Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19
  1. #1
    Stella
    Guest
    YouTube, the leading online video sharing site which was bought by
    Internet search leader Google Inc. this month, said it hopes to expand
    beyond computers to phones
    Verizon Wireless said that it would deliver selected video clips from
    YouTube to cell phones starting in December in a bid to increase
    subscriptions to its mobile media service
    http://www.latest-technology-tools.blogspot.com




    See More: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones




  2. #2
    Verizon User
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones

    Is this such a big deal? I have been doing this for a month with Kinoma
    Player and my Treo700p.


    "Stella" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > YouTube, the leading online video sharing site which was bought by
    > Internet search leader Google Inc. this month, said it hopes to expand
    > beyond computers to phones
    > Verizon Wireless said that it would deliver selected video clips from
    > YouTube to cell phones starting in December in a bid to increase
    > subscriptions to its mobile media service
    > http://www.latest-technology-tools.blogspot.com
    >






  3. #3
    Bill Marriott
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones

    The difference is that when you surf to YouTube on your own, it's against
    Verizon TOS and could lead to termination of your contract. But presumably
    when Verizon provides the same content for you from within their "walled
    garden" it's not.

    "Verizon User" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Is this such a big deal? I have been doing this for a month with Kinoma
    > Player and my Treo700p.
    >
    >
    > "Stella" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    >> YouTube, the leading online video sharing site which was bought by
    >> Internet search leader Google Inc. this month, said it hopes to expand
    >> beyond computers to phones
    >> Verizon Wireless said that it would deliver selected video clips from
    >> YouTube to cell phones starting in December in a bid to increase
    >> subscriptions to its mobile media service
    >> http://www.latest-technology-tools.blogspot.com
    >>

    >
    >






  4. #4
    g
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones

    Bill Marriott wrote:
    > The difference is that when you surf to YouTube on your own, it's against
    > Verizon TOS and could lead to termination of your contract. But presumably
    > when Verizon provides the same content for you from within their "walled
    > garden" it's not.


    That's it all right. Interesting that I've been doing it under Sprint
    service for the same length of time without that problem.
    g



  5. #5
    Todd W
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones


    "g" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Bill Marriott wrote:
    >> The difference is that when you surf to YouTube on your own, it's against
    >> Verizon TOS and could lead to termination of your contract. But
    >> presumably when Verizon provides the same content for you from within
    >> their "walled garden" it's not.

    >
    > That's it all right. Interesting that I've been doing it under Sprint
    > service for the same length of time without that problem.


    Thats because verizon's data service is toy access. Currently, only Sprint
    offers a enterprise grade high speed data network.

    Todd W.





  6. #6
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones

    "Todd W" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > Thats because verizon's data service is toy access. Currently, only Sprint
    > offers a enterprise grade high speed data network.


    Yea but VZW has better customer service, and everyone knows that is all that
    matters. <d&r>


    --
    Mike





  7. #7
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones

    At 03 Dec 2006 18:55:08 +0000 Todd W wrote:
    >


    > > That's it all right. Interesting that I've been doing it under Sprint
    > > service for the same length of time without that problem.

    >
    > Thats because verizon's data service is toy access. Currently, only

    Sprint
    > offers a enterprise grade high speed data network.


    But, arguably, Sprint isn't planning well for the future. How does that
    "enterprise grade" network stay useful for enterprise users if Sprint
    lets every teenager with a cellphone stream video on a $15/month Vision
    plan? It's hard to take something away from customers once they're used
    to it.

    Verizon, by rigidly defining prohibited uses now (regardless of whether
    or not they enforce them yet), protects themselves from their data
    network slowing down as more sophisticated users pile on with PDA phones,
    VoIP phones, etc. in the future.

    Keep in mind that currently relatively few mobile phone users take
    advantage of mobile data, but those numbers will only go up, and someday
    there may not be enough bandwidth for a bunch of low-dollar/high-speed
    users, without impacting your high-dollar PC-card-using enterprise
    customers.

    (Or maybe Sprint figures they'll have moved the enterprise customers to
    WiMax before it's a problem...)

    I'm not taking sides, BTW, and I use neither Verizon nor Sprint- I'm just
    playing devil's advocate.






  8. #8
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones


    "Todd Allcock" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > At 03 Dec 2006 18:55:08 +0000 Todd W wrote:
    >>

    >
    >> > That's it all right. Interesting that I've been doing it under Sprint
    >> > service for the same length of time without that problem.

