Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft's Xbox To Have Streaming TV Service?

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the bill-tv dept.

Microsoft 131

BogenDorpher writes "Microsoft is reportedly in talks with major TV networks about having its Xbox Live service stream TV channels in the United States. This would be an interesting move on the company's part as it would allow an Xbox 360 user to stream TV channels though their Xbox."

cancel ×

131 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Captain Obvious to the rescue! (3, Insightful)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927368)

Wait, no shit, a streaming TV service would be an interesting move because it would allow users to stream TV? Never would have thought of that myself.

Re:Captain Obvious to the rescue! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927396)

Wait, no shit, a streaming TV service would be an interesting move because it would allow USoAian users to stream TV? Never would have thought of that myself.

Re:Captain Obvious to the rescue! (1)

sortius_nod (1080919) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927858)

Yeh, because they wouldn't do it anywhere else [foxtel.com.au] .

(hint, they are already doing this)

Re:Captain Obvious to the rescue! (4, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927398)

Yo dog. I herd you like summaries so I put a summary of your summary in your summary so your summary can be summarized while it summarizes....

Re:Captain Obvious to the rescue! (0)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927404)

Well played.

Re:Captain Obvious to the rescue! (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928944)

Good thing this story came out in the spring. Just a little later and it would have been overwhelming.

Re:Captain Obvious to the rescue! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927790)

Wait, no shit, a streaming TV service would be an interesting move because it would allow users to stream TV? Never would have thought of that myself.

I figured that bit out on my own pretty quickly.
The part that totally blew my mind was learning a service called Xbox live would actually be able to stream to an xbox!

Re:Captain Obvious to the rescue! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35928982)

I would have thought of it as more like a steaming turd service.

What's with that summary? (0)

TBBle (72184) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927374)

Am I the only one who thinks that summary started off as a single sentence, but got a little ouroboros on itself?

Re:What's with that summary? (2, Funny)

kiddailey (165202) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927614)

Slashdot is just trying to be more efficient by duplicating articles sooner.

Re:What's with that summary? (1)

jhigh (657789) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927988)

Apparently no one is RTFA before criticizing the summary. The summary isn't the problem. FTA: "Microsoft is reportedly in talks with major TV networks about having its Xbox Live service stream TV channels in the United States. This would be an interesting move on the company's part as it would allow an Xbox 360 user to not only play games on their console but also stream TV channels though their Xbox."

It's bad enough to have this kind of garbage in Slashdot summaries, but when it's coming from the actual articles...we're doomed.

Re:What's with that summary? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35929170)

It's bad enough to have this kind of garbage in Slashdot summaries, but when it's coming from the actual articles...we're doomed.

It's coming from a guy named BogenDorpher on winbeta.org. "Journalism" of this quality is exactly why the majority of blogs shouldn't be taken too seriously.

tl;dr (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927378)

Good thing that second sentence was there to summarize the first sentence.

If only (3, Funny)

Cronock (1709244) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927380)

If only there was already a way to get cable channels onto my tv...

Re:If only (1)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928626)

I cut my cable TV channels this weekend and got Netflix. I went from $140 a month to $70 a month including the new Netflix fees.

If M$ can do this, they are actually going to end up saving you a ton of money. (This would get the IRONIC tag on Fark.) Or in other words, they can end up saving you the cost of a Windows licence every single month.

(Posted from my Ubuntu machine)

Re:If only (1)

yincrash (854885) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929068)

If only there was a way to get individual channels that you want to watch a la carte without having to buy a full package worth of crap...

Re:If only (1)

SydShamino (547793) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929614)

The cables companies will never allow this. Don't be fooled into thinking Microsoft is negotiating an end-around to the bundling. This will take legislation, and legislation will take politicians, and politicians prefer cash.

Dish Network has been pushing for ala carte packages for years. If Microsoft were to announce such a deal, I suspect Dish Network would insist on one, too, with each contract renewal.

Great Summary (1)

MikeTheGreat (34142) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927384)

"Microsoft is reportedly in talks with major TV networks about having its Xbox Live service stream TV channels in the United States. This would be an interesting move on the company's part as it would allow an Xbox 360 user to stream TV channels though their Xbox."

