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!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Time Warner Cable Cuts iPad Live TV Access 50%

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the half-as-good dept.

Desktops (Apple) 225

Junior Samples writes "According to the article: 'Time Warner Cable March 16 slashed the number of channels available for live streaming on the Apple iPad — less than 24 hours after launching the TV Everywhere app. The No. 2 cable operator reduced to 15 channels from the original 32 offered up as the first-ever live TV broadcasts available for streaming on a portable media device. The concept allows participating media providers to grant unlimited on-demand access across multiple devices to monthly subscribers at no additional charge.'"

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

What? (-1, Flamebait)

AnonGCB (1398517) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510308)

32/15=.5?

Impressive editing skills here, keep up the good work.

Re:What? (0)

AnonGCB (1398517) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510318)

Sorry - 15/32.

Doesn't make their math any more correct, but at least I can save SOME face :D

Re:What? (2)

yeshuawatso (1774190) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510336)

(15-32)/32 = -53% reduction

Re:What? (2)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510416)

It's a signed 5-bit int, but they're only taking the positive values.

Re:What? (3, Insightful)

mirix (1649853) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510550)

Close enough. Sometimes the pedants here give me a headache.

Re:What? (5, Insightful)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510596)

32/15=.5?

Impressive editing skills here, keep up the good work.

I've noticed that most corrections like this basically say: "I'm sooOOoo smart that I cannot understand what you're saying." That's not something I'd draw attention to.

Re:What? (0)

MichaelKristopeit344 (1967644) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510668)

why say 50% when the value is 53.125%? why not 53% if you're rounding? if you want to generalize, the word "half" might have a meaning you'd be interested in... consider the qualifier "about".

you're an ignorant hypocrite.

cower behind your chosen pseudonym some more, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510706)

Are you sure you hit your intended target, there?

Re:What? (1)

MichaelKristopeit345 (1967646) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510774)

you assume i have a target? that is very telling.

you're an ignorant hypocrite.

cower in my shadow behind your chosen portability based pseudonym some more, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510810)

is that you, charlie? step away from the blow for a little while before someone gets hurt...

Re:What? (0)

MichaelKristopeit347 (1968128) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510944)

i am michael kristopeit. i do not partake in illegal narcotics. your demonstration of baseless accusation is very telling.

you're an ignorant hypocrite.

why do you cower in my shadow? what are you afraid of?

you're completely pathetic.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510872)

Let's try this again: Did you reply to the right person? I didn't use the word 'half' anywhere. Seriously, double check, I think you hit 'reply' on the wrong post.

Re:What? (0)

MichaelKristopeit348 (1968130) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510960)

i didn't claim you used the word "half" anywhere.... your belief that i did is very telling.

you're an idiot.

cower in my shadow some more, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511004)

You're replying to the wrong guy.

Re:What? (1)

MichaelKristopeit329 (1963778) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511040)

you're an ignorant hypocrite.

i am responding to MobileTatsu-NJG... the idiot that hypocritically stated:

I've noticed that most corrections like this basically say: "I'm sooOOoo smart that I cannot understand what you're saying." That's not something I'd draw attention to.

cower in my shadow some more, feeb.

you're completely sooOOoo pathetic.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511066)

Okay, thanks for clarifying that. I'm still not sure what you meant in your first post. Could you elaborate?

Re:What? (0)

MichaelKristopeit326 (1963770) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511082)

an ignorant hypocrite is incapable of comprehending the clarification you suggest has not already been provided to you.

cower in my shadow some more, feeb.

you're an idiot.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511094)

Ah, so you mean you did reply to the wrong guy and now you can't find a way to twist what you originally said into something that sounds like it belongs in the context of what I said.

Okie, we'z all clear now. Thanks!

Re:What? (0)

MichaelKristopeit501 (2018074) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511158)

i mean exactly what i said, and always have. you're an ignorant hypocrite who hypocritically and ignorantly chooses to deny that fact... exactly as an ignorant hypocrite would be expected to act.

you responded to someone making editorial comments with an editorial comment claiming editorial comments are useless and nothing something that you would do.

you're an ignorant hypocrite.

STILL.

cower in my shadow behind your chosen pseudonym some more, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511288)

i mean exactly what i said, and always have.

