Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Television Media Communications Handhelds Hardware

Television On Your Cell Phone 157

Posted by michael from the bicycles-for-fish dept.
XopherMV writes "MobiTV is billed as the first streaming service to broadcast real-time video to cell phones. Offered by Sprint, it costs an additional $9.99 monthly, is adding new channels, and supports various handsets. My phone features 21 channels, some of them typical broadcast channels like Fox Sports and MSNBC, while others are designed for the mobile environment, such as NBC Mobile. What's it like to watch TV on a cell phone? The TV junkie in me says it's great. I really like the idea that I can pull my cell phone out of my pocket and catch up with the latest news and sports scores in an instant. Read on at MSN."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Television On Your Cell Phone More

Television On Your Cell Phone

Comments Filter:

  • Boston suffers season long recession (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fishdan ( 569872 ) * on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:28AM (#10031734) Homepage Journal
    Good Lord. If they can get the Red Sox [redsox.com] broadcasts fromNESN [boston.com] on this, I predict a HUGE work impact. I know other cities love their sports, but the Red Sox are bigger than Jesus in Boston. If people could watch games on their cellphone, there would be no work done during day games.

    I do wonder what the impact on people's driving will be. [cnn.com]

  • I just don't see it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nos. ( 179609 ) <andrew@nOSPAm.thekerrs.ca> on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:31AM (#10031744) Homepage
    Sure this is going to be aimed more at people wanting to catch up on the latest news and sports, but personally, this is not a service I would pay for. If I'm looking for up to date news/sports/stocks etc. I'd be more likely to want a phone with wireless Internet. I would want the information now, and want to be able to drill down to my own intrests as opposed to waiting until the TV finally gets to the little bit of information I actually want to hear. Lets face it, you're not going to "see" very detailed pictures on your cell phone.

    • Been there, Done that, NTT DoCoMo FOMA (Score:5, Informative)

      by kryonD ( 163018 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:44AM (#10031801) Homepage Journal
      Just curious, but did Sprint have the integrity to put a star next to the word 'first', and then have the words 'in America' printed in text so small most folks couldn't read it, or did they just flat out lie again?

      TV and movies have been available in Japan on cell phones for nearly two years. When I left in February, no one really cared all that much unless something important was going on. I would bet that tons of commuters are watching the olympics while riding the JR to work and back. The picture quality is actually pretty darned good. I personally never bought a FOMA phone because the 3G coverage in my area was still in the works. And the way they switched email from being directly on the phone to being through a web portal was kind of annoying when you were already used to just pressing a button and being inside of your INBOX on their 50x series of phones.

      With all the political BS going on in the media, I swear I'd donate money to the first 527 group who titled themselves "Disillusioned Cell Phone Users for a President Who Will Make The Cellular Companies Leave The Dark Ages and Stop F&^%ing Over The Public With Overpriced Used Technology".
      • you could have looked at the links. MobiTV [mobitv.com] bills itself as the first *global* cellphone based television network.
      • I have only seen one person watching TV on their phone here in Tokyo in the past 10 months. I went to the Vodafone store in Shibuya and demo'd a few models, watching live TV and all that, as well as movies. It's cool, but on the other hand, the screen is even smaller than the one in the back of the seat on Virgin Atlantic flights.

        More exciting for me was the new phone that has a 2 megapixel camera with movie ability, excellent-sounding digital music playback, and movie playback. They use SD cards for stora

    • Lets face it, you're not going to "see" very detailed pictures on your cell phone.

      What sports fan needs them? I don't need to see anything to know that the guy jogging to catch a fly ball to center is Johnny Damon. I don't need to see anything to know the guy dropping back to throw a pass is Tom Brady. Ditto for Joe Thornton and Sergei Samsonov, and while I don't follow basketball, I'm sure those who do can spot Paul Pierce. (Actually, even I could identify Pierce, just not anyone else on the team

    • I just don't see it.

      Smoooooth pun.

      Lets face it, you're not going to "see" very detailed pictures on your cell phone.

      That's why I'm going to wait for the High Definition version.

