Another Free Cue* Gadget At Radio Shack 76
dizgusted writes: "DigitalConvergence, fine purveyors of the infamous CueCat, are back with CueTV. URLs will be encoded in TV programs. A free gadget, again from Radio Shack, will send them to a PC where a browser can load the page. Now one can be mesmerized by two devices simultaneously. More here." The article's a few weeks old, but apparently within the week is when these devices will show up at Radio Shacks.
Re:Tracking Your TV Habits (Score:1)
Re:This idea will never take off... (Score:1)
This is probably the greatest promise of HDTV--not the digital signal (which is certainly nice) but the increased resolution that allows people to do more computing-like activities on their machines.
And the only place that I have really seen anything close to what people would consider a huge "wow, let's dish out moola for this" is in smart homes. Problem is, if anyone has looked at the prices of those devices, wowser. Sweet, but prohibitively expensive for the average consumer.
imo, this all means the *main* reason we have not seen convergence is not lack of design, lack of engineering, or impossible functionality; it's not the technical outline fo the ideas that's holding us back. It's plain old cost; good old-fashioned economics.
The hardware to do what we want is here now. We can already have 160+ gb compressed audio devices, digital vcrs, high definition tv, etc. The networks can already use push technology and cookies to sync up ads. But that this stuff is just outrageously expensive to put all together. When you see companies like Apple and Sony in the picture as the early adopters, you know it's going to be an expensive (albeit neat) solution. Not for everyone.
That's why we see these dubious, silly devices from companies like Cue. They are needed, we want them in a lot of ways, but they are what they seem--just hacks. Joe User doesn't want them because it's really not "easy" to do. Geeks don't want them for their intended purpose because the companies laden them with "hidden" baggage, like privacy concerns. This will again be another not such a common device in the household--it's just not what people want. Even if it is free.
When TIVO can capture general purpose data files.. (Score:1)
IMHO TV broadcasting should be viewed as data broadcasting anyway, as soon as it goes digital, and digital TV should be a special case of data broadcasting, not vice versa.
The bandwidth should be pretty high, and broadcasting should be a gain even if you have to go on the internet to repair glitches in the captured data (you can't very well NAK a transmitted TV data chunk). It shouldn't be that hard to invent a protocol similar to ftp for repairing data captured from broadcast. It just has to be able to fill in holes rather than just continue from a break.
This would be a good way to lighten the load on the net. Maybe you'd have data jockeys taking calls for broadcasting stuff. Or internet request pools, where once there are x people interested, it gets broadcast, and TIVOs catch it. MP3s at TV speeds anyone? Games? Software? Latest Linux?
Fast, while you sleep. Oops, I forgot, wrong crowd for wee hours sleep.
Not exactly rocket science. Someone will get rich from this. How come it's never me?
Re:what dont i get? (Score:1)
Sounds a lot like TeleText [google.com], which has been around since the 80's in Europe. It uses an unused portion of the TV-image to transmit programming schedules, weather, news, sports, miscellany info and even software. IIRC it's not available outside Europe, though.
Who thought of this one? (Score:2)
--
Online or offline? (Score:2)
Something like this *could* be useful if it was integrated with TV like hyperlinks are with the web. You would need Seinfeld to put these cues into the show at points that demand them.
I could really see this as useful for something like Junkyard wars or Connections3. The reliability is dubious too.
It seems like a niftier idea than the CueCat, but if they haven't gotten their crap together after the last time, who knows how bad it'll bomb.
I've heard.. (Score:1)
What would be interesting is a television ad service based on barcodes. If you buy a product, you could scan the barcode to block advertisements for the product (since you are already a customer)... that would be pretty neat, then the commercial could be either removed so you can get to your show quicker.. or be fed an ad which is not blocked.
Re:I've heard.. (Score:1)
--
I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations
Your mom is a junkie (Score:2)
Re:This idea will never take off... (Score:1)
I've been playing with it for a few days and it looks quite good (almost fully-featured demo too!). It makes ATI's bundled software look embarrassingly inadequate.