    >>
    >> Thats because verizon's data service is toy access. Currently, only

    > Sprint
    >> offers a enterprise grade high speed data network.

    >
    > But, arguably, Sprint isn't planning well for the future.


    You know Sprint's internal road map?

    I for one am concerned with what I can do right now.

    People said, 10 years ago, that the Internet could not support widespread
    broadband (or even unlimited dialup). They were wrong.


    >
    > Verizon, by rigidly defining prohibited uses now (regardless of whether
    > or not they enforce them yet), protects themselves from their data
    > network slowing down as more sophisticated users pile on with PDA phones,
    > VoIP phones, etc. in the future.
    >


    If that's their intention, and I doubt it is, they are crazy. The bandwidth
    they would be "conserving" for tomorrow cannot be saved. If it's not used
    today it's gone.


    --
    Mike





  9. #9
    g
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones

    Todd Allcock wrote:

    > How does that
    > "enterprise grade" network stay useful ...
    >
    > Verizon, by rigidly defining prohibited uses now (regardless of whether
    > or not they enforce them yet), protects themselves from their data
    > network slowing down as more sophisticated users pile on with PDA phones,
    > VoIP phones, etc. in the future.
    >
    > Keep in mind that currently relatively few mobile phone users take
    > advantage of mobile data, but those numbers will only go up,


    > (Or maybe Sprint figures they'll have moved the enterprise customers to
    > WiMax before it's a problem...)
    >
    > I'm not taking sides, BTW, and I use neither Verizon nor Sprint- I'm just
    > playing devil's advocate.


    You ask an excellent and, to me, interesting question. The crux of this
    is "how will the present, inadequate infrastructure be changed to allow
    for true 3G and 4G?". In the short term, one vendor may allow it and the
    other not but the situation can't continue as users and datarates
    increase.
    Whether one views it as a 'coverage' or a 'capacity' problem, the
    bottom line is as the (user*bandwidth) product goes up (as it does when
    we all move to full 3G and beyond), "What will the carriers do?" One
    user hogging all of an EVDO carrier for broadband uses the same
    resources as 60 users did for 1xRTT voice.

    Notice that this is not about protocols (GSM, TDMA, CDMA etc) but about
    what a user can do with a battery and antenna limited handheld device
    within a given infrastructure. It's a worldwide problem.
    The solution requires cell sizes to get smaller (and antennas lower)
    and that requires a big change.

    g



  10. #10
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones

    At 03 Dec 2006 13:30:35 -0700 Tinman wrote:

    > > But, arguably, Sprint isn't planning well for the future.

    >
    > You know Sprint's internal road map?


    No, I don't, hence the word "arguably..."

    > I for one am concerned with what I can do right now.


    Which is fine- I'm not suggesting you switch to Verizon- I only made the
    argument that Verizon is laying down the law now, so when and if there's
    a problem in the future they can enforce the agreement as signed. If
    Sprint, in a year or two brings out a new more restrictive agreement
    they'll either have to grandfather in old "abusers," or torque people off
    who signed up under a different expectation.

    > People said, 10 years ago, that the Internet could not support
    > widespread
    > broadband (or even unlimited dialup). They were wrong.


    Yet my broadband DSL provider has made me agree to a lengthy list of
    things I'm not allowed to do, including host a server (even for personal
    use.) Do I expect them to cancel my service if I host a few files for
    access when I'm on the road? Of course not, but it gives them something
    to justify cancelling me if I, in their opinion, exceed the limits of my
    "unlimited" service!

    > > Verizon, by rigidly defining prohibited uses now (regardless of
    > > whether
    > > or not they enforce them yet), protects themselves from their data
    > > network slowing down as more sophisticated users pile on with PDA
    > > phones,
    > > VoIP phones, etc. in the future.
    > >

    >
    > If that's their intention, and I doubt it is, they are crazy. The
    > bandwidth
    > they would be "conserving" for tomorrow cannot be saved.
    > If it's not used today it's gone.


    I'm not suggesting their saving bandwidth for the future- I'm suggesting
    that if, in a year, use of mobile video, mobile Skype, or mobile
    "something-we-haven't-thought-of-yet" explodes, and there isn't enough
    bandwidth to keep the $80/month corporate PC-card users happy, Verizon
    has already covered their a**, and Sprint hasn't.

    I'm not suggesting either method is the correct one- as businesses often
    say, having too many customers is a problem they'd love to have, so maybe
    (over)loading the network is the way to go- those $15 data customers
    can't complain too much about future congestion considering what they're
    paying, and Verizon many lose so many potential customers with their
    terms (and prices) that bandwidth will never be a problem!