      It's in currently in testing - I saw the Sprint test geek walking down the road muttering "I can see it now ... I can see it now ...". He didn't look happy though - that 60-inch screen must be a bear to carry around all day.

  • good idea? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dncsky1530 ( 711564 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:31AM (#10031749) Homepage
    Its great that companies are able to offer TV on cell phones, but it is really necessary? I for one have a camera phone with wireless internet and most of the features on that phone go unused. Internet enabled cell phones are usefull for stock quotes and news, and mabey checking mail. Having TV on the phone would not only drain the battery but people would have to watch the news for 10 minutes to get to a story that affects them instead of having it on demand like the internet. Thanks, but no thanks, i'll save my battery life for making calls.

    • Re:good idea? (Score:4, Funny)

      by YrWrstNtmr ( 564987 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @09:13AM (#10031913)
      It is necessary for the cellphone company. They have a need to separate you from some more of your money.

    • Re:good idea? (Score:1, Redundant)

      by EpsCylonB ( 307640 )
      Yep, this is a solution looking for a problem.
    • While I agree it does drain the battery, it seems that the "streaming TV" is actually clips that are updated every hour or so. So, while this isn't live, it is a huge leap from the 2 fps to about 15 fps. that everyone else can watch. And right now there's only one phone that can take advantage of it. I agree that mobile internet is much more usefull this is a pretty cool advancement.

      • Re:good idea? (Score:3, Informative)

        by XO ( 250276 )
        Actually, I just loaded this up on a Samsung A680 Sprint PCS, and compared the MSNBC to real MSNBC on Satellite.. the video coming into the Samsung phone was about 30 seconds AHEAD of the video coming into the Satellite TV.

        And the A680 is capable of pulling off 15fps when the datastream is fast enough
    • Need Tivo on my Cell Phone. Someone should start writing Tivo software for cell phone TVs. I know I don't want to watch 15 minutes of commercials while trying to watch 1 hour of TV.
    • "Its great that companies are able to offer TV on cell phones, but it is really necessary? I for one have a camera phone with wireless internet and most of the features on that phone go unused."

      Okay, so you're not sold. BFD. You should consider, though, that this isn't a matter of practicality. Not everybody treats their cell phone like it's their house key. A lot of us have cell phones that double as entertainment devices.

      I'll use myself as an example. I have a cell phone. I don't have a landline.

  • Cue the phone Ludittes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:32AM (#10031754)
    I give it 10 minutes before the first phone Luditte who comes complaining that nobody makes good plain phones anymore gets modded up.

    • Re:Cue the phone Ludittes (Score:5, Funny)

      by Hockney Twang ( 769594 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:35AM (#10031765)
      I was just about to do exactly what you describe, then your post stopped me. Thank you.
    • Man, I hate how no one makes good, plain cell-phones anymore. I mean, what has this world come to? But all silliness aside, it would be cool if someone came up with a really simple phone that could be mass-produced, then coupled it with a really cheap unlimited plan. Then I could hack the phone and use it for mobile access to slashdot ;)
    • My name is WhiteRanger99x and I am a phone luddite...not by choice necessarily, but by the fact that I just cant afford the latest phone/PDA/Ginsu Knife/Toothbrush that's out there :)

      I do however like to think that my cell phone is actually fairly modern (ok, it doesn't have a camera, but it serves it's purpose) :P

    • I give it 10 minutes before the first phone Luditte who comes complaining that nobody makes good plain phones anymore gets modded up.

      Actually, I was going to award phone luddite to the guy who submitted the story. He says it's billed as the first phone service to air tv on your phone.

      I was watching TV on a friend's Nokia 6600 [nokia.com.au] about 8 months ago, and no, I don't live in Japan (I'm in Australia).

      -- james

      • and.. (Score:2)

        by gl4ss ( 559668 )
        the best way to get up to date on news on a mobile is _not_ watching a video stream.

        when the info is available in text much easier and cheaper from webpages(browsable from phone)..

        • No one wants to "read" any more.