It's the 'what you said' bit that's unclear.

you responded to someone making editorial comments with an editorial comment claiming editorial comments are useless

Actually, no, I didn't. Heh.

Re:What? (1)

MichaelKristopeit501 (2018074) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511374)

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511414)

Uh, yeah, I understand what *I* said. Heh.

Is english your native language? I'm just asking, I think we're just having a translation issue, here.

Re:What? (1)

MichaelKristopeit406 (2018812) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511504)

who is "we"?

you are NOTHING.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511524)

Well I do have one thing going for me, I can communicate clearly. ;)

Re:What? (1)

MichaelKristopeit408 (2018816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511562)

you have certainly communicated your ability to demonstrate ignorant hypocrisy, through lies containing nothing but hypocritical ignorance and denial of your own past recorded actions.

you're an idiot.

cower in my shadow behind your chosen portable anagram based pseudonym some more, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511572)

Well it's hard to not be ignorant, I still haven't been able to decipher your point!

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35511294)

you're completely sooOOoo pathetic.

you responded to someone making editorial comments with an editorial comment claiming editorial comments are useless and nothing something that you would do.

Oh my. You were mildly funny. That's new.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511540)

(psst, you still haven't gotten to my other reply here...)

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511638)

you responded to someone making editorial comments with an editorial comment claiming editorial comments are useless

^^ I still didn't do this.

and nothing something that you would do.

Seriously, is English your native language?

Re:What? (1)

narcc (412956) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511260)

I wouldn't waste your time with MichaelKristopeit### -- He/she/it/they is a fairly well-known troll(s?) with hundreds of usernames. MK doesn't care what you have to say -- it just wants to irritate you.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511316)

Oh yes, I worked that out ages ago. I'm just having a little fun. :)

I do appreciate the heads up, though.

Re:What? (1)

MichaelKristopeit332 (1966804) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511444)

it's fun for you to demonstrate your ignorant hypocrisy while preaching about the things you would choose not to draw attention to?

you're an idiot.

cower in my shadow some more, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511478)

Didn't like where the other conversation was going?

Re:What? (1)

MichaelKristopeit407 (2018814) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511528)

i am stating facts about your ignorant hypocrisy.

you are telling lies about your actions... inline with your ignorant hypocrisy.

you think conversations can be compartmentalized? that is very telling.

you're an idiot.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511586)

Stating facts? I dunno about that. You're repeating yourself a lot, but the word 'fact' doesn't carry any meaning until you can clearly articulate your thoughts.

Re:What? (1)

MichaelKristopeit333 (1966806) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511426)

ur mum's face doesn't care what you have to say -- it just wants to irritate you.

you're an ignorant hypocrite.

cower in my shadow behind your chosen drug enforcement based pseudonym some more, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:What? (0)

MichaelKristopeit349 (1968132) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511000)

perhaps you haven't even yet realized the hypocrisy you are actively ignoring...

you're an ignorant hypocrite.

why would anyone care what you would choose to draw attention to? how is correcting or judging someone who is correcting or judging someone else less of an act of something you claim you would not perform?

cower in my shadow behind your chosen pseudonym some more, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:What? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511046)

perhaps you haven't even yet realized the hypocrisy you are actively ignoring...

Nice attempt at pulling up... Heh.

Re:What? (0)

MichaelKristopeit327 (1963772) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511068)

you're an idiot.

cower in my shadow some more, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:What? (1)

creat3d (1489345) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510718)

I can't tell if you're sarcastic or one of those aforementioned irritating pedants...

Re:What? (0)

MichaelKristopeit346 (1968126) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510790)

perhaps you can't tell because you're an idiot.

why do you cower in my shadow behind a chosen misspelling based pseudonym? what are you afraid of?

you're completely pathetic.

Re:What? (2)

WCguru42 (1268530) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510936)

I can't tell if you're sarcastic or one of those aforementioned irritating pedants...

The person you're replying to is what's known as a troll, and you should not feed him.

Re:What? (2)

Shadow of Eternity (795165) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511238)

Maybe he's using a pentium.

Re:What? (0)

MichaelKristopeit502 (2018076) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511336)

pentiums can solely edit and publish news articles?

brand gnu dating reincarnated? not enough pain? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510382)

gtk2gto? meeting the need? nails all chewed off, bloody? still not getting ahead? stuff that matters, for sure.

