Can anyone explain .........


webtv? I strive to grasp the concept, but am missing something. I know that we all have limited ISP's, bandwidths, dialups, and all the other things that are dictated mostly by where we live, and not by our computer literacy.
Yet, I really do not understand webtv. Before I make a judgement on this, I would like to hear some lucid descriptions of what it is, when it is used, and what sort of people use it.
With the exception of ONE person in the last ten years, every webtv poster I have read seemed to be a totally uninformed out of touch individual that one would picture living at the end of a windy dirt road without running water or indoor plumbing.
I know that at times, we all have to take the connection available, and want to grok this. I understand that portion. I do not, however, grok that 99.9% of webtv posters impress me as having a shallow gene pool.
TIA
Steve
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

== Perhaps the answer lies as close as a Google search. ==
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You are even more shallow than they are.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not hard to understand. Simple interface, totally Impervious to malware and virus attacks, great for couch potatoes who watch a lot of TV since 1 key push flips TV screen into web browser and back while retaining TV audio or not; great way to spend time during commercials. Cheap and super dependable printer support with a few cheap but decent printers from HP, others.
Also dirt cheap compared to computer purchase when sold 10-15 yrs ago ($129 versus thousands)
Good concept which could benefit a vast number of emailers / web users today, particularly seniors,
Surprised another PROM-based Internet appliance has not surfaced. Needed more now than ever given cyberthreats, aging population, etc.
Smarty
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Smarty has it right. I can sit on the couch with a cat on my lap, the keyboard (infrared remote) next to me and use my TV as a monitor. I don't have to wear my reading glasses. Using dialup, I can usually get on line in a little over one minute and go right to my email list. I don't have to worry about a virus or any other infiltrations. I can send and receive photos and even spellcheck. I have a computer (Dell desktop with Windows Vista) but find it slow and difficult so I never use it.
---MIKE---

>> (44° 15' N - Elevation 1580')
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@webtv.net (---MIKE---) wrote:

I've got a dog on my lap right now, but I do have to wear my reading glasses. My laptop is usually active when I'm watching TV.

Damn kids made me get Roadrunner years ago. I was never impatient before- but waiting a minute for Internet access would kill me now.<g>

Sure you do. not as frequent as a Wondoze box-- but they are out there & you should make yourself aware of them. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=webtv+virus

Check out the netbooks. I got an Acer Aspire for my wife last year & she loves it.
Jim
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

My gene pool is shallow I see, I had web tv. Web tv was and probably is the cheapest way to go online , a cheap keyboard and box and maybe 15$ a month. It was for those without computers as years ago computers cost alot more than they have in recent years. It was hardware designed before Flash and other programs that need a quick and large memory computer. Its limiting in what you can do and usualy slower than a computer but for those that have no interest in computers it works, but only somewhat now. It is obsolete in that it cant down load most sites now considered large data requirements quickly . It can as I saw years ago take 5 minutes or more to download to visit many large vendors sites and not enable Flash. It had its day but never kept up with its hardware to keep its use fast enough to be enjoyable, or you had to pay for a new box. I dumped it when it became unbearably slow and I didnt want to buy a new Web tv box. The only upside is watching tv and doing some minor surfing, now new tvs have included this as a feature. Web tv is dead, but MS is making money so they wont kill it till it goes into the red I guess.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 04:27:25 -0700 (PDT), ransley

These days there is no hardware reason why WebTV could not be built into the cable company set top box and go as fast as any cable modem PC. There is also no reason why it couldn't stream any kind of audio/video. I really think TV is heading that way anyhow and getting away from the "broadcast" model into an on demand model. I use my computer for other things so WebTV was never attractive to me but I do see where it is good for people who only use the PC as an internet engine. The advent of HD digital TVs has blurred the difference between TVs and monitors anyway. The biggest problem I saw with the WebTV concept was the lousy resolution in old NTSC TVs. I do have a PC connected to my big screen, just for streaming and playing internet content.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Apr 20, 11:22 am, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Of course there are reasons why an updated and faster WebTV can not be built into the cable companies set top box... That box is already full of all sorts of stuff for the cable company and uses a special operating system dedicated to accessing media content from the cable companies special servers which are not a part of the internet...
WebTV was designed for a niche market of people that wanted to be able to connect to others over the internet in a very basic and fundamental way but didn't want to invest in a real computer... Think of them as an in-home internet kiosk...
~~ Evan
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 10:40:29 -0700 (PDT), Evan

