Verizon Wireless said that it will use Microsoft’s Windows Media technology as part of the foundation of its new cell phone streaming video service. My Take: What took them so long? Even in Greece you can watch TV via your mobile phone via Vodaphone’s service for some time now. And why Europe has more advanced phones & services than US has? Trying to find a Bluetooth phone at Sprint for example, it’s already an exersize in patience.
Verizon taps Microsoft for mobile TV
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
“My Take: What took them so long? Even in Greece you can watch TV via your mobile phone via Vodaphone’s service for some time now.”
Why?
Has the battery technology improved for cell phones over the last few years? My cell battery dies after a few hours and thats just while talking on it. I can’t imagine being able to watch video without draining the battery.
what’s the point?
this is just as stupid as the idea of doing everyhitng on cellphone back then in Japan…and the result: these pioneering companies bankrupt.
Not everyone is a nerd and people dont wanna attatch to TV 24 hours a day.
when u go out, ur out with friends/families/collegues.
watching TV on mobile phones: get a life
Didn’t Frank Cassanova, Apple dir. of Quicktime, announce last year that Verizon was gonna go with H.264 a/v for their new internet services and that they were using Xserves? Wat a blow to Apple. I guess M$ still has some clout in this ever changing world of standards. phew. oh well.
LOL.
>>My Take: What took them so long? Even in Greece you can watch TV via your mobile phone via Vodaphone’s service for some time now. And why Europe has more advanced phones & services than US has?
Because Europe was blown to smithereens during WW2 so tons of money got spent rebuilding them and modernizing the continent. US on the other hand had no need to completely revamp but instead has done things gradually over time. Wait till Iraq is done, it’ll be the most modern country on the planet.
> Why?
Why not?
New phones sport resolutions bigger than 128×120, and so watching TV over E/GPRS is not really pixelated or difficult to implement. Bandwidth is cheap too for these carriers (another matter that they charge so much for it).
Also, we are talking here less than 10 KB/sec for a 128×96 video (4:3) with some pretty descent quality audio (through headphones). Way better experience than these small portable TVs when you are on the go.
It’s really easy to implement and run through a phone network, so I don’t see why not.
i sure don’t.
i got in a car wreck recently from a guy on his cell phone. i think it should be outlawed here in ‘arkiesaw’
maybe it’s more cost effective to work on useless crap in a country with 100 times the population density
And you tell that from a country where every piece of junk tends to be easily sold given a market populated by 100 times more people ? You come on.
why not in the US:
Cause I hate cell phones and more so useless gadget phones and I’m not the only one? People seem to take it as a sign that the US is behind technologically or something, when it’s mostly a matter of taste [/projection]
how is this an advance in phones? this is a step backwards, or a side step. Have people forgoten that a phone is for making calls? I know that seams like a crazy thing to do with one these days.
What would be a true advance is for someone to come out with a real phone, one that is just a phone with a good phone book in it and the very basic features, but actualy put it in a nice small packaging like all the phones jammed with junk get. Currently if you want a real phone, you have to get some big huge ugly monster.
Is it just me, or do a few of you seem like old grandma’s complaing they don’t need a brand new computer and only need a 486.
Why settel for just a cell phone, when you can have so much more? You can just not use the features you don’t want to save on battery power if your that paranoid about it.
On another note, people with cell phones driving is a stupid argument. You might as well ban beer because people are going to drink and drive no?
I think this latest advancement is cool, only im a bit saden’d that there using windows media, but hey, It could be worse
“Why settel for just a cell phone, when you can have so much more? You can just not use the features you don’t want to save on battery power if your that paranoid about it. ”
Well I guess it’s my turn to answer a “why”.
1) A less complicated phone will be easier to learn and use.*
2) A less complicated phone has less to go wrong with it, be it hardware or software.
3) Overall a less complicated phone is cheaper to make and sell.
4) You’re *assuming* that all the bells and whistles can be turned off.
5) Some of these bells and whistles are prohibited (not just ‘turned off’) in certain (secure) places.
6) Some of these bells and whistles can do more harm than good by being a tempting distraction (one of the reasons some vehicle dashboard displays are prohibited).
6) In keeping with three. Why should one pay for an unneeded feature?
7) And last in keeping with one. As some usability experts will point out. We have trouble enough with overly complicated desk phones. Why do we need a pocket version of such frustration?
*I’m thinking of that old saying “Jack of all trades. Good at none”.
BTW The whole situation wouldn’t be so bad if companies offered the choice instead of trying to upgrade everyone. Kind of like a certain software company.
what’s the point?
this is just as stupid as the idea of doing everyhitng on cellphone back then in Japan…and the result: these pioneering companies bankrupt.
Not everyone is a nerd and people dont wanna attatch to TV 24 hours a day.
when u go out, ur out with friends/families/collegues.
watching TV on mobile phones: get a life
>
>
Better yet pass laws against doing so in public places or while driving a car and treat the idiots arrested while doing so like people arrested for drunk driving since they are just as dangerous to those around them.
Greece has more people per square mile, so phones with bluetooth support sell better? Somehow that doesn’t compute…
The people per square mile argument only goes for quality of service, and even then it’s moot for USian cities, which should have at least as many people per sq. mile as the agricultural areas in greece.
Nothing to do with the how modern the continent is. The Europeans go together about 15 to develop GSM. You had roaming and interoperability that meant economies of scale as the world purchased phones of the one, network-independent, vendor-independent system. This made the subsequent value-added services quicker and cheaper to implement as they didn’t need to be developed for the network operator or their specific system, as in North America. So now Europe (and the rest of the GSM world) have more developed cellular services due to the cooperative model of development and lowered duplication of effort. Further, they were able to extend the networks to allow for high bandwidth services (impossible with 90’s tech) through using standards and good, modular engineering so that, for example, the radio path could be upgraded later to a faster modulation scheme (8-PSK in the case of EDGE) without affecting existing phones, services or the switching subsystem.
They did it right, and it’s opened up new services markets that didnt’t exist before. The lassais faire, competitive model really wrecked an opportunity for North America. BTW, to preempt the rebuttal, Japan doesn’t use a competitive model because one company (NTT) really calls the shots, and because they have such fierce market adoption, advanced services have been cost effective to roll-out. But the Japanese suffer when they leave the country and any roaming is for the basic phone service.
But that’s my two bobs.
The reason why it’s so hard to find the latest phones in the US is due to the fact that Americans are just complacent and take whatever phones companies like sprint decide to give us at over inflated prices. It’s really akin to insist on buying old EDO memory at $100 a pop for an old computer because upgrading to a newer P4 is a couple of hundred more expensive.
The reason the US doesn’t already have this is because there is very little market for it. If there was a chance that somebody could make a lot of money off of it, it would have already been here. Capitalism dictates this.
A miniature tv makes as much sense as a giant toothpick. Sure, it will work, but it is going to be painful to use.
-G
In the US, a TV and a one year service for basic cable is cheaper than a phone, a one year contract for that service and the Tv-on-cellphone service. Also, in the US, they don’t pay a license to own a TV like in some European nations. That said, I do think Europeans (and the rest of the world in general) have been a lot faster in adopting wireless technologies than the US.
Like a lead balloon