Really? I had no idea that streaming TV channels to XBox Live would allow my XBox 360 to stream TV channels! Thank you, sir, for the excellent & informative summary! :)
</ ducks >

Re:Great Summary (1)

Cronock (1709244) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927410)

To be fair, it's actually a direct quote from the article.

Re:Great Summary (1)

toetagger (642315) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927430)

What's worse? Writing something stupid, or quoting something stupid?

Re:Great Summary (0)

gatodecat (822540) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927490)

What's worse? Writing something stupid, or quoting something stupid?

Yes.

Re:Great Summary (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927758)

Lisa: It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Homer's Brain: What does that mean? Better say something or they'll think you're stupid.
Homer: Takes one to know one.
Homer's Brain: Swish!

Finally! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927388)

Using my Xbox 360, I can now use my TV to watch TV!

Re:Finally! (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927422)

+1 Insightful.

Extra points for getting people to pay extra for the privilege of watching youtube-quality video on their new HDTV setup.

Re:Finally! (2)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927612)

What do you mean? Do you think that the quality of video provided through a streaming XBOX service is going to somehow be worse than the HD you get from Netflix? Or the pseudo-HD you get from Comcast over cable?

Are we all really pissing over a way to possibly finally introduce some form of competition to the cable monopolies? As someone who has no interest in spending $100-$200 month (depending on whether you just want the crap channels that you don't watch or the crap channels plus the few channels with good content on them that are a ridiculous part of your monthly subscription) for the few worthwhile things on television, I'm interested in a possible alternative. If this can somehow get me reasonably priced access to just the channels/content I care about without having to install digital cable boxes all over the house, pay an expensive bill to the Cable company (who kept raising prices 10% or so per year for as long as I had it), then they might have a customer. Especially if it includes time-shifting capabilities.

Of course, if it turns out to just be "yo dawg, we put cable television on your xbox!" then . . . maybe not. Unless it'll be in competition against your cable television provider, rather than just another way for your existing provider to send you content (the way that ESPN content currently depends on whether you're already a cable subscriber in certain areas). Because, then, it's not any form of competition, after all.

Re:Finally! (1)

jmac_the_man (1612215) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927996)

the way that ESPN content currently depends on whether you're already a cable subscriber in certain areas

For ESPN on Xbox live, you need to get internet from an affiliated ISP. Your ISP is not necessarily your cable/TV company, especially if you're using this service to cancel your TV subscription.

Torne (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927406)

Been wondering when we would see something like this here in the states. The PS3 has had an add-on (Japan-only) since about March of last year called Torne that adds DVR capability.

Re:Torne (1)

AlanS2002 (580378) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927656)

Australia has had downloadable content for a while now that allows you to watch foxtel (what you yanks call cable) streamed through your xbox (costs doush to use though). Having free to air streamed though the xbox would be cool though.

Re:Torne (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35928960)

(costs doush to use though)

Is doush one of those words you skips use?

Re:Torne (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35929082)

That isn't a word.

Longcat (-1, Offtopic)

ksemlerK (610016) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927412)

Longcat is longer then other cats. Longcat is long.

ZZZzzz (1)

BogenDorpher (2008682) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927414)

I was half asleep when I posted that summary.... sorry guys lol

Re:ZZZzzz (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927506)

That's okay, I was completely asleep before I finished reading it.

Re:ZZZzzz (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927956)

To be honest so was samzenpus so I wouldn't feel that bad.
Just think of it as a recursive summary...

won't somebody please think of the electrons (1)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927424)

Am I the only one who feels uncomfortable watching streaming TV unless a multicast implementation is in place? It's such a waste of bandwidth.

Re:won't somebody please think of the electrons (2)

DarwinSurvivor (1752106) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927468)

Multi-cast uses just as much bandwidth as uni-cast (regular connections). It war INTENDED to be implemented in a way that allowed less bandwidth, but is now nothing more than an easy way to establish multiple uni-cast connections.

Disclaimer: The above is true on the *internet*, local networks may act differently!

Re:won't somebody please think of the electrons (1)

beanpoppa (1305757) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928218)

Then it's not multicast. Most ISP's don't support multicast. If they did, then it would be trivial for broadcasters to begin simulcasting their channels over the Internet. It would cost them practically nil. This would go against the cable co's interests.

