> Have any of you actually looked at the streamed video on a 63" HD display.This argument has two fatal flaws: 'streamed' and 'today'. The best HD
> These streamed formats are for content only and in no way compete quality
> wise to real broadcast television. Any argument that the streamed version
> of today television is a real replacement for it cannot be serious.
program you can watch is simply a big box of bits. With a DVR, it
doesn't matter how those bits get to your computer (aka TV), or when, or
even how long it takes. Streaming has two purposes: just-in-time
transmission to minimize how much you need to buffer on your end, and
making it difficult for you to save a complete copy (a form of DRM). It
also helps for live action, since you don't need to wait for the
complete program to be recorded.
Even today, streaming can be done to any arbitrary quality standard.
The best example I know of is watching a movie from my Netflix Instant
Queue using TiVo. Usually the only way you know it's not a recorded HD
program or a DVD is to try to skip more time than the buffer contains.
I suspect DRM is the only reason I can't simply download the entire
movie to my TiVo and watch it with full TiVo capability.
I have excellent reception on most OTA channels, but I have trees in the
way, and these trees keep growing taller. The FAA wouldn't let me put
up a 100' tower. I'm not anxious to pay $10,000 to have all the trees
topped. I'd pay to have shows on the marginal channels delivered via
Well that can be taken the wrong way.....it is just that after a week+ regarding a topic that turns out to be a political issue verses any technical issue it is time to stop discussing it on a technical based users group. By the way I meant either pro or con call your congressman. I'm too old to make my life miserable either way but I am con the issue.
--- In HDTV-in-SFbay@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Swank" <rswank@...> wrote:
>Now I know what they mean about you.
> So why don't those that care call a congressman and leave it off the users