          Readers of slashdot aside, most folks want to see (usually pretty) pictures and be told what's going on rather than have to do actual reading ... because thinking usually follows reading!

          And we can't have that now, can we?

          Crap, there goes my opportunity to mod this discussion.

  • Uh oh.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by DatAsian ( 626692 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:33AM (#10031755)
    I'm running low on power... lemme get back with you when I find a charger :)

  • I'd rather have annotated radio (Score:5, Interesting)

    by davidwr ( 791652 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:34AM (#10031759) Homepage Journal
    The screens are too small for good TV watching.

    TV programs that take this into account would work, but even so, I think radio is a Bigger Win.

    You can augment radio with things like instant polling, charts, hyperlinks, and other goodies.

    Here's an idea:
    24 hour traffic and weather reports tailored to the cell towers you are closest to.

    Gee, I hope nobody tries to patent "sending video signals over a wireless device." There's a wee bit of prior art on that, and I'm afraid our poor beleagured patent office might miss it.
    • The screens are too small for
      good> TV watching.
      There's such a thing a good TV watching?

      The cell phone might still be portable, but the car battery you'll have to drag around to watch tv with ain't.

      So, we're back to hi-res wearable/foldable displays and optic nerve stimulators (oops, forgot this is only 2004 :-).

    • That's basically what this is, considering the lag you get when tying to use it. I sure the hell aint paying for it; I got it free for 60 days when I got my new phone....figured I'd give it a try. It reminds me of the early days of streaming internet video on a 33.6 dialup connection with a crappy Real Player interface....but worse. The video only updates about once a second, and then stops for about 5-10 seconds every once in a while. But the sound never lags.
      • rather than paying for mobi, i decided to use my cheapie ($40) ati tv card, ffmpeg/ffserver and mmplayer (cellphone).

        I stripped the output down to 1fts divx video, monural audio @ 8kpbs (sounds OK).

        Cost? Free. I can watch any one of the 90 channels I get over my cable service (HBO, but why bother?)

        I use it primarily to watch (rather *listen*) to my local baseball team. It is a nice technology show-off, though.
    • >> The screens are too small for good TV watching.

      I know exactly what you mean... When are cell phone makers going to get it. All I want is a 52" Plasma Screen HDTV Dolby 6.1 system built into my phone, and why does no one make a 6MP camera phone with live video conferencing? Why can't I play the latest games on my phone... I'm tired of connect 4, I want to play something with great graphics like Doom 3. I hate getting disturbed while I'm taking pictures, watching tv, playing games, and browsing t

  • Sports scores? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Amiga Lover ( 708890 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:34AM (#10031763)
    really like the idea that I can pull my cell phone out of my pocket and catch up with the latest news and sports scores in an instant.

    I've been doing that for decades. l use a radio. It's free.
    • Yes, but now techheads everywhere will be able to do this in a totally new and spectacular way (video) and with a huge screen, to boot. Then there's the bragging rights, too. Especially when I pick up all the hot chicks with my awesome new techology.

      Plus, we can be happy to pay for broadcast we could otherwise have for free on a portable TV set anyway, and I for one, will be tickled pink when I get roaming charges as I watch Jerry Springer on the John.

      Although I suppose if I could watch HBO on my cell t
    • if by free you mean putting up with a minute of commercials for every two of a program. I don't listen to the radio for the same reason i hang up on telemarketers before they finish their little speech.

  • Not Again (Score:2, Insightful)

    by SomeOtherGuy ( 179082 )

    My kingdom for a cellphone that concentrates on 1 thing PHONE CALLS...Oh yea and this includes coverage quality and battery life.

    I may be a technogeek -- but I discovered that my last 2 cellphones sure have had lots a little gadgets and cost oodles of money, but were sorely lacking in the old business of using as a phone.

    • I like my Nokia 6010. It's got some features like WAP, IM, and games but it's primarily a PHONE. It doesn't organize my life, it doesn't take pictures, I use to make PHONE CALLS on. Good coverage (full scale anywhere I've been inside T-mobile's coverage area) and long battery life (I forget to charge it, because every time I look it's still on full battery). I got it free with new T-mobile service, and I'm happy with it.

      It's also got a SIM card, for transferring your phone book and whatnot.

    • Re:Not Again (Score:2, Interesting)

      by waynelorentz ( 662271 )
      Why not just buy a used phone on eBay? They have lots of antiques for people who like to live int he past.
    • You should try vertu [vertu.com] then. These are cell-phones with military-quality components that really only concentrate on making phone calls (no extra bells and whistles).

      For instance, instead of using a crappy 10c filter they would use a $5 filter, other components similarily. You're gonna be paying $8K for their cheapest offerings but quality is definitely there.

      Target group is mostly people who buy rolexes but at least you can't complain that there isn't a such a phone. Can I have the kingdom now?
      • Hey thanks. I will order 2. Actually quality of calls and equiptment is one of my biggest issues. However my HUGE pet peeve is in price -- I went to replace my ailing phone a few months back and since I did not use it much except to keep in the car for emergencies, weekend calls home, travel, etc....I did not want anything fancy -- just a cheap, NEW (not Ebay), flip phone to take a receive calls. I could not find anything under $199.00 (Sprint service) -- and since I already had a plan the 1 penny pho

  • Driving (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:37AM (#10031769)
    Great, something else I can do with my cellphone to distract me from that boring morning commute! Other drivers, beware!
  • With a screen small enough to fit in the phone, you could have a radio instead. I can't think of this as anything more than just a geek toy - it may _sound_ cool to have one, but you probably won't _see_ much.
  • we can only imagine how crappy TV can become... with the current incoherent and pathetic state television programming is in, combined with the highly developed yet second rate connection a cell phone provides, i am sure this will be beyond irritating...
    technology yet again takes bold a step forward...
    and the show must go on!!
  • How much bandwidth does this use up? Can the network really support it if more people start using it? It should be technically possible to fit a real tv tuner in a decent sized phone these days (dunno about the battery tho)..
    • I'd imagine it would run off of a digital connection, so there would probably not be a TV tuner involved.
      • thats what i mean - digital connection = lots of bandwidth, tv-tuner = free. Unless it only needs to transmit it once and everyone can share the same connection in each cell. otherwise its like the phone companies admitting it costs them nothing to handle calls and they are overcharging. or maybe its a bait and switch?

    • How much bandwidth does this use up?

      If you check out the demo, it can't use up too much bandwidth:

      1. Tiny, pixilated, herky-jerky picture (worse than video for windows 3.1 on a 286)
      2. The demo crashes (at least in firefox) when it tries to change a channel (shade of twilight zone: "Don't touch that dial. We control the horizontal. We control the vertical"). That's okay thugh - I certainly didn't want to listen to C&W this early in the day/week/year/lifetime.

      All in all, much easier (and cheaper) to bu

  • Not first and apparently lousy quality... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Cpt_Corelli ( 307594 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:41AM (#10031788)
    Well, I hardly believe they are the first company to offer streaming video to cell phones. Europe is already switching to the third generation of mobile communications (3G) and most networks [www.tre.se] offer streaming video at a much higher quality than what is displayed in their demo.

    3G networks have a much higher bandwidth (384 kbps) compared to previous technology such as GSM.

    Most of the 3G phones [www.tre.se] have two-way simultaneous video chat as well.

    • In English, try Three UK [three.co.uk].
    • Europe is already switching to the third generation of mobile communications (3G)

      "is switching" is a good way of saying it. In reality, 3G is not going anywhere soon. While there are some networks being rolled out (3 in the UK was the first), most have pretty crappy coverage for the moment. Now, they're mostly operated by pre-existing GSM operators, so your phone will just handover to GSM for phone coverage, but there goes your "fast" data connection.

      In the Netherlands only 2 of 5 of the networks that r
    • vodafone (a britsh cell phone company i think) and foma (part of docomo) have been doing video phones for a while.. as well as video conferencing.. i'm sure however, that this is the first in the states, but it is not the first period...
      what i don't understand is how they can charge money for this.. unless it's actually downloading the content off the internet (which is just stupid) all you'd need is an antena and a tunner.. that's the way it works in japan. you just have to buy a phone with the stuff in it
    • their only claim is that they're the first global cellphone based television network. can you deny that? i really can't, to be honest.