Re:won't somebody please think of the electrons (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929416)

but then all the users are limted to the same old same old.. this program starts at this time and ends at that time -- where it is very very very obvious that people want to watch something at the time they want to watch it - and no DVR is a stop gap not a solution.

you want to limit bandwidth - allow all the set top boxes to be buffers/nodes and do a massive bit-torrent style network..

Yes (2)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927536)

The whole point of streaming (well other than maybe to pay less than cable/satellite) is on demand. You watch what you want when you want. That the the reason Netflix's streaming is so damn popular. You get to choose what it is you want and it starts and stops at your pleasure.

Can't do that with multi-cast.

Broadcast = perfect for multicast (1)

Aqualung812 (959532) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928110)

The point is that the parent poster is making refers to live TV stations. As in, watching a sports event live, or a 1,000 other things that people rather watch live, if for no other reason than to keep from reading spoilers before they get it from their DVR.

I agree, I really wish the Mbone actually connected to ISPs, but they don't use it. Even if Xbox and the TV station supported it, the ISPs won't simply because they can't figure out how to bill each other for 1 stream that goes to 100,000 endpoints.

Re:Yes (1)

SighKoPath (956085) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929298)

You could still hook a DVR up to the multicast stream, and time-shift it that way.

Vodafone Portugal has this service. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927452)

Vodafone does that in Portugal.
You can download a software to your xbox that allows it to work as a TV Box for their IPTV service.
The download costs 10€.

If you can live with the noise the xbox makes, it's a pretty good deal.

Re:Vodafone Portugal has this service. (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928242)

I can assure you it'll cost more than that if Microsoft does it :)

There's quite a few stream things going on, in small set-top-boxes that also allow you to stream videos from a PC (running a DLNA server, like the free and good Tvmobili or PS3MediaServer). Some of these also transparently stream video from the internet too, like youtube and BBC iPlayer.

Wake up (1)

Kuruk (631552) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927458)

Its ok they will screw it up and pirate bay will still be cheaper and easier.

They trying to change. That's a good sign at least.

Re:Wake up (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927608)

Microsoft has actually been playing the IP-TV game for some years now [wikipedia.org] . I can't speak for the quality of their implementation; but it could hardly be worse than a lot of the shit that cable companies manage to ship with a straight face.

The new development here would be whatever eldrich blood rituals are required to actually get permission from Team Content and the Cable Cartel to do something that might remotely involve change or a hypothetical threat to their revenue and/or serf population.

That, honestly, is where piracy really shines. The cost savings are attractive to hardcore cheapskates; but the really nice part is being able to use technology to the limits of its capability, not to the limits of what some suit thinks are acceptable for his '80s understanding of the TV/Computer distinction.

Re:I have MS Mediaroom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35928302)

Portuguese ISP "MEO" has been distributing IPTV cisco boxes for a while, the boxes have Microsoft's Mediaroom in the firmware. My parents have this service at home and in my opinion the Mediaroom is crap. It is still better than the alternatives provided by other Portuguese ISPs but comparing to what I saw in france (Free.fr for example), MEO is much worse. Microsoft's Mediaroom is slow to react to the remote control which can cause some frustration, it also crashes frequently (no shutdown needed because they have a watchdog which resets the router automatically) and is extremely DRM oriented. That is, we can't watch recordings on the PC, we can't copy media into the box (the box even has a USB connector which doesn't work), we can't stream from the PC either. Mediaroom's can't also do transcoding, that is, you are only allowed to plug 720p or 1080p flatscreens into the box. If you plug, lets say, a 22' HDMI screen with 1680x1050 resolution, you are fucked because either the monitor or the box can not resize the stream.

The FreeBox (from free.fr) is way more useful, it even supports UPNP which allows you to stream from your computer very easily with mediatomb or xbmc.

Fine Print (1)

atari2600a (1892574) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927466)

It'll probably only be available to Xbox Gold members. I was pissed when I set up a DD-WRT box to find out that I couldn't even USE netflix, & I'm sure this'll piss off alot of people too.

Re:Fine Print (1)

AlanS2002 (580378) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927668)

I think you'd be right about that. In Australia streaming Foxtel through your xbox is only for gold members and then you got to pay extra again.