It is still a computer and there is no hardware reason why it couldn't include a browser. The box I have here from Comcast is mostly empty. A few more chips will fit in there easily. It is just a matter of time before the cable companies migrate to an internet distribution model or get left behind because someone else beats them to it..

Those people are still out there and they probably have a cable box.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Apr 20, 1:54 pm, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Umm... Yes there is a reason... Cable companies will never go to an internet based distribution... They keep it on a separate system so that there is no widespread motivation for trying to hack the system...
A cable company doesn't need to go to an internet based anything, they provide their own network and they maintain its security on the media content distribution channels by purposely not using standard windows based systems and software...
By your logic the phone company should do the same thing with its billing equipment and software -- no one would be motivated to try and crack that system to be able to obtain free services if it were all based on the "internet distribution model" and became vulnerable to being attacked by outsiders...
If you don't know how it works or what software it is even running you have no ability to try and attack the cable companies or phone companies networks...
~~ Evan
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

We have cable TV, approx 80 channels, most of them useless, but they do include most North American news networks, BBC World News and especially the PBS, History and Discovery channels.
However there are deficiencies in world coverage; so, when needing better information, especially about a situation in another part of the world we use Live-station, which provides alternatives, which include France TV, Russia TV, China TV, Al Jazeera (Out of Qatar), ITN (From UK), UN TV, etc etc. all in English, which is my prime language.
Haven't yet found any Australian/New Zealand or S.American stations/ channels to add, but will probably do so in time. Despite the speed of my internet link it quite watchable. And one can flip back to the internet any time, while leaving the sound on the TV feed. Without any subscription it is also possible to have two stations on screen at one time. Watching another countries TV is rather like picking up a newspaper in another country; one quickly gets an idea what is of concern and current interest to that country!
A recent example was the huge mine disaster in China, involving over 200 miners underground most of whom were rescued by 1000 working above ground. Where some were rescued after 'eight days'! This was the same time as the West VA gas explosion that killed some 33? And which got frequent half hour coverage, while the much larger and longer Chinese one got very little North American coverage!
Some of the reporting has an element of propaganda of course; Burma TV for example, but one can allow for that, as anyone who has had to cope with Glen Beck or Lou Dobbs one sided rants can! And Fox News; some of the little Fox coverage seen has been infantile and amateurish! Seems to be pandering to only one point of view (preaching to the already converted and unthinking, maybe?).
So try Livestation? For news coverage anyway.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:21:33 -0700 (PDT), Evan

They will be relegated to selling nothing but bandwidth. Internet distribution of content is only going to get bigger and the cable companies are already under attack by internet content providers. When the producers figure out they make more money by marketing their content directly to the subscriber and avoiding the cable company middle man that empire will go the way of the video rental club.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What way is that?
I jes joined Netflix. With cable/satellite costing $100+ to get any decent movie/program content, $23 for 4 DVDs and free video streaming is almost a steal. Plus, I get the best of (?) made-for cable and network programing (Bones, Family Guy, etc). I can watch it at any wifi hotspot. The only down side --for me, anyway-- is you have to have M$ Windows or a Mac. I left my eee netbook set up for XP.
nb -linux user
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I notice you said "free video streaming". They are really trying to get you used to that way of getting your content and move you away from your DVD player, much as they did your VCR. Content on little bits of plastic is going to be relegated to an obsolete relic of the 20th century.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Apr 21, 2:16 am, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