Re:Not new.....marketing is but this is not new... (Score:1)
I wonder how much they'll be selling it for. I would guess that it is only mono because that is all that is required for their scheme, and it would help keep people from using it for anything else.
Re:I'm still waiting... (Score:1)
If I'm interested in it, I will go and seek it out on my own, and most advertizing thus becomes superfluous. The purpose of the Great Advertizing Blitz in which we live is not to inform you, but to get you to buy stuff you weren't interested in, to keep consumption high to that production will be high so that corporate profits will be high. I'd rather not play, thanks.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | http://www.infamous.net/
Re:Who thought of this one? (Score:1)
It's been done, IIRC. Please don't ask for details, I barely remember reading about this ages ago. Some UK computer (Acorn?) had a thingie you could hook to it and point to the TV screen, during some computer program on the BBC a square would flicker away downloading to your deck. I though that was a pretty keen idea. I did a cursory Google but didn't turn up anything.
Whatever their audio decoder costs, I'm sure that a simple photocell would be cheaper.
I think you'd want a phototransistor instead, photocells are slow in their reaction times, relatively speaking.
Re:Anyone besides me not wanting this at all? (Score:2)
Well, at least I'm more likely to find a use for that than I am for the twelve :Cue:Cats I have laying around the shop.
I say Digital :Convergence is getting better, not worse ;-)
Re:Who thought of this one? (Score:2)
Audio, eh? I assumed that the "obvious" way of getting the data would be through a small square in the corner of the picture. Modulate the square's luminance, and you have data transfer. It should be pretty easy to explain to the customer, too.
Whatever their audio decoder costs, I'm sure that a simple photocell would be cheaper.
Sony TV-2-DVD? (Score:4)
Does anyone have any info on this? Sounds like it would just about have to be a similiar setup, with mpeg capabilities. How great would this be? I hope this means simply DVD-r. PLEASE, let it mean DVD-r...
Re:Who thought of this one? (Score:2)
If I didn't have a good set of stereo speakers for my computer, I might be inclined to hook it up to play to my main stereo in the living room, but even then I wouldn't probably not want to run a second record cable. I can't tell from the article if it is a monitor cable hooked to your TV/amplifier, or just a microphone (even scarier)
DC needs to learn that their "value added content" is not so spectacular that people are going to go to extra truoble to make it work, even if it is really cool once set up. The reality is that their service is mediocre at best, and way too much work to justify.
what dont i get? (Score:1)
Does someone honestly believe a bunch of people are going to run wires from their computer to their television, so they can rewatch the same advertisements on their computer - just adapted for the internet.
Come on, If I am that interested in a product I can do a web search - don't need my television to be controling my web broswer.
What is the benefit of using this product? It's going to be used all for ads, dont tell me otherwise.
What they should of done is found a way to encode a data stream in the television channel with useful information that people would want to see interspersed with ads - no internet connection required. This way computers without access to the internet can get some data, sports scores, news headlines, weather, etc.
The bottom line is people won't use this because the hassle of installing it + hassle of viewing lots of unnecessary ads > benefit to user * 10000!
The saddest part of all is that the only people who are ever going to try this is people who read slashdot.
Re:Functionality? (Score:1)
Write some software that ignores the "official" audios cues but trackes key phrases like "Hi, Bob." and "Make it so!". Voilà -- Now you've got computerized score-keeping for drinking games. If computer-assisted drunkeness isn't a killer app for the American market, I don't know what is.
Apparently, a number of people do both at once. (Score:1)
Now, really: You can't expect Digital Convergence to ignore experts like those, can you?
now? (Score:3)
Now? You mean I am the only person who plays EverQuest while watching Oprah?
I work there... (Score:1)
The Cue cable is a cable with an RCA plug on one end (the tv end) and a 1/8" plug on the other. The RCA end also has a pass through so another rca cable can be hooked up at the same time.
Of course, the idea is to hook it to your TV and have it send audio ques that take you to a website. Now what they don't usually mention is that all the tv sound comes through the computer's speakers.
