5 ms·
Except this is streaming broadcast shows, not cable (unless I missed something). This wouldn't really help cutting the cord... you could already get rid of cab
by californian 12y ago
Except this is streaming broadcast shows, not cable (unless I missed something). This wouldn't really help cutting the cord... you could already get rid of cable and just use an antenna for CBS.
- ryanhuff 12y agoAntennas won't work for many people.
- eastbayjake 12y agoWhich people? I've lived in one place where my antenna didn't work, and it was so in the middle of nowhere that slow DSL speeds would have made streaming TV content pretty unpleasant. I'd imagine many of those people already have satellite for TV and internet.
- ryanhuff 12y agoI hear downtown areas are particularly bad for OTA. I live in southern California, but far from the transmitters, and its hard to get a clean OTA signal.
- ansible 12y ago* Antennas won't work for many people.* Heh. Especially so in the Chicago market. CBS 2 Chicago (WBBM) is the only remaining VHF transmitter in the area. I can easily pull in the other UHF stations, but CBS has continued to be a problem. Reception was poor, but since February I can't get them at all. At one point during the DTV transition period, they weren't allowed (permitted?) to transmit at full power. I wonder if something similar is going on now. That, or a new building has gone up between me and downtown.
- AjithAntony 12y agoIn fact, "cable TV" was invented to solve this problem. CATV=Community Antenna TV
- baddox 12y agoYou can think of this as just another physical medium for transmitting the same content. We already have cable and satellite, and now there's the Internet. Of course, it does have the advantage of being available without an entire cable or satellite bundle.
- akira2501 12y agoThe access to a large back catalog of CBS shows is, for me, a worthwhile feature.