LOL... Not in the US, and not unless Congress acts to restore net neutrality... Your ISP could make you pay extra to have good speed on your connection to web based businesses like Netflix and other media content carriers that have no networks of their own and use the systems of other businesses without any sort of financial consideration to the companies that maintain the infrastructure...
You should see some changes coming soon unless Congress acts, your ISP could be deciding what you can access over the internet, not you...
~~ Evan
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 09:51:58 -0700 (PDT), Evan

That will just be the last nail in the cable company's coffin. The actual fiber is a common carrier and just like the phone company, the cable company will be forced to lease their bandwidth to a 3d party if they can't provide the service the customer wants. We are really just talking about the last mile anyway.
Actually once people figure out what net neutrality really means I imagine the law will come around. Once typical home port bandwidths get up into tens of megs, choking that down to T1 speed won't affect streaming anyway. I have a 1.5m DSL that does just fine streaming TV. I can even do some low bandwidth browsing at the same time like these newsgroups. I only see a problem if I am watching a TV stream and trying to stream another video feed at the same time. Then it is just a little stutter in the TV sometimes.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Apr 21, 1:23 pm, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

LOL... Then the world shouldn't worry because of what you have right now... Those websites which allow you to stream TV won't be around for very long unless they are using your ISP or paying money to every ISP out there to guarantee that they can deliver their media content to everyone out there... ISPs can as of right now (actually like a couple of weeks ago) choose to restrict any traffic they want that isn't a paying customer of their network... Sure you are a customer, but you are trying to access commercial media content you are paying to access from a 3rd party who isn't paying your ISP to be able to use that ISP's network to deliver their bandwidth intense content to you for a profit...
That is what Net Neutrality is all about... ISPs were formerly not allowed to restrict traffic flowing through their network unless it was found to be malicious...
As far as "cable company will be forced to lease their bandwidth to a 3d party if they can't provide the service the customer wants" is total bullcrap because most markets have more than one cable provider competing within it... It is not like the phone company leasing wires to the various multitude of no-tel mini-comms and 3rd party ISPs leasing copper pairs to a specific customer's premises... Each pair of copper wires in the phone network has a unique origin point outside of the central office... A cable system does not... All of the signals sent out on the system go to all points of the system -- the level of service is determined by what features are unlocked inside your set top converter box by the cable company provider...
You can not compare the two systems and say that eventually the cable companies will be required to lease space on their systems to 3rd parties because there is no capacity within such systems to isolate the different carriers from each other like you can with copper pairs at the phone company...
It is quite clear you have no idea the differences between a phone companies cable plant and that of a cable company...
It is not "just talking about the last mile anyway" as that last mile of cable plant without any connection upstream is USELESS... The 3rd party pays a lot of money to be able to access upstream connections from the phone company to make its connections... They can resell the services to you cheaper because they are able to purchase the services in bulk, for thousands of lines at a time and can get a better price than single line consumers...
Please get a clue...
~~ Evan
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's because those are the people it was designed for and marketed to.
There's quite a bit of interesting reading about webtv and its effect on usenet and the internet in general out there.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
webtv? I strive to grasp the concept, but am missing something. I know that we all have limited ISP's, bandwidths, dialups, and all the other things that are dictated mostly by where we live, and not by our computer literacy. Yet, I really do not understand webtv. Before I make a judgement on this, I would like to hear some lucid descriptions of what it is, when it is used, and what sort of people use it. With the exception of ONE person in the last ten years, every webtv poster I have read seemed to be a totally uninformed out of touch individual that one would picture living at the end of a windy dirt road without running water or indoor plumbing. I know that at times, we all have to take the connection available, and want to grok this. I understand that portion. I do not, however, grok that 99.9% of webtv posters impress me as having a shallow gene pool. TIA Steve
Steve B has to be the most stupid man on earth if He really means He can not comprehend WEBTV.
He will not see this since He has me blocked but all of this is because of some yellow or orange text. LOL
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.