While the cat and cable are free, there are a couple of related items that are not:
The "Audio Link" -- this is a wireless sender that does the same thing the cable does and sells for 19.99
The Cue cat holder -- attaches to your monitor or computer and holds the cat. Usually sells for 1.99, but during this promotion it's now
The contest with nbc works something like this. you get the cat & cable & install it. You also get a game piece with a barcode on it. Once you install the cat, you swap the barcode and that enters you into the contest. I think the prize is a trip to hollywood to be a guest on an nbc show.
Anyway, don't be surprised if rs employees try to get you to buy stuff when you go to get one. That
s why radioshack is doing this - to get people in the store. Now any employee is suppose to average about $32 per ticket. And every cat counts as a ticket. And a $0 ticket at that. So the employee has to make up for it by trying to sell you more stuff.
IMHO, the idea of using the tv to go to web sites probably sounded good at the time, but they didnt think it through. (It's a cool hack, but not very usefull.)
Re:USB CueCats (Score:1)
Not new.....marketing is but this is not new.... (Score:2)
I just check the link and actually this is more then just a cable, it's wireless too. Hmm....may be worth the trip to get this thing (imagining reversing the link for wireless MP3 playing on my stereo!).
Re:This idea will never take off... (Score:2)
Re:Nothing new, only marketing.. (Score:3)
Perhaps the most touted benefit was a gimmick for Monday Night Football viewers. They had a well-educated representative from Britannica.com provide real-time explanations of Dennis Miller's notoriously obscure references. (Yeah, they could have done this with text on the TV - like I said, it was a gimmick).
Cue's idea could theoretically allow the same sort of thing without the need for precise scheduling. You'd be able to synch web info even if you're watching a videotape, for example. Or marketers could record the "links" right into their infomercials, broadcast them whenever local rates happen to be cheap, and still be able to launch mounds of pop-up ads on your computer before you can hit the mute button.
The idea of allowing television broadcasts to control proprietary closed-source software on your computer that connects to the Internet has some amazingly evil possibilities. It's an almost Microsoft-like idea, except for its being doomed to financial failure.
Re:Who thought of this one? (Score:2)
Their "audio decoder" costs them nothing - they use your pc's sound card. All this thing is is a cable for attaching your tv/vcr/dss audio out to the line in on a pc, plus appropriate software.
Useless stuff (Score:3)
Re:Functionality? (Score:2)
That would be great...
TV: "My name is inigo montoyo. You killed my father. Prepare to die."
Computer: TAKE TWO DRINKS
-------
Re:Functionality? (Score:3)
Head Engineer: We messed up big time. Why did we make a product that was useful in other ways than what we designed?
Head of Marketing: Meh. We need some type of product that's useless to anyone.
HE: I know! What if we have a way to connect your TV to your computer? Geeks use TV tuners cards in their computers, and REAL geeks- the kind who can reverse engineer anything, don't watch TV!
HM: Genius.
-------
An idea... Can we do this ourselves? (Score:1)
They have software that listens for the "cue".
Couldn't we write the software ourselves and listen for the cue and then tell it to do whatever we want?
By the way, it does work across a 2.4 GHz wireless transmitter. Particularly X10 but they all should work. (It's simply transmitting audio so there isn't any reason it shouldn't.)
Re:Why are they using audible cues? (Score:1)
Actually, it makes a twisted sort of business sense, I suppose. Some possible reasons for NOT using T2 to send this data:
URL data in T2 can be encoded on the tape or inserted later, right up to and including at time of air. Anyone along the broadcast chain -- from content originator right up to whomever is actually broadcasting the signal you're actually receiving -- can stick that data in there. That would make it difficult for DC to collect.
Data in T2 can also be removed just about any time you want, again including at time of air.
Broadcasters want to be able to charge their advertisers separately for having URLs (or "Cross-Over Links" as they like to call them) in their commercials. Don't want to pay extra? Guess we'll just shut them off, then. Now, imagine that a cable or DSS provider decided they wanted to do the same thing to the broadcaster. Don't share that revenue? We'll turn T2 off so YOU won't get the $$$ either.
Bandwidth. T2 gets a max of about 60 characters per second. EIA suggests that you don't use nearly that much. (I think the guideline is 15% of total Line 21 usage or something like that. It's been a while.) Much more bandwidth available in the audio signal. There are (or possibly were) companies who were doing various interactive TV things using the audio signal.
Compression. Certain networks (PAX comes to mind) do time compression. They "speed up" the playback in order to squeeze in extra commercial spots. (Something like 30 seconds per hour maybe?) This does some very bad stuff to all line 21 data. Don't know how it would affect the audio tracks.
I don't know, the whole idea sounds really dumb if you ask me.
--john
p.s. The URLs you see on your TV when you put your decoder in T2 mode are indeed intended for WebTV users. Most broadcasters aren't doing much with it yet but usage is increasing. To see a whole bunch of them, tune to the Weather Channel.
Re:Anyone besides me not wanting this at all? (Score:5)
Just sit back down and relax as we plug this IV into your arm. No need for you to think anymore. We've taken care of that for you.
This is very cool (Score:2)
Imagine how cool this could be, you could make a music video, set up (say) 100 pages of pictures on a website, and have 'stereo' video productions.
Or maybe a video on the evils of the Cue corporation, with embedded links to sites describing how they cracked down on reverse engineering of the CueCat !
Lying when your privacy is not respected (Score:2)
If no one will help you, consider "Self Help" measures. ;)
Re:Cool. Now I can make a COMMERCIAL ELIMINATOR! (Score:2)
A new form of TV advertising, computer control. Just like product placement.
Possible Usefullness (Score:2)
--Josh
Re:CueCats are awsome... (Score:1)
Re:Anyone besides me not wanting this at all? (Score:2)
/Brian
Re:Anyone besides me not wanting this at all? (Score:2)
I don't, personally, see that as a bad thing. There are certainly many pieces of information you don't want to give out, like your SSN (which you have to give out for every little thing these days), your mother's maiden name (likewise), etc. But really, the fact that you go to watch, say, various heavy-breasted commercials can only be a good thing for them to know. Then, more ta-tas will show up on your tee-vee.
Not only that, but they will be able to find out what you're watching - This is good! First, nothing on the TV stations that'll carry this content is the kind of thing that will get you into trouble, unless you're trying to establish an alibi and talk about some show that wasn't even on or something. But really, don't you want the shows you watch to be successful? This is your chance to keep the shows you like on the air.
I'm not sure I believe what I'm saying here, but I like to do the satanic advocacy thing.
Also, I wouldn't sign up unless the T&C said that no one would ever get my address or email address from them. I'm quite willing to be a statistic, but I don't want targeted spam. I DO want my needs to be known, I just don't want anyone specific to know about them. I want to tip the scales, not be the only weight on 'em.
--
ALL YOUR KARMA ARE BELONG TO US
Free stuff! (Score:3)
Why are they using audible cues? (Score:1)
Audio vs infrared. (Score:2)
All if can imagine is the effect on house pets. Obviously it has to be above the range of human hearing. But if it gets into bat range, then it is far more directional.
Presumably they decided to do it this way instead of using IR because otherwise all of the sequences in the scanning of URLs just interfered with too many other remotes.
Check out the Vinny the Vampire [eplugz.com] comic strip
Re:Anyone besides me not wanting this at all? (Score:3)
Not out-of-band (Score:2)
When I started writing about the CueCat last year, the promotional material I received included what purported to be recordings of television cues. I didn't have the analysis tools I have today to try to determine how they encode digital data in the sound, but my short attempt with a spectrum analyzer didn't expose anything obvious.
I do know something about the audio chain used in television stations, and can tell you that the chain is unable to pass anything outside the passband 50-15,000 Hz. Remember, television sound is transmitted using FM modulation of a subcarrier at the top end of the channel. (Picture information is transmitted using AM, and color information by phase modulation.) Transmitting anything about 15 kHz at any significant level would cause the audio signal to splatter outside the allowed passband. Not only that, but most television reception equipment -- especially for the home -- wouldn't pass the out-of-band signal out the RCA jacks anyway.