ALL MOMMYS, GET YOUR BUTTS TO THE MIDDLE EAST, JAPAN, DC, LA, GA, NY, FL ETC.... WE'VE HAD IT. WE'RE DYING HERE.

freely distributable under the nppprc

Gentleman, gentleman (2)

kyuubiunl (1747574) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510442)

Perhaps they meant for very large values of 15.

Bait and Switch (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510446)

It is called "Bait and Switch".

Re:Bait and Switch (-1, Offtopic)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510544)

It is called "Bait and Switch".

Need another layer of tinfoil there, buddy.

IIRC, this was a FREE service, for people who where ALREADY SUBSCRIBERS.

Moron.

Re:Bait and Switch (1)

praxis (19962) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510660)

It is not a free service, you must be a subscriber, for which you pay. They might have added a feature to their existing package without changing that packages rate, but the service is not free. For those that may have subscribed to the package because this feature addition was what tipped the cost/value analysis for them, it was a bait and switch.

Re:Bait and Switch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35511356)

How many people out there are actually looking at this from a cost/benefit perspective and thinking to themselves - "Hey, now I can take my iPad into the bathroom and watch tv while I'm taking a shit! I'm totally signing up for cable now!"

And Android...no? (1, Interesting)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510500)

Why won't these 'successful' companies release Android apps as well? Android outsells iOS big-time, but still gets the short end of the stick!

Heck, even my bank, which made 2.1 billion dollars in profit (last quarter), does not have an Android app...yet it keeps advertising iPhone and iPad apps as if iOS is the king in the mobile arena.

I just do not get it especially when the notion of Android fragmentation is a myth [goo.gl] and Google seems to confirm this. [goo.gl] I am bewildered.

Re:And Android...no? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510562)

Android outsells iOS big-time, but still gets the short end of the stick!

No, it doesn't. There are more Android phones than iPhones, but the iPhone isn't the only device that runs iOS. In terms of units sold, there are far more devices that run iOS.

Re:And Android...no? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510818)

Not sure about other devices, but your dick surely seems to be running on ishit.

Re:And Android...no? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510622)

Why won't these 'successful' companies release Android apps as well?

For the simple reason that Android Tablets haven't taken off.

Re:And Android...no? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35511220)

Waiting for the Toshiba version as well?

Re:And Android...no? (3, Informative)

Anubis IV (1279820) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510630)

They released an iPad-specific app. Last I checked, the iPad is outselling all other competitors combined about 4:1.

Another point of consideration with something like this is the rights protection/DRM that Apple has in iOS, which is consistent across the devices. Refer to the problems Netflix has been having in bringing their service to Android because of the inconsistent DRM protection offered across the Android lineup of devices.

Also, you're conflating iPhones and iOS. Android smartphones are indeed outselling iPhones on a quarterly basis, and have been for the last few quarters. That said, all Android devices are, last I checked, still behind all iOS devices when it comes to sales on a quarterly basis. I saw some numbers from late last year that put iOS ahead by about 30-40M units in terms of installed base, with both the Android and iOS lines on the graph growing at the same rate, essentially meaning that they're keeping pace with each other, but that Apple got the head start. That's not to say that they'll always be ahead, of course, but they are for now.

As for OS version fragmentation, you're right. It's not nearly the issue that some folks make it out to be. That said, there is an issue for customers who want to update to later versions and can't since their carrier won't permit reasonable updates after just a few months, but that's more of an issue with bad business practices that affect consumers negatively, rather than a problem for app developers.

Re:And Android...no? (2)

perlchild (582235) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510950)

but that's more of an issue with bad business practices that affect consumers negatively, rather than a problem for app developers.

I'd say it becomes a platform problem if(or when, you pick) the bad business practices are rampant across most devices, up to the point where app developers need to take it into account when developing software, especially since the more fragmented markets seem to be the loud, highly visible, trend-setting north american markets.

I thought they already did need to take precautions for software, denials from google notwithstanding

Re:And Android...no? (1)

WCguru42 (1268530) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510980)

That said, there is an issue for customers who want to update to later versions and can't since their carrier won't permit reasonable updates after just a few months, but that's more of an issue with bad business practices that affect consumers negatively, rather than a problem for app developers.