  • Instant Updates? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by oogoliegoogolie ( 635356 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:42AM (#10031791)
    ...I can pull my cell phone out of my pocket and catch up with the latest news and sports scores in an instant.

    I'm sick and tired of the instant-info-internet too. I'm moving back to TV where I have to watch for 20 minutes to see the sports scores or news that I want.
    • I'm sick and tired of the instant-info-internet too. I'm moving back to TV where I have to watch for 20 minutes to see the sports scores or news that I want.

      Oh my god! Grandpa, is that you!? :P

  • More is better, but... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NEOGEOman ( 155470 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:43AM (#10031796)
    Japanese phones have had the ability to receive broadcast TV (via the internal antenna, not a re-packaged pay-to-view version) in several phones for a while now. Have a look at this Vodafone NEC [vodafone.jp] unit.

    It's not about the extra abilities in my phone [2y.net], it's the disabilities that are newsworthy. The TV phone linked above has ridiculous DRM - you can save video clips and screenshots, but not transfer them. The powers that be fear losing what control they've got that you can't transfer the images or video clips you make with your phone, not to your computer. They're locked on the phone. Java apps are locked to the phone, if you have to replace the phone you're f**ked, unless you can transfer them to the SD card - if the phone has a slot - and even then only if your new phone is the same manufacturer and the same phone number. The phones are locked to the carrier, there's absolutely no way no how to use a Vodafone on DoCoMo's network, end of story. You can play music files, but only ones encoded by the locked-down software app, so they're useless to any other music device.

    On the bright side, mine has a 2megapixel camera that does pretty nice work, so it's mad handy when I don't want to lug around the real camera and see something neat [2y.net].

    Where was I... Oh yeah: More features are good, but please - make these features useful and not more restrictive than the alternatives, ok? Anyone listening?

    nope...
  • Something that I can do in class. Now instead of being bored out of my mind during lectures on the nature of Legumes and why Shakespear matters in my daily life, I can enjoy a rousing game. Although I do have a tendency to get into what I am watching. That could be bad. Standing up and cheering as I hoot. Yeah, pretty less effective. Yup.
  • In Japan, Vodafone [vodafone.jp] offers something similar on their phones [vodafone.jp]. The content isn't specially tailored to mobile viewing, but it's simply able to pick up the 10 or so free channels offered to the Japanese public (plenty for most people considering very few people here actually have cable). The only problem is, as one would expect, batter life is insanely short.

  • is it better (Score:3, Insightful)

    by elinenbe ( 25195 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:45AM (#10031805)
    than Ad in your Slashdot? I sure hope so, because these ads disguised as "stories" are getting a bit old.

  • Japan (Score:1)

    by JanneM ( 7445 )
    I've seen this offered almost a year ago. The phones also seem to be able to receive at least some ordinary ground-based telecasts. Not first, in other words.

    That said, I saw no possible reason why I'd want this, and apparently, neither do most other people here.

  • The real question is this (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Slinky Saves the Wor ( 759676 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:46AM (#10031809) Homepage
    Are you willing to PAY some amount of money, to see the sports score or whatever, in your cellphone NOW, OR will you wait until you're at home/work where you can see the same score from the Internet for NO COST?

    I usually go for no cost, i.e. home or work or friend's place, although I could check using the cellphone... but it's just too cumbersome and slow. In short, inconvenient. And this even though I don't pay for my phone bills!

    The "services" and whatever, those are just too difficult and cumbersome to use or start using.

  • just another step (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bwy ( 726112 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:46AM (#10031814)
    This just seems to never end. I have no argument with technology of any kind- I think it is great. But the way people use the technology gets on my nerves.