Now that I have a copy of the SDI watermark attacks, I can try some of those techniques to find the embedded information without having to reverse-engineer the stupid Cat software, which doesn't work on Linux anyway...
(It also means I now have a reason to install the TV-tuner card into my PC and get a cable hook-up to it, assuming that I want to try to capture this stuff anyway. Because the TV-card is supposed to play through the computer speakers, I should be able to grab the sound stuff as it goes by.)
How appropriate! (Score:3)
I just check the NBC/CueCat web site [perfectprize.com] and saw that the show that will have "Cue-enhanced commercials" is none other than
Now, how appropriate can that be? I mean, one of the lamest game shows on television today being the vehicle for testing your CueCat link? It is to laugh...
The skinny on TVText in the US (Score:4)
The C-Text service was launched in, if memory serves, 1973. This used one of the top lines in the vertical blanking interval (line 16? Anyone remember that detail?) to transmit text at a respectable rate over a standard TV channel. The data stream was organized in numbered frames of about 300 characters each, and the system transmitted 15 C-Text data frames per second. A set-top box would scan the datastream for a frame with the frame number selected by the user; when that frame was received by the box it would put the data into a buffer and display the text on the TV screen.
In the system demo I saw, the frame numbers were three decimal digits. Mini-computers (DEC PDP-11/70s) would structure the datastream and feed it to the transmission system. One reason for using the PDP-11/70s was that the head-per-track disk that seemed to be standard equipment for those computers could ensure that frame assembly could be done in real time. The software kept a "play list" of frame numbers, so that common frames would be transmitted frequently while less-common frames would be transmitted at less frequent intervals.
The reason I saw this demo was that Rockwell was thinking about launching a C-Text type service in the United States. When Marketing was done chewing the numbers, the resulting opinion was that offering the service didn't have a large enough ROI to justify the expense and risk. So Rockwell said "thanks, but no thanks." Broadcasters were worried that C-Text data would interfere with the transmission-quality test signals built into lines 18 and 19, and the telcos echoed the feeling.
I agree, the dumber the consumers.. (Score:1)
join the flock.
Re:Anyone besides me not wanting this at all? (Score:1)
I'm still waiting... (Score:1)
Re:I'm still waiting... (Score:1)
I doubt that Radio Shack is going to make you sign some EULA to only use this hardware as they tell you to. I'll avoid installing any CueCat software so that they can't bind me to a EULA there.
Actually, they're already at Radio Shack. (Score:1)
--
Re:This idea will never take off... (Score:1)
http://jason.artoo.net/2001-06-04/Rack_3_sm.png [artoo.net]
I'll admit, at the moment I'm the only one I know to have gone this far, but I've got a number of co-workers that have done either the video capture thing or the mp3 output to stereo. Yes, we're "geeks," but as soon as it's put together in an easy to install and use packages, folks will buy it, if it's marketed right.
Re:This idea will never take off... (Score:2)
Might want to be prepared for some hassle here, I got an ATI all-in-wonder Radeon, and the TV-on-demand is flaky at best. I havn't had much time to play with it, but it seems to be some sort of codec problem. (i.e. fixable in software)
-
Re:USB CueCats (Score:1)
Re:How appropriate! (Score:1)
Re:USB CueCats (Score:2)
a new realm of computer hacking? (Score:1)
oh wait, digital convergence has got that pegged.
Functionality? (Score:1)
At least with the
Let me know what you think it could be used for.
Stupid Business Plans (Score:2)
This plan ("People own TVs. People own computers. We've got to be able to make money off of that somehow...") reminds me of the underpants gnomes on South Park:
Step One: Collect underpants
Step Two: ???
Step Three: Profit!
That's just it, you DON'T GIVE them the info... (Score:1)
Then they have the New York ABC to send everyone to www.nbc.com/news.asp?id='New York.NY', and they do this in every broadcasting center across the country.
