have the highest download rates, yes. But that's because of
the Europeans, and because the networks wait forever to show Europeans
episodes North Americans have already seen. So the Europeans download them.
Not because they want to be pirates, but because the networks basically
refuse to let them see those shows when everyone else has been allowed to.
Which means all of the 24 and Alias "pirates" are really just the show's
regular viewers and fans. If you lived in America and your Fox affiliate
didn't carry "24" or waited 9 months to show the episodes everyone else was
getting to see, you would very likely arrange a distant friend's assistance
to tape "24" from another affiliate and mail them to you. How are the
Europeans' downloads different? They're not.
> (as well as TIVO which is a whole other subject matter).
There's no difference between TiVo and any regular VCR. Both of them can
skip commercials and time-shift rather nicely.
The reason that the industry wants TiVo gone is because it never stopped
wanting the VCR gone. TiVo is nothing but a digital version of exactly
the same things all VCRs do and have always done, and the industry sees
this as its second chance to clobber home recording rights. The industry
knows the public doesn't think analytically too often, and is counting on
people not realizing that PVRs are incapable of doing any more harm than
traditional VCRs as their second chance to demonize home recording with
their lame B.S. about jeopardized ad revenues and piracy etc.
Remember when the RIAA goonsquad destroyed Napster because "Napster" is
spelled differently than "recording your favorite songs off the radio"?
I bet there are more cassettes lying around in people's homes containing
songs taped off the radio than there were MP3s on Napster. The RIAA
somehow forgot to mention that while suing Napster out of business, though.
The RIAA also overlooked the fact that calling a radio station to request
a song, and then hearing it FREE (gasp!) is no different than requesting
the same song from someone's Kazaa client. "Oops."
> If a show got cancelled such as say
> Veronica Mars a very small audience to begin with - people with that
> attitude would be the main reason why the show died. Simply because a few
> key "nieslen" viewers weren't watching the show would lose maybe a hundred
> or two hundred thousand viewers - a big enough difference to keep the show
> on for another season.
The reasons TV shows are dying or have poor ratings has nothing to do with
internet downloads. The reasons are:
1) The networks air lots of degrading shit that appeals only to mental
defectives to begin with. The same is true of the chaff put out by the
recording industry today. When airing dreck only interesting to one
population segment, you can't expect ratings to reflect huge numbers
like in bygone times when more broadly appealing programming was aired.
2) The intelligent viewers are mostly long gone (there's better things
to explore on the internet), so even when something good comes along,
there are few suitable audience members left "channel surfing" to notice.
Word of mouth would bring many of those suitable viewers back if given
time, but network execs are normally so short sighted that they cancel
or postpone the hell out of anything that doesn't get perfect ratings in
its first month its on the air -- see Futurama, Family Guy, etc.
nobody
> Actually... I saw this on a recent show discussing the proliferation of
> pornography. The satellite companies can actually tell which channel you
> have on. And the funny statistic: the average porn viewer only watches the
> show for 7 minutes.
Satellite companies know what you're watching only when you're silly enough
to plug your satellite receiver(s) into phone jacks (or into the internet,
for models which support that). Doing so lets them "phone home" like common
gutter spyware. Without phone/internet connections, your viewing is totally
and completely anonymous.
The only downside of not plugging satellite receivers into your phone line
is that you lose Impulse Pay-Per-View (the ability to order things with your
remote instead of calling the company's 800 number). To me, though, that's
a perfectly acceptable loss as compared with being spied on.
All digital cable systems, and some advanced analog cable systems as well,
also surveil you and report back on your viewing habits, BTW. They don't
need phone lines, since they have the coax itself to talk through. (Any
cable system that's been upgraded to support cable internet, or impulse
pay-per-view, by definition has two-way transmission capabilites -- from
them to you, and from you to them. As long as that capability exists in
the coax network, the chances are pretty good its also being used to watch
what you watch.)
nobody
> in article d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi, Maaxx at ma...@xrs.net wrote on
> 3/2/05 12:28 PM:
>
> > Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> > show you want to watch off the internet?
