It's all over for Aereo

[jbloggs]

In light of the Supreme Court's ruling against it, it's all over for Aereo.

http://www.thewrap.com/aereo-investo...mpany-is-over/

http://www.deadline.com/2014/06/aere...-diller-loses/

[Blu-Dog]

Never stood a chance.

[Visco.]

Who?

[Josh B]

No one owns the signal, it's the process of that signal converted into actual programing, that's owned. They pulled this shit with Tesla, lol I have no idea what I'm talking about.

[ay221]

Just use your own antenna, then you don't have to pay anyone. I have a hd ota recorder, and that is all I need. Plus blu-rays here and there.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by ay221

Just use your own antenna, then you don't have to pay anyone. I have a hd ota recorder, and that is all I need. Plus blu-rays here and there.

Some areas don't get a decent signal, or none at all...

[Lemmy Lugosi]

Way to support hi-tech, SCOTUS.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by ay221

Just use your own antenna, then you don't have to pay anyone. I have a hd ota recorder, and that is all I need. Plus blu-rays here and there.

agree

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Some areas don't get a decent signal, or none at all...

true but that is probably deep in the boonies where sat is the only option (and even that might not work too well.

The biggest issue with OTA tends to be ignorance. For example around 3 years ago I had my second cousin at my home (baptism of my nephew which is why I remember when it was), the kids were watching TV and she asked if it was a BD (I have a large collection), I said no that it was TV, so she asked if I had cable or Sat since it looked so good, I pointed out that it was OTA, she could not believe it and at first thought I was joking, when she realized I was not she said something like " it looks good but you probably only get 4 channels", I go no, asked the kids for the remote and that this would take a couple of minutes and flipped through all the over 20 channels I had at the time ( there are 26 now but not sure how many there were back then). Then it was "but you must have paid a lot for the antenna, and so I said no, built it and installed it myself for under 20$. Then she said something like "yeah but I am guessing it won't be the same at my place" so I asked her for the postal code entered it in TVfool.com and showed her her list (she actually had a couple more).



needless to say a few weeks later I was at her place helping her with her new antenna. Once the installation done she flipped back and forth from antenna to cable and remarked " why does the antenna look better" and I replied because cable takes what you see on the antenna compresses it even more so that they can send a lot of different channels on that same cable and for them it is as many channels as possible and it does not matter if you are watching it or even paying fro it they are all there."

I think many imagine OTA is still in the 1970's or early 80's with very few channels that are full of snow (because the reception is just a bit too week) or ghosting (because the reception is a bit too strong). while over the years more networks have been added and with digital OTA it is a lot less finicky and many have added sub channels.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

true but that is probably deep in the boonies where sat is the only option (and even that might not work too well.

Not at all. People in the Hollywood Hills can't get broadcast television, right in the shadow of Mt Wilson, where the antennas are. Wave propagation is not clear sailing in mountainous areas, that can be intensely populated.


Antennas are also focused, just like a lens. Signals are directed at the most populated areas, for obvious reasons. Signal strength can deplete due to numerous factors, including interference from terrain, electromagnetic sources, atmospheric conditions. etc.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

The biggest issue with OTA tends to be ignorance.

Why is it you have to be so insulting about people?

Originally Posted by Anthony P

For example around 3 years ago I had my second cousin at my home (baptism of my nephew which is why I remember when it was), the kids were watching TV and she asked if it was a BD (I have a large collection), I said no that it was TV, so she asked if I had cable or Sat since it looked so good, I pointed out that it was OTA, she could not believe it and at first thought I was joking, when she realized I was not she said something like " it looks good but you probably only get 4 channels", I go no, asked the kids for the remote and that this would take a couple of minutes and flipped through all the over 20 channels I had at the time ( there are 26 now but not sure how many there were back then). Then it was "but you must have paid a lot for the antenna, and so I said no, built it and installed it myself for under 20$. Then she said something like "yeah but I am guessing it won't be the same at my place" so I asked her for the postal code entered it in TVfool.com and showed her her list (she actually had a couple more).

So you're really intelligent for building an antenna an wowing your relatives?

Originally Posted by Anthony P

needless to say a few weeks later I was at her place helping her with her new antenna. Once the installation done she flipped back and forth from antenna to cable and remarked " why does the antenna look better" and I replied because cable takes what you see on the antenna compresses it even more so that they can send a lot of different channels on that same cable and for them it is as many channels as possible and it does not matter if you are watching it or even paying fro it they are all there."

I think many imagine OTA is still in the 1970's or early 80's with very few channels that are full of snow (because the reception is just a bit too week) or ghosting (because the reception is a bit too strong). while over the years more networks have been added and with digital OTA it is a lot less finicky and many have added sub channels.

You are lucky you have a good signal.