They can then get lists of every person who happened to watch the news that night, where they are located, their IP address, etc., etc., and if you happened to already do business with them or an NBC affiliate, the cross-reference they use the cookies that are probably already on you computer to match up the data.
Now you are saying that the broadcast areas are usually very large, well yes and no. The areas that are unuslly mid way between the diferent areas, for instance Old Bridge, New Jersey (a city pretty much halfway between Philadelphia and New York), almost always have both NBC broadcasts, and usually at different times so that the people there can watch both versions of the news. In these cases, the computer would go to both Philadelphia's and New York's page, and the database system would see this, and then be able to place the person into the areas where they know there networks overlap.
No more need to type in where you are located, giving you the change to say Tokepa, Kansas, or some other city that you don't live in, they know where you live, now you have to do whatever possible to kep them from knowing you name.
The funniest annalogy I have seen in a long time (Score:1)
Anyone besides me not wanting this at all? (Score:4)
Think about this one second. They can send the data at specified times to certain areas of their TV networks, and when the next time you log on your computer, they can then match up that data with your computer and know the general area where you are located (and to a very good degree). No more hassle with haveing you input you address anymore, cause the only way you would have gotten that signal was if you had a TV that got that signal.
The only way I would EVER think about getting one of these is if they:
1) would gaurentee that they would not share or sell the database information to anyone else
2) would allow me to view and edit any and all information collected about me
3) if the company goes out of business, the data in the database can not be considered a company asset and thus be sold to anyone, specificly a clause that would state that the data about me ultimatly belongs to me, and that I am only leasing to the company the rites to view and use the data.
I don't want to sound like I am paraniod or anything, its just that I truely feel the internet has become just a comercial entity in which the users of it are just giving more food to the corporations in a much easier way for them to collect and keep checks on that information. I would truely rather be an anonymous entity in a huge group of anonymous entities, thus giving me the freedom to express my opinions and beliefs without any fear of personal backlash. A place where I can be whoever I want whenever I want, do things that I would never even dream of doing in real life and not have to worry about those actions comming back to haunt me at some later time because someone was cataloging them and had a way to tell exactly who I was EVERY SINGLE TIME I go online.
Re:Tracking Your TV Habits (Score:2)
I always laugh about people freaking about sites trying to match ads to consumer bowsing habits. Sure, it means they might know I spend 24 hours a day at ninenine.com :) but that the price you pay ;)
Now before you privacy zealots get your panties in a wad - I'm not saying I want no privacy. Its just that to me, a company with my browsing habits via cookie is not a huge deal and actually provides me with some potential benefit. Same goes for TV. I'd love the advertisers to know it was me watching TV - then they could play Victoria Secret commercials for the whole time I'm watching! BONUS!
Nothing new, only marketing.. (Score:4)
Still, I don't see how they're going to convince thousands of people to string audio cables between the TV and the computer.
ABC's enhanced tv much does it smarter. By syncing the web site to the television timing you get exactly the same effect. TV commercials on "Who Wants to be a Millionaire" result in the same ad on your computer screen..
My favorite Cue Cat joke.. (Score:5)
It's only me, or the idea is loony? (Score:1)
Yes of course. I want something of what he's been taking. I know nobody that wants the PC on when they are watching TV. The d*** PC is noisy. I know of some people that like to have the TV on as they surf, but usually give almost no attention to it.
This kind of things are so far away of what I would consider a good bussiness plan, that sometimes I wonder if it's only me. I mean, these people have got money to back their loony ideas, and we are no longer in the anything-goes era, rather the other way around.
As a rule, I would consider a bad sign that they have to give away the hardware, so as to create a market. If the idea is so good, why they think nobody is going to pay a dime for it? And if nobody is ready to pay for it, why are they going to connect it at all, even less to use it?
But well, perhaps I'm wrong this time, I've been wrong before. But, also as a rule, you have to start with a perceived need, and then develop a product or idea. But lately I see more and more of "let's press this wonderful idea on the not-so-interested public, they don't even know they have this need". Ok, enough of it. Wake me up the next time somebody invents a videophone, or a micropayment system.