That's something that I wish Google had been a little more proactive about. If the Android license had some requirement for support of some sort in regards to updates I think the entire Android environment would benefit tremendously. That being said, Google has more of a challenge on their hands compared to Apple because Google went to all (or most) handset and networks.

Re:And Android...no? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35511244)

Another point of consideration with something like this is the rights protection/DRM that Apple has in iOS, which is consistent across the devices. Refer to the problems Netflix has been having in bringing their service to Android because of the inconsistent DRM protection offered across the Android lineup of devices.

This is a good thing. The last thing I want is for Shortsighted, Inc. to support Android, but not Linux. If the "consistent DRM framework" available is... you get to put whatever encryption you want into your application, then perfect: it will run on my desktop.

Re:And Android...no? (2)

grapeape (137008) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511452)

Umm when your the consumer fragmentation is a pretty damn big issue. Lets put it this way I was enough for me to decide to ditch my 8 month old Samsung Android phones a few weeks ago and pick up a pair of iPhones, I would have rather stayed on android but at least now I know i'm going to get support for at least a couple phone generations. I was told I should just buy another brand of phone but frankly I just dont trust any of the android phone manufacturers to not just drop support on a whim after rolling out a new model 4 months later. You can blame google, blame the manufacturers, whatever...most consumers who dont give a crap about the politics are just going to drop them and find something else.

Re:And Android...no? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510752)

Not that this case makes any difference since it is free, but companies have found it nearly impossible to sell apps on the Android app store.

DRM (2)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510766)

Because Android does not implement system-level DRM, that's why. IE, because it is open, media companies don't like it.

This is exactly why Netflix has no Android app, they have said so right on their blog.

Re:DRM (2)

Kryptonian Jor-El (970056) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511022)

Re:DRM (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35511208)

IIRC their blog post said they're waiting for DRM implementations on specific Android phones. Nothing is preventing a manufacturer from adding DRM on top of Android. I think the Galaxy S phones had at least a partially working implementation of PlayReady, the DRM scheme Netflix uses on the PC.

Re:And Android...no? (1)

adamdoyle (1665063) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510824)

Heck, even my bank, which made 2.1 billion dollars in profit (last quarter), does not have an Android app...

BOA has an Android mobile banking app. They make slightly more than 2.1 billion/quarter, though.

Re:And Android...no? (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510942)

Ohh that's the mighty USA. I was referring to the Royal Bank of Canada [royalbank.com] .

Re:And Android...no? (1)

adamdoyle (1665063) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511018)

Ohh that's the mighty USA. I was referring to the Royal Bank of Canada [royalbank.com] .

hmmm.. I've never seen "enrol" (with one one "L") before until I clicked your link. Is that spelling common in Canada?

Re:And Android...no? (1)

adamdoyle (1665063) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511032)

(with one one "L")

*only one

Re:And Android...no? (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511210)

That's Canadian English...just like an American would see an 'error' in the following words: neighbourhood, honour, colour and many others.

Re:And Android...no? (1)

adamdoyle (1665063) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511232)

I wasn't saying it was erroneous - just that I had never seen it. I often see the extraneous u's and associate it with UK-English... (and Canadian)

Re:And Android...no? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35511034)

Android users does not like to pay for apps and other stuff.

Re:And Android...no? (1)

Karlt1 (231423) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511302)

I just do not get it especially when the notion of Android fragmentation is a myth and Google seems to confirm this. I am bewildered.

It's not just about the OS -- it's about the different hardware capabilities, the lack of encryption (that's what's keeping Netflix off), the differing resolution, etc.

Besides, Android users don't buy apps.

http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/21/861-5-percent-growth-android-puny/ [techcrunch.com]

Re:And Android...no? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35511470)

That's bullshit. I bought TWO $0.99 apps in the last year. TWO OF THOSE BASTARDS!

having our monikers on both sides of every coin... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510514)

& every never-ending fatal 'business' the world (& now, shopping the cosmos?). yes. yes. that should do it. as the invisible authors of the georgia stone would have it, it shall be?

Pressure From Above? (4, Insightful)

macs4all (973270) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510532)

Methinks that several of the "Channels" first heard about this when it was announced, and SOME of them bitched to TimeWarner that their current agreements didn't cover LIVE streaming of their content.

