Comments on: Zeebox boss says smart TV is a dumb idea

By: pgattocpa

pgattocpa — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 20:10:15 +0000

Jason: Unless, like me, you live in an area that receives virtually no OTA transmissions due to being on the opposite side of the hills from the tranmission antennae. So, I could get a cable card, rather than a cable box, in order to utilize the TV’s built-in digital tuner, but I am still stuck with cable. Or, in my case, I switched to satelite recently. Further, cable companies are not “scamming” with respect to OTA broadcasts. If that is all someone wants, then like you they just need an antennae. No one is forcing them to pay a cable company to get OTA broadcasts. Now, you may say that the cable companies are scamming for some other reason if you think their profit margins are too high, but that would be a different discussion for which I am not facile enough to comment upon.

By: Shaun Flagg

Shaun Flagg — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 16:33:13 +0000

There are rather strange sentences within the article. Here is another one “Large producers can now create applications and experiences that audiences can use that deepen their link to the program, said.”

By: Charlie Pinker

Charlie Pinker — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 16:24:29 +0000

Not that I disagree with him, but the guy works for Sky, so it’s hardly surprising he’s anti-smart TVs.

“Always consider the vested interest”

By: Bobbie Johnson

Bobbie Johnson — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 16:21:33 +0000

My mistake, now fixed. The whole article’s hard to read? Tell me more: it’s not meant to be!

By: Shaun Flagg

Shaun Flagg — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 16:16:06 +0000

“But even not everyone is a fan.” ? What is that? This article is really hard to read. Please proof before publishing.

By: jason

jason — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 16:01:56 +0000

When cable switched to Digital only broadcasting, they did tests beforehand where you could see if your current TV was capable of receiving the transition or would need an adapter (box). Most all modern day TVs did just fine and were already capable. Then suddenly the cable provider said a cable box was required regardless. All of which is truthfully not necessary, and only a way for them to charge more for leasing the box aside with cable TV. I do not have cable…I have a digital antennae that picks up digital broadcast over the air of all local channels for free….and in HD. Is the biggest scam by the cable company.

By: Bobbie Johnson

Bobbie Johnson — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 15:59:12 +0000

I know people get frustrated with cable, but I think there’s a much more fundamental question than this, Jon. In Europe (where Rose and Zeebox operate) free-to-air digital transmission is the norm, not cable. And he still thinks smart TVs are stupid — because it’s a mess of companies and standards trying to impose themselves on an already-too-complicated experience.

By: Jon Smirl

Jon Smirl — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 13:55:55 +0000

Cable DRM is ruining smart TV. Open up cable DRM to the smart TV manufacturers and smart TVs would be much more useful since they could replace the pointless, expensive cable box that is impossible to hide on a wall mounted HDTV.