    This is just another tool for people to act like asses- now watching TV on their phone while you're eating dinner with them or catching sports scores while in a staff meeting. People already walk around in a complete daze while on cell phones, seemingly unaware of anything around them. I wonder why people can't just enjoy themselves doing whatever they are doing? I guess I just don't understand the need to always be glued to a blackberry or cell phone. What stock quote is so important or what conversation is so critical that it has to take place while you're getting checked out at the supermarket? Or during one of a thousand other inappropriate times.

  • What about RSS instead? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Silwenae ( 514138 ) * on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:47AM (#10031816) Homepage
    I understand in a society of instant gratification TV on a cell phone could be cool.

    But how often do you turn on MSNBC or Fox Sports and get the news you want right then without having to wait for the top of the hour news or ticker scores instead.

    What I would actually use on a cell phone is some kind of customized RSS feed, but more than what exists today. I'd think there has to be a way for a Fox Sports or an ESPN to create an RSS feed every 15 minutes with the latest scores. Let me subscribe to that over a cell internet connection, and let me pick the feed (for example NHL, NBA, NFL, MLB etc) or do the same for customized news.

    This way you can avoid televesion commercials and have some content on your phone personalized for what you want instead of taking what the big media companies give you.
  • Something tells me that's going to play hell with the battery life on cellphones everywhere. :-)

    It's almost as practical as having a TV Screen right smack dab in front of you while you're driving your SUV, Truck, or whatever :-)

  • The first? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by interactive_civilian ( 205158 ) <mamoru&gmail,com> on Saturday August 21, 2004 @08:53AM (#10031838) Homepage Journal
    So said the submitter:
    MobiTV is billed as the first streaming service to broadcast real-time video to cell phones.
    The first? Well, maybe in the US, but I believe Vodafone Japan [vodafone.jp] has had TV on some of their phones for a little while now...

    The PDF about the V402SH [vodafone.jp] describes one such phone...

    Of course, on the one hand it is different from the service mentioned above in that it is not a streaming service but rather a built-in tuner, but on the other hand it has no additional cost...

  • if not, then it's overly expensive to use.

    besides, I was watching fresh tv news streams a little over a year ago already.. but the bandwith isn't really there in gprs and for higher quality it would get too expensive quite quick even if the speeds were up to it(becaus of data rates).

    well, 3g and cheap datarates and then it's maybe time to make a personal box that encodes tv realtime into a stream(or streams divxes or whatever)..

  • Post text STOLEN (Score:3, Interesting)

    by StevenHenderson ( 806391 ) <stevehenderson@NOspam.gmail.com> on Saturday August 21, 2004 @09:04AM (#10031874)
    What's it like to watch TV on a cell phone? The TV junkie in me says it's great. I really like the idea that I can pull my cell phone out of my pocket and catch up with the latest news and sports scores in an instant.

    Looks a little familiar? Cause the text is right here on this PCWorld review:http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,1 17178,00.asp [pcworld.com]

    If you're going to plagiarize, make sure it isn't the first Google result.
  • ... I dunno if you've got the 3G operator "three" in your area. But at least where I live, they provide free sports scores (and video for charge, not live though). I really prefer to browse my news etc in a text-based enviroment... Plus I don't have to use earphones to do that.

    Just my 5 pence.
  • has just became that much easier, despite the grossness factor.
  • Sorry, I am not into sports too much.

    But here in Turkey, www.turkcell.com.tr and www.telsim.com.tr gives those services for 2 years at least.

    Turkcell even sends goals (soccer) to their subscribers via MMS.

    Also, for broadcast people, channel 55 is available. Tune in, you get scores as that happens. That one is going on for 5 years.
  • "I really like the idea that I can pull my cell phone out of my pocket and catch up with the latest news and sports scores in an instant."

    I've been doing that forever. You don't need a television on your phone to be able to do that. T-Zone!

  • Framerate (Score:2, Interesting)

    by StevenHenderson ( 806391 )
    From PC Magazine review:

    Video quality isn't as good as on your television set. In general, 15 frames per second (fps) is the minimum required for humans to perceive continuous motion, and 30 is the goal. Idetic currently aims for 1 fps

    How the heck can anyone put up with 1 fps? I get annoyed watching streaming video on the net that isn't fluid. I understand its cool and all, but isnt this a stretch?
    • If there is a market for it, and I think there is, the screens will improve and the bandwidth will be more effeciently utilized for full framerate video. Also, the memory capacity of the phone could be jacked higher, or a hard drive incorporated into the design, thus enabling video downloading on the go.