Re:Fine Print (1)

jmac_the_man (1612215) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928016)

It's not fine print. To do anything on Xbox Live, you need to pay for it. If it's not an individual purchase (i.e. I pay 1200 points for DLC or 80 points for a stupid avatar upgrade.) If it's not an individual piece of content at a fixed price, it's part of your $60 dollars a year subscription. The ONLY reason their free accounts exist is so you can make individual purchases from their store.

Re:Fine Print (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928392)

That rationalization might hold if you didn't have to pay for the netflix subscription on top of it. But you do. And your ISP. And you've already paid for the 360 too, so there's really no good justification that you should have to pay XBL, too.

Re:Fine Print (1)

jmac_the_man (1612215) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928892)

That rationalization might hold if you didn't have to pay for the netflix subscription on top of it. But you do. And your ISP. And you've already paid for the 360 too, so there's really no good justification that you should have to pay XBL, too.

Why stop there? You also have to pay for the electricity. And your house. And taxes. You pay taxes, right? Compared to those things, Live is cheap. How about we make Xbox Live the one thing that we have to pay for and make all those other things free?

The reason you have to pay Microsoft for XBox Live is that it is an ongoing service that Microsoft provides to its customers. Your ISP provides you with a different, but similar, service. (They don't provide you with matchmaking services or a standardized friends list that persists across games.) Netflix provides you with a different service. (Netflix doesn't provide you with the ability to watch a Netflix movie with other people who aren't in the room with you. Microsoft built that service on top of Netflix, and then provides you with the matchmaking service so you can.) If you want a service from Microsoft, you have to pay Microsoft for it.

Re:Fine Print (0)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929016)

Are you illiterate, or just a troll?

Reading comprehension, it's a good idea.

Microsoft doesn't provide the bandwidth for Netflix on the 360. Microsoft doesn't provide the movies. Therefore, IN TERMS OF THIRD PARTY SERVICES (which is what the damn post was about), it makes no sense to only allow it on gold subscriptions.

Re:Fine Print (0)

whereiswaldo (459052) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928182)

Agreed. I emailed Microsoft criticizing the need to have a paid XBox Live Gold account just so I could use my paid Netflix membership on an XBox 360. My 360 is almost always turned off now and Wii/PS3 get all the use.

Re:Fine Print (0)

filthpickle (1199927) | more than 3 years ago | (#35930026)

The problem is that the vast majority of Xbox Live users, or should I say console scum, don't know any better and happily fork it over.

Please note that I don't mean that all console gamers are console scum. Just the stupid ones that pay for things that should be free....and that are causing the dumbing down of games.

Ah well...lowest common denominator. I am so glad that Portal 2 didn't suck. I would have taken a hostage.

Re:Fine Print (1)

EastCoastSurfer (310758) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928562)

In addition the xbox is a horrible device to use to watch movies because it's so damn loud. It sounds like a jet taking off which is fine during action flicks, but not something you want whirring in the background during dialog.

When my xbox live gold account ran out instead of spending $60 on it again, I just bought an apple tv 2 for $99. It streams netflix great and is much better from a usage standpoint (the remote is simple, the device is tiny, and it's silent). I assume a Roku or similar device would also work just as well or better if you have lots of random ripped movie formats that you also want to stream from your home network.

The US - behind the rest of the world again... (2)

OneMadMuppet (1329291) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927478)

...you've been able to stream Sky on the XBox in the UK for years. Why is this a big deal?

Re:The US - behind the rest of the world again... (1)

benbean (8595) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927720)

For which you have to already have a full monthly Sky subscription, meaning your TV already has a Sky box on it perfectly capable of showing these channels, and an Xbox Live Gold account. Hardly a great deal.

Re:The US - behind the rest of the world again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927896)

For which you have to already have a full monthly Sky subscription, meaning your TV already has a Sky box on it perfectly capable of showing these channels, and an Xbox Live Gold account. Hardly a great deal.

Its still good for multiroom / if you do not have 2 sky boxes but you want to be able to watch TV in your bedroom

Re:The US - behind the rest of the world again... (1)

benbean (8595) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927944)

Maybe, but it requires a full Sky Player-eligibe Sky account, which means you either have to already be paying extra on your base package for Multiroom or one of the Sports packages. Again, this is in addition to the Xbox Live Gold account requirement. If it was a simple, reasonable monthly fee for access to Sky channels on the Xbox without a dish it'd be a worthwhile proposition for people who aren't already Sky customers. As it is, you already need to be a Sky customer paying in the £40-50 a month region for your packages to benefit.