    I just find the contrast in styles interesting, that's all. Personally
    I'm with T-Mobile and pay $5 for unlimited (albeit slow) EDGE data with
    very loose terms- T-Mo essentially lets you do anything you are able to,
    and instead blocks certain types of usage technologically rather than
    through a terms of service agreement (i.e. blocks ports, limits download
    sizes, etc.)





  11. #11
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones

    "Todd Allcock" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > At 03 Dec 2006 13:30:35 -0700 Tinman wrote:
    >> I for one am concerned with what I can do right now.

    >
    > Which is fine- I'm not suggesting you switch to Verizon- I only made the
    > argument that Verizon is laying down the law now, so when and if there's
    > a problem in the future they can enforce the agreement as signed. If
    > Sprint, in a year or two brings out a new more restrictive agreement
    > they'll either have to grandfather in old "abusers," or torque people off
    > who signed up under a different expectation.


    Since most test results are in Sprint's favor, I don't know why you would be
    concerned about them running into data issues (compared to Verizon). And IMO
    their performance right now gives them a head start when it comes to
    implementing new technologies in the future.

    This is assuming the demand for data (and associated revenue) does indeed
    increase tremendously. So far it hasn't been the gravy train the carriers
    had hoped for.


    >
    >> People said, 10 years ago, that the Internet could not support
    >> widespread
    >> broadband (or even unlimited dialup). They were wrong.

    >
    > Yet my broadband DSL provider has made me agree to a lengthy list of
    > things I'm not allowed to do, including host a server (even for personal
    > use.) Do I expect them to cancel my service if I host a few files for
    > access when I'm on the road? Of course not, but it gives them something
    > to justify cancelling me if I, in their opinion, exceed the limits of my
    > "unlimited" service!
    >


    You and millions of other people--included me--are using broadband daily.
    Critics said the Net could not support it. Yes, wireless is a bit different.
    But if the demand is there for it, it will happen. Lots of technologies out
    there that haven't even been implemented yet.


    >>
    >> If that's their intention, and I doubt it is, they are crazy. The
    >> bandwidth
    >> they would be "conserving" for tomorrow cannot be saved.
    >> If it's not used today it's gone.

    >
    > I'm not suggesting their saving bandwidth for the future- I'm suggesting
    > that if, in a year, use of mobile video, mobile Skype, or mobile
    > "something-we-haven't-thought-of-yet" explodes, and there isn't enough
    > bandwidth to keep the $80/month corporate PC-card users happy, Verizon
    > has already covered their a**, and Sprint hasn't.


    You are basically saying if something big comes around, Verizon ain't gonna
    be in on it due to their precious business users? Guess I don't see that as
    a good thing.


    --
    Mike



    >
    > I'm not suggesting either method is the correct one- as businesses often
    > say, having too many customers is a problem they'd love to have, so maybe
    > (over)loading the network is the way to go- those $15 data customers
    > can't complain too much about future congestion considering what they're
    > paying, and Verizon many lose so many potential customers with their
    > terms (and prices) that bandwidth will never be a problem!
    >
    > I just find the contrast in styles interesting, that's all. Personally
    > I'm with T-Mobile and pay $5 for unlimited (albeit slow) EDGE data with
    > very loose terms- T-Mo essentially lets you do anything you are able to,
    > and instead blocks certain types of usage technologically rather than
    > through a terms of service agreement (i.e. blocks ports, limits download
    > sizes, etc.)
    >
    >






  12. #12
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones

    At 04 Dec 2006 00:23:58 -0700 Tinman wrote:

    > Since most test results are in Sprint's favor, I don't know why you
    > would be
    > concerned about them running into data issues (compared to Verizon).
    > And IMO
    > their performance right now gives them a head start when it comes to
    > implementing new technologies in the future.


    Perhaps- as I said, I use neither. I was just hypothesising why Verizon
    would couple the highest data prices with the most restrictive tems in a
    competitive marketplace!


    > This is assuming the demand for data (and associated revenue) does
    > indeed
    > increase tremendously. So far it hasn't been the gravy train the
    > carriers
    > had hoped for.



    Agreed. I'm a nerd, so I've played with mobile data ever since I was
    connecting a Palm-Sized PC (the WinCE predecessors to Pocket PCs) to a
    data interface on an old analog cellphone at 4800bps!