      Gotta agree, 1 fps is pretty useless. GIF's with an attitude.
  • ...when I could only drive, eat, smoke, drink, listen to the radio and talk on my phone at the same time. Now I can watch TV, too! Stay off the sidewalks, folks.

  • Welcome, to the world of tomorrow! (Score:5, Funny)

    by AIX-Hood ( 682681 ) on Saturday August 21, 2004 @09:12AM (#10031906)
    How far we've come. From people watching the very first tv on tiny screens in public places, to people watching tv on tiny screens in publ... er...
  • At this point people like you are paradoxicaly so disconnected from reality. I mean you are surrounded by people but speak to someone that's not there with you in the crowd, then use your cell to watch TV on it just to make sure you forget you surroundings (the day I'll see a moron driving while watching TV on his cell isn't far then, how sad...), it's like travelling with your house on your back, your "personnal bubble" cannot be bursted. At this point you shouldn't get out of your home; use delivery servi
  • With mini hard drives coming to cell phones [64.233.167.104] (Google cache), the cell phone "TIVO" can't be far behind.

  • I tried it (Score:5, Informative)

    by IRNI ( 5906 ) <{ten.inri} {ta} {inri}> on Saturday August 21, 2004 @09:38AM (#10032059) Homepage
    I am a sprint customer and I tried MobiTV. I cancelled after the first day and got a refund. In my mind it is a totally retarded idea for the following reasons:

    1. It is way to small to make anything out.

    2. it isn't loud enough coming out of the tiny little speaker on the back of the phone. Sure you can put in a headphone to hear it better but I don't have one with me at all times.

    3. The backlight goes out after a couple of seconds so it is hard to see again... of course I could set my phone to always leave the backlight on... then I should be able to watch a 30 minute show before I have to charge again I guess.

    4. The channels are beyond rediculous. I couldn't find anything worth watching.

    5. This "TV" on the cell phone is more like a slideshow. There is no motion. At 9.99 this is an absolute ripoff.
    • I have MobiTV right now, and I agree, the frame rate is stupid, maybe a frame every second at best. The audio is not bad but still choppy some times, but at least it buffers audio when it falls behind and you don't miss anything. There's just not enough bandwidth for this. They should use multicast and reduce the number of channels. Really, do we need cartoons? Marc
  • Being of the crowd that thinks cell phones should primarily be for making and receiving phone calls, I find there are several (perhaps semi-facetious) convergence questions yet to be answered:

    1. When will we be able to record movies with cameras built into cell phones?
    2. Why doesn't my portable video recorder have a built-in cell phone? wireless?
    3. When will consumer digital cameras have a built-in wireless?
    4. Can we trade pr0n images and pirated movies without using the I^hinternet (ad-hoc or bluetooth)
  • Correction, MSNBC and the various Fox channels (other than the Fox Network which is Channel 10 here in Phoenix) aren't broadcast channels... they're pay channels (cable or satellite).

    At least the rabbit-ears on my set can't pick them up.

    My television has a knob, it works and I'm not afraid to use it! (Click, click, click)
  • So how long until we get Synapse now? hehe

  • TV... (Score:1)

    by BJH ( 11355 )
    ...has been available on mobile phones for ages... in Japan!
  • Could you do this yourself, and set up a base station at home with a TV tuner card and then use your portable device to tune to either a live channel?

    Or to watch something you've recorded on Myth or Tivo? What are the technical hurdles to prevent us from doing this right now?
  • ...are the video headphones/goggles. We've shrunk storage, bandwidth, and cpu to pocket size, but the darn screen either remains big to the point of sacrificing portability, or gets small, sacrificing quality and usability.

