You last visited: Today at 01:53 PM
|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|12-13-2012 09:53 AM|
Live again at $60
BTW, this is live again at $60:
(Too lazy to start a new thd. )
|11-27-2012 02:21 PM|
|11-22-2012 09:21 AM|
For a multi-TV setup, the AppleTV connected to the TV avoids having multiple computers (Mac Minis, etc.) connected to each TV. For a single TV setup, you could skip the Apple TV if the computer was connected directly to the TV.
Also, I believe there are Windows versions of software that will work with HDHomeRun that could export to iTunes, so you probably could replicate my setup using a Windows PC as your iTunes server. I just happen to have a Mac.
|11-16-2012 01:31 PM|
As far as legality. The FCC rules governing this are worded far different than the way Comcast or other cable providers write their contract. And in many cases the cable provider is skirting the FCC rules through fancy maneuvering.
As long as the person is paying for the service to the home, any user owned equipment should NOT be an added charge. This is one reason that the providers recently convinced the FCC to allow full encryption because it then forces all users to have some form of equipment to decrypt, and for most people that means a cable card or rented box. This was under the guise of people stealing service without paying for ANY service at all (a problem that occurs in many urban areas from what I noted). The fact that some (not all) providers add these charges, and mind you, inconsistently is just maneuvering on their parts to squeeze more money from their customers in order to satisfy shareholders. Not to recoup costs - because if you check the company stocks you can see we are talking PROFIT and not operating costs.
Now if you are paying for only internet and then trying to snag TV signal that is a different slice of pie
|11-16-2012 06:13 AM|
True...people get lost in what dB means.
|11-16-2012 06:05 AM|
|NCSaint||I finally bought one. I have my tunerless projector just gathering dust. At least this way I will have someway of feeding it a signal. Likely cable but maybe OTA since that is a nice option. Thanks.|
|11-15-2012 02:23 PM|
|11-15-2012 12:03 PM|
You obviously don't see value in intellectual property, that is why you can't quantify someone's hard work into dollars, cubic feet, or kilowatt hours. However, it is there, even if you can't measure it. Besides, there is electricity in those coax wires, which you call "signal"
When the cable company pays to the content provider, they pay them a fee based on the number of people who will potentially view the content. If you don't think the content does not cost them a dime, then like I said earlier, start your own.
Anti-trust laws are in place to prevent marker monopoly. If you think that your cable company has a monopoly in your area, and you are unfairly prevented from starting your own, put those laws that you so determined to break, to work.
You seem like an intelligent person, but you are failing to grasp the basic concepts of how businesses are run. Even the non-profits make money, they just spend it on "operating costs" rather than giving the extra money they make on top of the cost to run the business to the "owner" (shareholders, actual owners, ect)
If you want to work for free, I am sure there are people who will gladly take you up on their offer, but you won't be able to do that for too long, as you won't be able to support your self and your family with your free work.
What you are paying is for the signal to that particular box/TV that you are renting from the cable company, not to the whole house. If you want to view the content on other TV's, no one is going to stop you from splitting the line and moving the box around from one TV to another. But, what you propose is cable theft, since you only pay for one location, but using service in more than 1 location.
Cable companies will gladly rent you another box or charge you additional TV outlet fee to allow you to view the content that you paid for on another unit. It does cost them money to purchase the feed from the content holders, and it does cost them money to distribute it. Why should they not be able to recouperate their costs?
|11-15-2012 11:03 AM|
And I can't just start my own cable company, thanks to the government which doesn't even come close to representing what America is about any longer. Just like other utilities, these are highly regulated industries that form legal, regional monopolies. When you have gov't basically controlling how a large private business can operate, carving out special privileges and laws that grant them certain advantages that make an actual free market impossible if not illegal. When it comes to corporatism and me being denied an actual choice, I have zero regard for "technicalities" that company can force down our throats because we can't go anywhere else. If the rest of American's weren't such ignorant, mind numb lemmings they could not get away with these types of anti-competitive abuses of the consumers.
And wow if you can't see the one overwhelming details that disproves that stupid analogy then it shows how worthless it is even trying to engage someone like yourself.
The big difference between power and cable is when you use power, you are paying for a quantifiable amount of power. Power can be considered as directly analogous to a gas or water supply. It has a voltage (pressure) and current (flow rate) for which everything you plug into it dissipates or uses up that power. When you put a splitter on a cable you are basically just replicating that signal which does not cost the cable company one dime. Its not a quantity when it comes to a signal, its there or not and when its there the information can be infinitely replicated with your own equipment within your own home without any cost to those providing the signal. Try doing that with your power utility. Its not like running a heater in 5 rooms in my house in which they all consume power that costs the cable company to generate. If I pay for cable, I am paying for that information. Whether I use that signal to watch TV in my bedroom, garage or living room with my own equipment should have no bearing. I am paying for the service, not the amount of energy.
Oh and that other "minor" difference is you are PAYING FOR THE SIGNAL TO YOUR HOUSE ALREADY. Unlike stealing your neighbor's power which you are not paying for.
Seriously if at first glance these obvious differences don't come to mind then its clearly a waste of time talking to you. If your mind is really that simplistic and lacks all ability to think critically then well we know who's the child here. Being logical and refusing to lap up the crap that Corporatist monopolies shove down my throat make me a child then call me Peter Pan and I'm making it my goal to turn American into Never Land.
|11-15-2012 10:28 AM|
You can think whatever you want, but laws are laws. If it weren't for the laws, then we would have anarchy. If you don't like the law, do something to change it, rather than beyouching on some internet deals forum.
If you think Cable Company has a monopoly in your area, start your own. This is what America is about, not about stealing. But, if you see a market that has not been served, you serve it and make money doing it.
As to the analogy, it is a valid one, until you come up with a more accurate analogy. You are paying for service to that one particular TV, just like you paying for electric service to your particular house. Just because you pay your electric bill for your house, does not give you right to take electricity from your neighbor, or tapping into the power lines in your backyard.
If you want to view content on multiple TV's what is stopping you from setting up your own antenna and doing whatever you want with the Over the air signal?
Sometimes the childish "I want!" overcomes the adult common sense.
|11-15-2012 10:19 AM|
If you pay for the damn service it is nothing NEAR the same as stealing your neighbors power. That is one of the dumbest, most idiotic analogies I have ever heard. They are nowhere near the same level, not even in the same universe.
I don't give a flying f- what the agreement says, if I pay for the f-ing service I watch it on any TV I want. Period. Some legal technicality you are forced into because of the regional monopolies cable companies hold does not dictate what is right or wrong. I guess I don't allow legal technicalities to over ride my common sense and never will. Unfortunately the people in power in this country (worthless lawyers and former lawyers) all think the way you do. Common sense and reality goes out the window when some arbitrary technicality comes into play.
|11-15-2012 10:12 AM|
|11-15-2012 06:27 AM|
I agree, it is global Idiocracy.
|11-15-2012 05:45 AM|
It is akin to me walking up to your house and plugging in an extension cord into your outdoor outlet and saying, "Well, SBX007 left it energized, and therefore I can plug into it"
The only legal way to have multiple TV's without paying individual charge per TV is to have a CableCard and a device capable of taking advantage of the 6 simultaneous streams that it can decrypt, i.e. a Windows Media Center with Windows Media Center Extenders.
When you rent a CableCard the fee covers 6 streams at once.
|11-14-2012 09:37 PM|
|AggroDude||new link and live again!!!!|
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|