>
> Sure, same as I considered knocking over a liquor store or getting the
> season 6 Buffy DVDs. But I didn't do any of these things. Why? "Because
> it's wrong"
For your information, when you download episodes from the internet, you're
neither causing physical destruction to anybody's liquor store, nor are
you stealing. Stealing implies the removal of physical items from someone's
posession against their will. Copying is copying. If I take measurements
of your coffee table and make a duplicate in my wood shop, I haven't "stolen"
your coffee table.
nobody
> "Maaxx" <ma...@xrs.net> wrote in message
> news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
> > Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
> > show you want to watch off the internet?
>
> No, because I want the people who make the shows I like to get paid, thereby
> giving them the incentive to keep making shows I like.
I think the MPAA has uploaded a bittorrent of its bullshit to your brain.
If you forget to watch an episode of American Idol, the producers don't
lose money because you were absent from the "approved" broadcast's viewing
audience. The same is true if you download an episode from bit torrent
because you missed the "approved" broadcast.
The truth is that P2P is as beneficial to the entertainment industries as
FM has been to recording artists. People with P2P are likely to sample a
show or band they've heard about through word of mouth, and become fans.
Of those who become fans, many will watch the "approved" TV broadcasts (or
buy the CDs), considering that the broadcasts (and CDs) are of vastly
superior quality (and in the case of TV broadcasts, are available before
the torrents as well, and without all the fuss of the download). Which
means CD sales and viewers that otherwise wouldn't have existed. P2P is
just FM radio on crack: on the radio, music is free to the public knowing
monetary losses caused by people who tape off the radio are outweighed by
sales to those who buy what they hear there. P2P isn't wrong just because
some collect MP3s or Divx files from it without spending any money. If it
were, every FM station would be shut down because some people also tape
all their favorite music off the radio.
David B
Where did I say I was?
David Johnston
>James Gassaway wrote:
>
>> "Maaxx" <ma...@xrs.net> wrote in message
>> news:d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
>> > Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>> > show you want to watch off the internet?
>>
>> No, because I want the people who make the shows I like to get paid, thereby
>> giving them the incentive to keep making shows I like.
>
>I think the MPAA has uploaded a bittorrent of its bullshit to your brain.
>
>If you forget to watch an episode of American Idol, the producers don't
>lose money because you were absent from the "approved" broadcast's viewing
>audience.
Nobody was talking about missing a broadcast episode. The subject was
severing your relationship with cable TV.
David Johnston
>ANIM8Rfsk wrote:
>
>> in article d05443$4ob$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi, Maaxx at ma...@xrs.net wrote on
>> 3/2/05 12:28 PM:
>>
>> > Has anybody ever considered giving up cable TV and just downloading any
>> > show you want to watch off the internet?
>>
>> Sure, same as I considered knocking over a liquor store or getting the
>> season 6 Buffy DVDs. But I didn't do any of these things. Why? "Because
>> it's wrong"
>
>For your information, when you download episodes from the internet, you're
>neither causing physical destruction to anybody's liquor store, nor are
>you stealing.
He never said that he was causing physical destruction or stealing.
He just said that violating copyright is wrong.
Democracy Proponent, Ian J. Ball
rgo...@telusplanet.net (David Johnston) wrote:
No - I see a gradual shift away from the old model, as we're already
starting to see with radio and satellite radio.
Ian (A la carte cable may accelerate this shift as well...)
Dennis Francis Heffernan
> No, because I want the people who make the shows I like to get paid, thereby
> giving them the incentive to keep making shows I like.
Unless you are a Neilsen family or similar, or maybe run a TiVo, no one knows
if you're watching the program or not.
--
Dennis F. Heffernan CoH: Venture (Virtue) heff...@comcast.net
#include <disclaim.h> MS Messenger: Venture
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days
when Victoria reigned!" -- T.S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"
Maaxx
news:42266981...@news.telusplanet.net:
VCRs have been around for 30 years and we still have television.
Maaxx
news:PIzVd.26$oO4...@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net:
It seems you've never heard of intellectual property.