What we need in the UK is a decent Netflix-style system with unlimited access to a film and television library in the £10-20 a month region, accessible on our existing consoles without any surplus requirements such as the Xbox Live membership or massively overpriced full Sky package.

Re:The US - behind the rest of the world again... (1)

OneMadMuppet (1329291) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929242)

Nope, you can subscribe to Sky Player separately - you don't need a Sky box or a dish or whatever. There's a link on the front page: http://skyplayer.sky.com/vod/page/online-tv.html [sky.com]

Re:The US - behind the rest of the world again... (1)

benbean (8595) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929338)

That's for a very limited subset of channels though compared to the dish packages.

The US has lower multi room fees most then others (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928072)

The US has lower multi room fees most then others.

SKY multi room is a rip off at 25 pounds + 10 pounds HD fee per box after box 1 and box 1 needs it own HD fee as well.

canada is the best buy the box pay no rent and no outlet on most systems some make you pay like $5 to have more then 3 boxes.

Are the editors even trying? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927500)

I think it would be interesting for slashdot editors to put an effort in choice and editing of news summaries because more effort would be put in choice and editing of news summaries on slashdot.

The end of OTA (1)

2phar (137027) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927544)

And if we can get everyone streaming TV, then the govt can sell off the rest of the broadcast tv spectrum for yet more $$$

Re:The end of OTA (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927628)

I'm not impressed by the current "Let's sell it to the telcos for rather less than it is worth; because Ma Bell knows best!" strategy for spectrum re-allocation; but I can't say that I'd be sad to see the end of the rather ghastly waste of high quality spectrum that is legacy broadcasting.

Coupled with kinect.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927546)

If you thought iphone tracking was bad, wait till the kinect can watch you and your chip /beer logo's and hear your every movement while you watch your 'streaming'... genius.
I for one welcome our new multimedi....Oh wait.

Re:Coupled with kinect.. (1)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927616)

Catching me jerking it to the Food Network a few times should cure them of their desire to invade my privacy.

Re:Coupled with kinect.. (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928352)

They have Nigella [wikipedia.org] on the food network now?

Already happening in Australia (4, Informative)

stootles (100640) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927580)

http://www.xbox.com/en-AU/Live/Foxtel/

i iz in ur description... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927598)

Obvious description is obvious.

Great. (1)

zppln (2058178) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927610)

Another shitty US-only feature paid for by Gold subscribers from all over the world. I'm still not renewing my subscription. Try harder.

done already thru sky uk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927626)

Already done by sky bsb in UK and its great just wish it had BBC and co on it or recordabe ability

The Murdoch Empire (2)

dorward (129628) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927686)

We (in the UK) have had Sky Player on XBox for ages. I'm amazed America doesn't have anything similar already.

Re:The Murdoch Empire (0)

Amouth (879122) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929466)

Sky is flawed in that you already have to have a set-top box and full package.

what i want is to select and pay for only the channels i want to watch - sorry i don't need 100-200+ different channels - i watched a total of 3 when i had cable.. one was broadcast the other two was cable only.. when they started selling their shows on Amazon/iTunes i cut cable and went to Broadcast + Netflix and haven't looked back once.

The racism involved is staggering (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927760)

What is it with these people?

- rating electrotechnical sites (1)

dimon8282 (2070134) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927776)

Elektro-top [elektro-top.ru] - rating electrotechnical sites

A lot of devices already do that (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927798)

It is just another "me too" feature from Microsoft a few years after it is available everywhere else - Blu-ray players, Internet TVs, Tivo, Boxee, Roku, etc.

Several devices support Amazon Instant Video.

Amazon has CreateSpace for distributing movies through Amazon's website.

Amazon recently started Amazon Studios to fund movie making.

Youtube took the size limitations off videos on the site and devices already support streaming video to your TV from Youtube. They will probably introduce a way for content producers to get paid similar to Hulu Plus or Amazon Instant Video.

Re:A lot of devices already do that (1)

jmac_the_man (1612215) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928028)

None of those things are broadcast TV, which is what this article is about.