--
information on wireless (Score:1)
It might be too much to wish for that this thing broadcasts enough of the audio spectrum to use as a MP3 broadcaster, but it might be a good low-bandwidth wireless transmitter when used with some of the (baycom-like) audio-broadcasting technology that HAMs have developed. Also, it seems there must be some sort of memory associated with storing the information, which is also cool and hopefully hackable. The company almost made hacking the cue cat too easy - let's hope they still haven't a clue. I also hope that they keep trying this sort of business model, so that I can do my part in getting free stuff and causing them to go bankrupt.
cuebox
Re:what dont i get? (Score:1)
They've done that the last 20 years or so. In Europe, text-TV gives you all that. I don't know why US never managed to launch text-tv of some form. Vetoed by adverstisers? Picked the wrong testmarkets? Mainstream US consumers are hyperslow adopters? TV industry is technologically challenged? Not enough bells and whistles for the decision making executives?
The CueCat is not actually a cat! (Score:1)
Re:Anyone besides me not wanting this at all? (Score:3)
But if they ever do make such a promise, we'll be protected since a bill was passed in March by the U.S. Senate along with the U.S. House (though I can't remember which one or where I read this) which would prevent bankrupt companies from selling their database of personal data, if those companies promised not to. Only thing is there's also a loophole in the bill -- companies can sell or lease the personal data and it would be justifiable if it is consistent with the company's pre-existing policy. And because there's this loophole, many companies have already changed their policies, or are beginning to (or eventually will) change them to reflect this. Ebay recently did this [wired.com] and Amazon has since September 2000.
CueCats are awsome... (Score:5)
Idea for Cue: Why not give away CueCams, digital video cameras that connect to your computer and send your browser to any URL they see on any visual media? I promise I would not use it as a webcam. Honest.
USB CueCats (Score:1)
They now have USB CueCats, besides those horrid PS/2 ones.
Market share data the obvious application (Score:1)
As a business person, I'd be more likely to buy ad time from a station that can show me "Cue says we have a 65% market share" versus one that shows me "Nielsen's survey says we have a 65% market share". I'd be more likely to buy ad time from a station that can tell me "Your ad was presented in 65,536 homes" versus one that tells me "According to Nielsen, the sponsored show was viewed at least partially in 65,536 homes"
Some may think this is all about tracking individuals, and perhaps it is, also. The data this generates, however, is likely to be most valuable to track entire advertising markets. We've already established that Cue knows where you live (by ZIP code) and that's all this would need.
Whatever. I don't use Windows, and I don't own a television set. I wonder if Nielsen even has a blank for "respondent doesn't own a television set" ... Cue certainly doesn't.
This idea will never take off... (Score:1)
DiVX
Homemade Tivo - ATI's latest offerings have me considering this myself.
Video Capture - Kinda like the Tivo thing except you don't need specialized software.
Serious Hardcode Bigscreen Gaming (or Porn) - Size does matter.
MP3 Playback - There's something to be said for a home surround sound system compared to $19 K-Mart special computer speakers.
Okay, that's a few reasons... However, they're all kinda geeky "function-over-form" reasons and you end up with cables everywhere. Only geeks need apply. I just recently bought a DC10+ capture card and hooking it up involved buying the longest stereo A/V cable Recoton sells, a 12 footer. It barely reaches, and my computer and TV are in the same room.
If they're seriously interested in getting Joe Sixpack to buy into this, RadioShack should start giving away wireless audio senders. This has the added benefit that it would make a great MP3 sender if used in reverse. I've seen the free "convergence cable", it's too short and it's mono... Props to anyone who can find a good use for it.
Re:USB CueCats (Score:2)
I talked to a dumber-than-usual salesdrone who offered me a Cue Cat, PS/2 of course. I told him I don't have a port for that on my computer cause it's a Mac (okay, I do have a Mac, so it's not entirely lying - but I never use it.) and asked if he had any Cue Cats with a different connector... He gave me a USB Cue Cat. Finally. Trying it out wasn't all that exciting though, it's HID compliant and doesn't need any special drivers to work with the current windows hacks.