Why mujst everybody monetize every single little thing? I understand these "networks" have a duty to their stockholders; but they are not getting the big picture. An iPad in the home of a person that is already a TW subscriber is absoutely the same as adding another TV in that same home. No more. No less.

Re:Pressure From Above? (2)

mikkelm (1000451) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510594)

An MSO customer viewing live TV through a stream provided by the MSO could just as easily be network customer viewing live TV through a stream provided by the network.

Re:Pressure From Above? (1)

WCguru42 (1268530) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511030)

An MSO customer viewing live TV through a stream provided by the MSO could just as easily be network customer viewing live TV through a stream provided by the network.

Totally out of my element here, but would it be possible to spoof an iPad into thinking it was on the network that was directly connected to the Time Warner cable subscriber while some place not in the household? Seems plausible, but then again, a whole lot of people think that what happens in 24 is possible in real life.

Re:Pressure From Above? (1)

RalphSleigh (899929) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511344)

It's not the iPad you need to fool, but rather the server serving up the content. Which you could do, by connecting the two though the household, but it would probably be quite slow.

Re:Pressure From Above? (1)

agrif (960591) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511366)

Totally out of my element here, but would it be possible to spoof an iPad into thinking it was on the network that was directly connected to the Time Warner cable subscriber while some place not in the household?

You could just set up a VPN at home (I do it through my DD-WRT router, it was simple enough) and then you literally are on the home network. Of course, then you have to deal with the slow VPN connection.

For a more tailor-made solution, you could use MobileSubstrate [iphonedevwiki.net] to hook whatever mechanism the app would use to check out the local network, and make it look like you're at home only to the TV app. Similar things have been done to make Apps think you're on wifi when you're really on 3G, so you can use Skype, etc. over wifi.

Re:Pressure From Above? (1)

mattack2 (1165421) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510834)

An iPad in the home of a person that is already a TW subscriber is absoutely the same as adding another TV in that same home.

It's not *absolutely* the same. The other TV in the home very likely, nowadays, has at least a cable box/DTA/other cable card device attached to it. (In other words, even local stations in analog are gone in some areas already, and will likely be gone in more soon.)

I have no idea if the cable networks make more money for more 'outlets' in a house.

What? (4, Interesting)

mikkelm (1000451) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510554)

".. offered up as the first-ever live TV broadcasts available for streaming on a portable media device."

Can't we go back to the days when advertising was merely dishonest? What do they achieve by lying about an accomplishment that does not impact the experience of the product?

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510734)

It's becoming the norm. The iPad was the first glaring one and I thought it was the biggest black eye Steve Jobs ever got. Now you have to assume if some one announces an "unlimited" service or a service that actually sounds exciting it will get reduced right after launch. Often within days. 32 channels was hardly impressive given what's even in standard cable. 16 channels is pointless. We aren't even talking on the road you have to be at home to use it. Get a Slingbox and use your notebook. It may not be as sexy but at least you can get real cable and not a few whimpy channels.

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510840)

I have been streaming live tv to my portable device with Dish Network ever since i got the SlingBox :)

Because of apple userbase (1, Insightful)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510864)

>> What do they achieve by lying about an accomplishment that does not impact the experience of the product?

Welcome to Apple era. Check out this "OH SHINY!!" rambling on twitter about this app, and you have the reason why such lies work - it's easy to convince apple userbase (i.e. sheeple (there, I said it) ) if you market it right (no matter how useful the product is, or how truthful the advertisement is)

http://twitter.com/#search?q=time%20warner%20ipad%20COOL [twitter.com]

Re:Because of apple userbase (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510992)

You are a retard on so many levels that you're just not worth addressing.

Re:Because of apple userbase (0)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511058)

But you just did, itard.

Re:Because of apple userbase (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35511330)

Hey fuckhead: I'm a Unix/Linux programmer that wrote some of the code that gets traversed every fucking time you use the internet. And I use OS X.

Now please kill yourself in shame.

Re:Because of apple userbase (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35511574)

Your shittily written abandonware PHP project on sourceforge that was downloaded twice in 7 years?

Re:What? (1)

cshake (736412) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511214)

I wonder why that battery operated handheld TV receiver I had in the 90s doesn't count as a portable media device.