    Where are we at with video goggles that let you jack into your phone/pda/ipod and see the video at a quality/size level that makes it worthwhile? This would revolutionize portable computing and enterainment.

    Is it a question of technique or technology? Both?

  • MobiTV Sucks! (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I work in a vendor call center for a major US cell carrier. And theoretically we are supposed to support MobiTV. It is just a fast slideshow with audio, and it's pretty crappy.

    Besides the way the network works. Emergency calls take top priority, regular voice calls next, and data is dead last. During peak times of the day your data rates are going to suck. So why are they trying to overload the networks with limited bandwidth?

    On another note. I don't know why people aren't using black & white strea
  • Folks like myself riding the train to/fro work would shell out an extra $9.99 for the service as it'd give a huge boost to plain ol' internet+phone usage. Plus it'd be a bit more entertaining than reading flat text news/sports/whatever. If I weren't on the train so much - I don't think I'd think twice about picking up this service.
    • I hope you mean train and not subway...

      And to threadjack ever-so-slightly, I'd have rather heard that sprint's new network would be based on the 900 or 1800 frequencies, so that American and Europeans could start using the same frequencies, and therefore the same phones. Is there a particular technical reason why the US uses 1900? Or is it just a way to force international travelers to have multiple phones?
  • The Japanese cell phone carrier Vodaphone started rolling out phones with TV abilities by integrating a TV tuner into the cell phone itself to pick up over the air TV signals. This past spring they've rolled out a new line of phones from Toshiba to expand upon their previously released phones from NEC. I first saw advertisements for these new phones on Japanese Drama shows.

    More information on these phones can be found in the translated URL below. Granted though, this tuner cannot pickup Digital Signals

  • propaganda (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I really like the idea that I can pull my cell phone out of my pocket and catch up with the latest news and sports scores in an instant.

    catch up with the latest propaganda, you mean. And pay for it too..

    If you want to catch up with the latest news, better use a simple RSS feed reader on your mobile and tune in to the alternative media. Real News, and alot cheaper too.

  • Who? (Score:2, Funny)

    by JawzX ( 3756 )
    I can understand that someone, somewhere actualy WANTS this functionality on thier cell phone, but not me, or anyone I know personaly. So WHO? Where? lets take a little mini survey; Who are you? Where are you? Why do you want/need TV functionality on your cell phone? I consider "becuase it's cool" to be an invalid reason and all replys using that excuse will be smacked with a large, fresh, very cold Trout, or ignored, whichever comes first.

  • there is an update to MobiTV together with the new Samsung MM-A700.
    Was announced last week. http://www.i4u.com/article1930.html [i4u.com]
  • I've got Sprint on my spiffy Treo600. That means CDMA2000 1xRTT, which should mean up to 140Kbps on the smartphone. But "up to" means "less than", and I get averages of about 58Kbps over most 1-5 second windows, and about 100Kbps averaged over most minutes. But it's so bursty that even 64Kbps shoutcast audio streams rebuffer every minute or so. And at least one day a week, many hours leave the phone unable to connect through their gateway to any website. Then there's their narow coverage and weak signals -
  • "I can pull my cell phone out of my pocket and catch up with the latest news and sports scores in an instant"

    And you can't do this with text, or even still images?
  • I want off this planet now. Yes, Mr. conductor throw me off the universal train ride. This is so stupid and wrong I can't believe I'm even posting.

    I thought destroying arcade machines was wrong. I thought crushing CDs in the middle of the street was moronic. But now... I could for a round of golf with one of these gadgets on the tee. Cue Bush: Watch this drive. Uncue.

  • What's stopping us from routing our cable TV feed into our PC? We could use a high-bandwidth connection via a cell phone with a good video screen to log into our own personal TV server and watch anything we care to: streaming live TV, DVD's, MP4 video, video phones, webcams... why does everything worthwhile require us to pay through the nose? This tech is nearly free. If the cell companies weren't in the content selling business, they would't restrict what we can do with the phones so tightly. As I used to
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

Slashdot Top Deals

As you will see, I told them, in no uncertain terms, to see Figure one. -- Dave "First Strike" Pare

Close