It has it already with Sky (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927812)

If you have Sky multi room in the UK or Ireland you can currently stream whatever TV channels you subscribe to with your Sky package on your Xbox.

Anyone I know that uses it only have the Xbox and use a friends account number to get access to the Sky channels

Lets take this the next step. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927828)

Maybe cut out the xbox and connect the TV directly to the inputting connection. We could call it a "wire" connection, or a "cable" connection. Or even take it further and broadcast TV over the air! It could even be free and supported by ads. All you would need is a simple wire to pick up this broadcast. The potential is endless! You know, this idea is so crazy, it just might work!

It already does this if you have U-Verse... (1)

aapold (753705) | more than 3 years ago | (#35927874)

If you have U-verse you can get this xbox thing that basically turns it into a u-verse receiver/dvr (using the xbox hard drive). Sadly they charge $99 for this, versus a monthly fee of like $5 for another unit. I guess it would pay for itself eventually. Or if you somehow had a TV with only one input it could be worth it. They advertise not having to use the source select button on your tv remote as a feature. Its not a $99 feature. Also you can stream a lot of ESPN content via Xbox Live... not their top ticket items, but it is a good way to see some of the less in demand sporting events... e.g., CONCACAF soccer, NCAA women's basketball, etc. You can usually see one of their current sportscenter shows as well..

Re:It already does this if you have U-Verse... (1)

mbourgon (186257) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928666)

Yes, but the big deal is a la carte pricing - instead of paying for channels you don't want, you might just buy the ones you're interested in - which the cable companies have said repeatedly is impossible.

Re:It already does this if you have U-Verse... (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928816)

They say it's impossible because the content owners won't allow them to sell one channel at a time. They are told that they can sell a whole block of channels or none. I don't see this changing with streaming too much. You'll end up paying for shows you don't want through increased rates on shows you do want.

Re:It already does this if you have U-Verse... (1)

SydShamino (547793) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929738)

This will take legislation to break up. The content providers not only required the cable channels to bundle, but they mandate that you bundle with other content providers. In other words, Disney doesn't just require that you provide EPSN2 with ESPN, or that you provide ESPN Classic with ESPNU, they require that ESPN and ESPN2 be part of the first tier package along with all other first-tier channels. That prevents Dish Network from providing, for example, a Disney-only package, where you don't have to pay for Warner channels. There are some pre-negotiated exceptions, like the Family package, where a different first-tier is allowed.

Personally I think there's merit for an anti--trust case based on the providers insisting their products be bundled with other providers' products. But I also think there's merit for a monopoly-busting case based on each channel being a copyright-based-monopoly, and it being against the law to use that monopoly to force bundling of a second monopoly channel...

Re:It already does this if you have U-Verse... (1)

Locutus (9039) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929916)

which brings up the question, I wonder how AT&T feels about Microsoft going around the Microsoft-AT&T U-verse packaging to pull this off? Considering the billions paid to them for all U-verse, now late it was and how it was locked into Microsoft's software. It has to sting some.

LoB

ALL CAPS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927960)

What's that about bandwidth caps? Somebody better alert comcast to this, because even though it was arguable before it certainly won't be if this goes through. P2P, video chat, netflix, hulu AND xbox360-TV running through the same single line going into a house? Yeah, some people DO have families that watch different things all at the same time.

Someone needs to wake up and rethink the damn data cap b.s.

cause that worked so well for them in the past.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35927984)

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/01/21/microsoft-sells-comcast-stake/ -- just saying

Yo dawg... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35928046)

...I heard you like TV, so I put TV on your Xbox so you can watch TV on your Xbox on your TV while you're not watching TV on your TV.

hum... (1)

Syberz (1170343) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928076)

What's the point? I already have TV on my TV... and it doesn't eat up all of my bandwidth.

I have 3 XBox 360s but have never played a game (1)

bigtallmofo (695287) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928122)

I use TVersity to stream DivX, jpgs and mp3s, Hulu, YouTube, Joost, etc to any TV in my house by using an XBox 360 attached to the TV. It works fantastically. Another streaming service would be welcome as well, but to be honest, I already have over 2 TB of content on my local server for my family to watch including just about every kid's movie ever made along with every good kids cartoon ever made.