Re:What? (1)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511522)

It's not web 2.0-compatible unless it supports "streaming"! (something to do with urinating)

Quickly kill it before it grows too strong! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510606)

Competition! Streaming Video!!! Our customers actually like it more than cable!!!!

Kill it with fire now!!!!!

Re:Quickly kill it before it grows too strong! (5, Informative)

FliesLikeABrick (943848) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510826)

http://www.twcableuntangled.com/2011/03/heavy-demand-crashed-our-ipad-app-last-night-it%E2%80%99s-not-a-good-party-unless-you-run-out-of-beer/

It was actually because they had capacity issues and have temporarily reduced the number of channels available so as to not knock the whole service offline again.

(full disclosure: I used to work for TWC)

Not on my app they didn't (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510808)

I still have 32 channels. I also have Time Wanrer Signature at Home which combines 50mbps Wideband, Digital Phone and Digital Cable, so that could explain it perhaps. I checked just now and they are all there.

hired goons can shoot us, if they're not invading (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35510958)

so that's good? how much does that 'cost'? never mind. no point in disarming ourselves, & everybody else (our 'partners', allies, skeletons. eugenatics, weapons peddlers, adrians, georgiastoneauthors, walking dead, genetically, physically & spiritually altered nazi mutants (sociopaths) etc..?) to save a few 100,000 babys? business is really booming now?

ALL MOMMYS, GET YOUR BUTTS TO THE MIDDLE EAST, JAPAN, DC, LA, GA, NY, FL ETC.... WE'VE HAD IT. WE'RE DYING HERE.

 

"first-ever" (2)

PhattyMatty (916963) | more than 3 years ago | (#35510976)

"the first-ever live TV broadcasts available for streaming on a portable media device"

Japan has had this technology for quite some time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_mobile_phone_culture#Features [wikipedia.org]

Re:"first-ever" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35511104)

Yes I think it will be good to add in the US to this sentence, as this type of service on mobile phone existed for years in Europe...

And even on the Ipad European telco released at least 8 month ago TV application to watch live broadcast (and I'm not mentioning Zattoo...)

Re:"first-ever" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35511500)

What Japan has isn't the same thing as what this bit of marketingspeak is talking about. Their cell phones (including the one I owned when I lived over there) are equipped with 1seg tuners, which receive terrestrial broadcasts.

It's a server issue (5, Informative)

frdmfghtr (603968) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511002)

According to 9to5Mac, it's a server issue not pissed-off providers (although there may be some of those too)

http://www.9to5mac.com/56532/time-warner-ipad-app-crashed-servers-halve-offering/ [9to5mac.com]

‘It’s not a good party unless you run out of beer,’ says TWC in regards to the loss of channels in the iPad app today. They deny outages are being caused by programmers who could have pulled their content even though some are reportedly upset.

It appears that it actually isn’t the streaming load that is buckling the servers, but the authentication servers according to ablog post by Time Warner Cable’s Jeff Simmermon:

Our engineering team is working as hard as they can to put a fix in place and get everything up and running as soon as they can. For the time being, the app is running with only 15 channels. We have found that by temporarily reducing the number of available channels, we can ease strain on the authentication process. This will enable us to offer at least some sort of an experience to our customers while we get a fix in place. We’ll add the other 17 channels back in as soon as we can fix the underlying issue, and we’ll be adding more channels in future iterations of the app as well.

fyuldyuldyultyulty (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35511184)

http://www.voguembt.com

BEST QUALITY GUARANTEE!!
SAFTY & HONESTY GUARANTEE!!
FAST & PROMPT DELIVERY GUARANTEE!!

our price:
Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $25
T-Shirt(VERSACE,womanPOLO,womanPaco,Chicano,womanEd Hardy womaned hardy) $12
edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25
coach chanel gucci LV handbags $32;
coogi DG edhardy gucci t-shirts $15;
CA edhardy vests.paul smith shoes $35;
jordan dunk af1 max gucci shoes $33;
EDhardy gucci ny New Era cap $15;
(air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb,) nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32

NOT first live TV broadcasts on portable media dev (1)

Optic7 (688717) | more than 3 years ago | (#35511488)

Some that come to mind that have been doing it for a while now: livestation.com and flotv.com, NBA and MLB apps, etc. Welcome to like 2009.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?