    On the other hand, my wife, who could sit in front of a PC for hours on
    end, won't even look up the weather on a mobile because of the small
    screen, and akward UI. I'm not sure there could be a "killer app" to
    make her use mobile data regularly.

    > You are basically saying if something big comes around, Verizon ain't
    > gonna
    > be in on it due to their precious business users? Guess I don't see
    > that as
    > a good thing.


    I'm not saying Verizon wouldn't be in it, I'm suggesting they won't allow
    a bunch of $10-20 data customers "ruin it" for the $80 customers.

    Personally, if I was in the market for EVDO, I'd take Sprint over Verizon.





  13. #13
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones


    "Todd Allcock" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > At 04 Dec 2006 00:23:58 -0700 Tinman wrote:
    >> This is assuming the demand for data (and associated revenue) does
    >> indeed
    >> increase tremendously. So far it hasn't been the gravy train the
    >> carriers
    >> had hoped for.

    >
    >
    > Agreed. I'm a nerd, so I've played with mobile data ever since I was
    > connecting a Palm-Sized PC (the WinCE predecessors to Pocket PCs) to a
    > data interface on an old analog cellphone at 4800bps!
    >
    > On the other hand, my wife, who could sit in front of a PC for hours on
    > end, won't even look up the weather on a mobile because of the small
    > screen, and akward UI. I'm not sure there could be a "killer app" to
    > make her use mobile data regularly.


    Yep, and I suspect she is more like average users than you (or me, for that
    matter). I know people who, after seeing the charge on their bill,
    immediately had data removed from their plans. And this was only at $10-$15
    per month--before even getting into the "unlimited is not really unlimited"
    nonsense.


    --
    Mike






  14. #14
    g
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones

    Todd Allcock wrote:

    > On the other hand, my wife, who could sit in front of a PC for hours on
    > end, won't even look up the weather on a mobile because of the small
    > screen, and akward UI. I'm not sure there could be a "killer app" to
    > make her use mobile data regularly.


    Agreed that the darn things are too small (for my eyes and thumbs
    anyway). However, I'm wondering if your wife has had occasion to see/use
    any mobile search apps. I'm finding that I'm using even basic ones like
    Google (standing in the aisle of the hardware store trying to decide
    about something or other), Google Maps and GPS+Street Atlas a LOT... in
    spite of the silly little screen.

    Maybe new cars fill this need but I can't afford one at the moment to
    see (:>)

    I also find it awfully convenient to check my mail while on-the-go.

    I think the novelty apps (YouTube?) will probably wane for me and I'm
    not about to develop a large software project on one but have to admit
    that I'm getting awfully accustomed to my smartphone/PDA.

    g



  15. #15
    Joel Kolstad
    Guest

    Re: Verizon to offer YouTube on cell phones

    "g" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Whether one views it as a 'coverage' or a 'capacity' problem, the bottom
    > line is as the (user*bandwidth) product goes up (as it does when we all move
    > to full 3G and beyond), "What will the carriers do?"


    The same thing the broadband Internet service provides do... expand their
    infrastructure to keep up and, in areas where that can't happen fast enough or
    doesn't make economic sense to do so, simply make everyone slower... and
    perhaps start selling business plans with guarantee bandwidth.

    Just like most residential cable modem & DSL plans, none of the mobile data
    carriers *guarantees* any particular data rate. However, also like the cable
    & DSL guys, *on average* something like EVDO really is going to be "fast
    enough" for the uses envisioned. For those who require guaranteed bandwidth,
    I fully expect the carriers will offer it for a premium price, just as
    Internet service providers due to businesses (or really well-heeled
    individuals).

    Note that over time the price of cell phone voice call on a "per minute" basis
    and that of a data call on a "per bit" basis has gotten cheaper and cheaper:
    This directly reflects advances in technology and economies of scale, and
    industry forecasts are generally that this will continue to happen.

    > The solution requires cell sizes to get smaller (and antennas lower) and
    > that requires a big change.


    That's one solution, there are many others: More spectrum (a lot of people are
    salivating at the thought of getting a chunk of the old UHF TV broadcast
    spectrum -- there's a huge amount there, and these days you can make a good
    argument that its present utilization is poor), simply adding more sectors to
    present antennas, "smart" (electrically reconfigurable) antennas (very close
    to being commercially implemented), perhaps higher power transmissions if
    battery life and safety concerns can be addressed, etc. There are literally
    thousands of people working on expanding mobile data capacity every day, and
    plenty of them are quite bright.





  • Similar Threads




  • Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast