TV Over Phone Lines To Arrive In 2005

[Ioman]

Looks like the telephone companies are fighting back:

"If everything goes as planned, the telephone industry will be all about television in 2005. TV over your home phone line. TV on your cell phone. Few topics have been as popular this past year among phone companies and their technology partners. "

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=528&e=4&u=/ap/20041221/ap_on_hi_te/ye_telecom

[llbbl]

and the blur between the phone company and the cabe tv companies grows yet even foggier

[ECA]

What a WASTE...
Consider that Phone lines are to small to carry much..
CABLE lines are great for most everything, but in the END it will be to crowded...
Might as well AIM high, and use the power cables, as they are trying for internet, NOW.. But thats going to take a FULL overhaul.
But with ANY of this, its going to take ANOTHER 20+ years to get most of it in.. upgraded, modified, FIXED...

CELL took..
20+ years to get Analog up, and digital STILL isnt totally up(another 10 years to go).
Cable..
Just went to high speed access, and that took 10 years to UPGRADE, and STILl isnt finished, but then they will need FREQ modulation, or goto FIBER OPTIC(RE OVERHAUL) whole system, 20+ years..
POWER lines..
Have the bandwidth, but transformers arent designed to keep quality signal strength, and would kill most signals. Wont go into TAPING the lines.. they cover 99% of the country, but would need complete overhaul of electrical system. 20+ years...

[znaps]

TV over the phone lines in 2005? They said we'd all be using 3G on our cellphones by 2003 too.

I call BS.

[llbbl]

I hope there is more of a convergence in the telecommunications industry where we have one line going into the home to bring phone/data/HDTV all through one provider. There of course should be several of these companies that are large enough to provide an all encompassing service so they could compete with each other.

I wonder if these large companies did form that initially it might be better and easier but they would probably be more likely to split up the country through agreements not to market in each others terrorties.

[ECA]

TRUe,
Its the BELL company AGAIN... And STILl no competition

[llbbl]

so what is better . a bunch of independant companies different for every city or a large conglomerate spanning counties and states . It makes sense that the bigger a company it is than the more funds it will be able to poor into developing additional services for its customers like interactive TV and full HDTV service and 10 MB/s U/D internet. What are the advantages to smaller companies? They offer a localized feel when you call them up the customer service people live in the same town you do.

[ECA]

Large company Takes over, and there is no controll and no competition, so they can raise price ANYTIME.

Smaller companies, but still little control.. And no price breaks,m as they cant afford to LOWEr prices, to pay there costs.

What would be neet, is like:
LOTS of small companies, that are supported by the makers of the equipment. But this is to SMART, and wont happen. Each comapny would be responsible for setting up and supplying access to 100,000-250,000 persons.
this would give ALOt of business to the Equipment makers equal to the BIG corp, and a fair price for there product... Insted of a customized NON-friendly tech, that no one knows how to use. And it would setup a chance to have competition with the small companies. and the companies would FIGHT for the large DENSE areas of population, and then the rural areas..

[llbbl]

It's complicated issue to try and think about how a city is wired for telecommunications and getting these systems to operate together.

[ECA]

they could've done it 20 years ago, using cable TV lines... but no-one wabted to buy into the idea or set it up... HARd part is the relay systems..

[llbbl]

they could've done it 20 years ago, using cable TV lines

what company was that ? was it a federal initiative?

[ECA]

No, it technology...
Thats why you can get 200 channels on CABLe and highspeed access NOW...
they were discussing it 20 years ago, and Adding telephone access to it also.

[Ioman]

I am going to wait for TV over powerlines so that I can get my internet and television both through the power lines without having any special ethernet or cable jacks or phone jacks in every room.

[ECA]

ya,
but that will take a whole new box on the outside of your home.
they will be useing an ungraded tech, freq modulation. bandwidth available makes it great.
REMEMBER to OLD time party lines? They went to FM, and had 250 ppl on 1 line, and everyone had there own phone and no interruptions. Think what they can do NOW, including digital into that.

[Canada]

You people are living in the dark ages. I have been enjoying tv through my phone line since april of last year. I also enjoy very fast broadband internet access as well through my phone line. As for digital cellular.... in Canada it's deployed over the entire Rogers AT&T network. Every single cell in the country. The other providers cover a minimum of 80% of the Canadian population with digital service. And I'm not totally sure of what 3g is supposed to be exactly however, if voice, sms, mms, full color photos, video, internet access, all through a connection faster than 56k has anything to do with it.... then it has arrived. (I may be wrong on the 3g thing though) lol

[ECA]

Ya,
it funny that other countries have access's to tech we are only just stating to HAVE...NOT USE...and they're prices are CHEAP, and we pay ALOT for them..

[znaps]

The USA is traditionally slow to embrace new technologies though. As for why, I'm not really sure.

[ECA]

Ya,
Its called money...
Until we PAY for it in ADVANCE they wont install it...
As for tech, they will only install the BASIC material to do anything, and NOTHING more.
digital could have been fully installed accross this country 10 years ago, BUT they added analog digital, so that when you get out of AREA, you USE analog phone service. so, that they DIDNT need to add all the special STUFF.

[znaps]

I don't think so, I think it's more to do with how eager the customer is to embrace new technology.

Companies will invest millions before getting it back from customers if they have confidence that we'll pay for the service or product..look at Comcast for instance.

[ECA]

I DO, Look at comcast..
And all the REST of the companies..
And do you REALize that the stockholders NEVER had a dip in profits..
the the TOP head managers NEVER had to lower how much the were PAID?

[ModestMouse13]

thats kinda worthless. its stupid how many dumb worthless things we humans have made.

[ECA]

Its worthless HOW much we PAY, for something thats ALMOST free to USE..
Cable TV..
Most channels are broadcast in CERTAIN areas for FREE, YEP, use that antenna.
But CABLE wants MONEY for it..
Quality of clothing..
Even tho its MADE in malasia, it costs MORE then the US brand. WHY??
TECH. WOW, should I compare whats in the US, to malasia, and japan.. and its 1/4 the price..

[k2]

cable is free of censorship; that's the main reason it's different than over the air broadcasting. anything you pay for; is uncensored. canada doesn't have 3g cell phones; that's euro/asia. we can import 3g phones since most can run multiple networks; but they avg $1,000+ cad. rogers is gsm.

20yrs ago you couldn't network telephone + tv; the hardware didn't exist; regardless of what you'd like to think ECA. networking is in a fast development stage; things you see today just wasn't possible 5+ yrs ago; like the net over power lines: the old hardware constantly melted.

most asian cities/countries are offering tv over the phonelines; i'm pretty sure it's available in hongkong now. i could check with my bosses (live there). i'm jealous of their dsl prices. 11Mb costs $6cad.

[ECA]

20 years ago, the only thing missing was DIGITAL, insted of analog signals..
With digital they can SEND MANY channals on the same frequency, insted 1 channel PER frequency.

Prices in this country include HOW MUCH someone makes at the top. As profit, and Stocks. Other countries DONT use this method, and there prices are cheaper.

[k2]

that's some pure crack talk.

[ECA]

well, consider ..
The phone company had 1 telephone line and 16-32 persons on 1 line, and you could ALL listen to each other..PARTY line..
They went to FREQ modulated phones in the 50's, and that 1 Phone line had the SAME people, but you coulnt listen to each other ANYMORE..

Only problems was a good storm would knock it out, and that there was ONLY so many frequencies that the line could handle at one time.

With digital, you could have 255 persons on 1 LINE PER frequency, and run 1 Phone line.

ya, I went to tech school to learn Telephone tech...

As to PROFIT margins... talk to someone that just came back from japan.. they charge $50 for a phone, and they have ALOT more features then the stuff in the US.

[znaps]

The technologies here are a few years behind, but you do get up to date $50 phones here also.

Anyway, the Japanese mobile companies make way more in services than in the USA, such as using your phone for purchases at vending machines, or train tickets.

[k2]

Prices in this country include HOW MUCH someone makes at the top. As profit, and Stocks. Other countries DONT use this method, and there prices are cheaper.

that's what i was calling pure crack talk.

[ECA]

what??
That a CEO in this county makes 10-100 times what they do in other countries??
Even as an average..
Its funy yhat when the tpyota was imported into this country that $8,000 was added as import taxes..Without that ADDED cost, it was the Most reasonable priced car on the market. Same goes for the rest of the imports.

[k2]

well, yeah .. that's economics. import/export, etc. every country does it. i pay a 100% mrsp mark up on mountain bike parts. seriously, a $30 shimano rear derailuer costs me $70cad. the exchange is only around 1.3%

[ECA]

ya, and cell phones have a 400+% markup in the US, BEFORE SALE.

If we CANT compete, then we should get out of the market.
US cars have so much markup they have to lower the prices to sell them, $2000 REBATES..
Ever look at a car and wonder HOW they got that much money for one... I REALLy cant see it. 90% of the parts are made in other countries for 1/10-1/100 the price in the US, but we PAY as if it was MADE in the US. And its NOt the import taxes, as PARTS have no tax, only the FULL car shipped in. AND NAFTA(YUCK) made it so, there WAS no tax between Mexico and the US.
THEn there are 3 locations in the world, that are SETup as NON-TAX ports. All you have to do, is send Via that port(unload on docks, then LOAD UP again) and all goods are NON-TAXED..

For what many countries pay Little or nothing for, we pay about 4+ times the price BEFORE its even sold here.
Take the most expencive and popular Video card... its about $400 HERE.. It costs about $50 to make.
Nike, shoes...made, shipped, and distributed, about $3, and we pay HOW MUCH???

[k2]

well that's capitalism. you pay more for some items, while other countries pay more for items you get for very little cost.

good 'ole capitalism.

[ECA]

Im sorry..
I believe a FAIR price is better.
Thats one reason I wait 1 year after a product is introduced.. I wont pay the extra $100 for the BEST/NEW item...Esp now when most releases are beta ware.