Re:I have 3 XBox 360s but have never played a game (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35928834)

Just what I want: Noisy fans while watching my favorite shows. Add the cost to power two machines (PC + XBox), my TV, and possibly a receiver...

Of course... (1)

multimediavt (965608) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928338)

If the Xbox Live network gets attacked like the Playstation Network, then all Internet services to the device will be just as useful as Netflix is on my PS3 at the moment. Sigh

Bandwidth caps in 5..4..3..2..1! (1)

BLKMGK (34057) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928588)

Implement this and in a flash you'll see throttling and bandwidth caps galore - bet on it! That said, I might actually use my 360 more often if this were deployed and it gave me more control than I have now with cable and my Tivo...

Plan 9 from Xbox Live! (1)

tripleevenfall (1990004) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928784)

These future events will impact you in the future!

I dont understand (1)

Whatsmynickname (557867) | more than 3 years ago | (#35928916)

If 99% of the US internet is through a major telecorp or CABLE SYSTEM, and they already have a CABLE BOX which streams digital TV to my set, who is this market meant for again? I mean, why would I want a streaming TV cable box where it's hooked up to a system which already has such a device?

Re:I dont understand (1)

rwv (1636355) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929290)

Cable companies are good at managing the wires from the content provides to your home. They suck at being able to manage the content that flows across those wires. If Microsoft is competing with Hulu and Netflix, power to them. They are not competing with Comcast or Verizon. Those companies are losing Cable Subscribers in large quantities because Hulu and Netflix offer better service (or at the very least, better PRICED service) than traditional Cable + DVR + Pay-Per-View plans.

It'll be fun to watch this play out. Admittedly, Microsoft, Hulu, and Netflix NEED Comcast (and other Cable TV Companies) to provide affordable Internet service for their own services to be worthwhile as most subscribers are more willing to ditch their Cable bills and switch to an Internet-only Plan. I hope Comcast doesn't ass-rape subscribers of Internet-only service. I really hope Comcast figures out that they are a wire company and fully leave the Cable TV business.

noise? (1)

indecks (1208854) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929140)

I'm not being facetious here but I see all of these comments about using the 360 as a Netflix streaming device and nearly all of them are complaining about fan noise. Am I the only one with an Xbox360 Elite that has competent fans that don't sound like 'jets taking off?' Granted, I'm on 360 #4, so I'm not saying the 360 is a magnificient piece of hardware by any means, but when I use it to watch Netflix (my HTPC is having a stuttering problem with Netflix, cant figure it out. Might need more RAM) it makes little to no noise what-so-ever.

Re:noise? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35929492)

I still have the first version and it is unsuitable for streaming services because of the noise and when you look at the fanless alternatives. But I welcome another player.
In reality is is meaningless for me since no one offers streaming services worth anything, where I live.

There is a lot of programs that i would like to see but they are mostly not shown on any channels I can recieve and the few that are, lacks HD and sometimes they are even shown in 4:3 with black borders all around within the 4:3 frame(not just the 16:9 part that is black. Don't know what it is called). At least they are available on usenet in HD.
Too bad that there isnt a solution where i could watch every tv program i could think of, like there is plenty of with music.

I bet the NAB isn't on board with this (1)

yuna49 (905461) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929372)

Not a single mention of the National Association of Broadcasters, who represent the people who own the broadcast television stations throughout the US? Do you really think CBS is going to abandon its hundreds of affiliate stations, not to mention its owned-and-operated stations in major markets, to funnel TV programming to XBox users? The broadcasters have fought many battles with cable television operators over, first, the "must-carry" rules [fcc.gov] , then later "retransmission consent."

Slashdot commentators continue their tradition of ignoring the decades of industrial relationships that govern the television and other entertainment industries and focus only on the, often irrelevant, technological details.

Could have had iPlayer years ago (1)

Goffee71 (628501) | more than 3 years ago | (#35929830)

MS's dumb insistence on not letting the awesome BBC iPlayer on Xbox in the UK shows how late and asshat backwards the company is here. Plus, after the Sony hack/outage (http://t.co/GRQ1QIk) are these walled gardens really to be trusted anymore? Why would I risk my entertainment in one zone that can be crippled for a week or longer?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?