“A couple of weeks ago, Fox.com was atop our list of Websites that could still be accessed on Google TV to stream full episodes of content,” Tyler Cunningham reports for GTVHub.
“Well, you can go ahead and cross Fox off that list, as they are now blocking Google TV devices,” Cunningham reports. “The list of networks allowing Google TV devices to access their online content appears to be dwindling.”
Full article with screenshot here.
[Attribution: Engadget. Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Lynn W.” for the heads up.]
Google never worries about making sure all the loose ends are tied up. They just dump “wonderful” products on the world and expect they will work perfectly without anymore effort on their part.
I hope all (probably 3) people who bought Google TV are enjoying their selection of YouTube videos.
Let’s see. The studios get to choose a device that allows users to access their current and old content for free or choose the device that allows users to rent/own the content for a fee.
So, which one of you bloggers bought into beelzebub’s GTV?
Another thing is that GTV already cost the users:
$299 – http://www.logitech.com/en-us/smartTV/revue
or
$399-$599 – http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&categoryId=8198552921644751998&XID=O:sit:googlehp_corp_display
…and now you’re losing content!
G T V is good when it means…
Train à Grande Vitesse…
TGV 😀
Google & Co missed that one…
Google’s problem is that they have been used to having access people’s websites through their webads. With youtube they got used to punting free content. Now they think they can distribute video royalty free.
Doesn’t work that way – the content owners need to make money and that’s through ads.
The problem with GTV is that its just web tv 2.0. Didnt we already do this? And why does it cost 400 bucks for a browser that connects to my TV?
After all, all the value add by google can run ina browser around what ever content they are displaying.
Google creates devices that rely on the kindness of others to provide value. They did with carriers and smartphones, they’re doing it with set top boxes and the networks. As long as they get their hooks into your personal information, they’ve got a revenue stream.
http://themacadvocate.com/2010/10/22/networks-to-google-wah-wah/
Google simply forgot to slap on their beta tag on this device, when it clearly was begging for it. Hobby doesn’t sound so bad now, does it?
MDN MW: ‘clear.’ Wow, how did they know I was going to use that word?
@84 Mac Guy
“Google never worries about making sure all the loose ends are tied up. They just dump “wonderful” products on the world and expect they will work perfectly without anymore effort on their part.”
Model which worked well for a web-search engine; its monetization was an after-thought.
Now Google can’t do anything in a different/appropriate way. They are stuck in the old model.
Google is just feeding the same beast that M$ fed – thieves.
DOS was loved because you didn’t have to pay IBM.
Windows was loved because you didn’t have to pay Apple.
Napster/LimeWire/PirateBay was loved because you didn’t have to pay the hard working artists that slaved away, sometimes for decades, to bring their art to the world.
Android is loved because you can steal, steal and steal some more!
The tech world will always be hounded by thieving scum who don’t want to pay for things, and do not have the moral grounding to understand that they are stealing.
The same hypocritical MFrs that want to do some tea bagging are the ones that get angry when they cant steal their daily dose of media. Apple’s “walled garden” makes them SO mad.
Google sucks again. They’re the new Microsoft.
“The tech world will always be hounded by thieving scum who don’t want to pay for things, and do not have the moral grounding to understand that they are stealing.”
Being delusional is your idea of “moral grounding”?
Because copying a file isn’t stealing, period. No, even if you’re supposed to pay for it, that still doesn’t make it stealing. In reality it’s actually something called copyright infringement, and according to both the meaning of the word ‘theft’ and the law itself, it isn’t theft.
You can stand against copyright infringement all you want, go right ahead, but stay anchored in reality please.
Also, I’d say DOS and Windows were loved because they were essentially the only viable operating systems on the market thanks to Microsoft’s anti-competetive dick moves. This made it very easy to fool most computer users into thinking that DOS/Windows were the bestest things ever, because they were only using DOS/Windows and had nothing to compare them to. They’d also easily believe whatever BS MS came up with regarding the horribly beleaguered competition because, again, they really had no points of reference.
Kind of like if you feed a person dogfood all their lives while telling them it tastes awesome and steaks taste like shit and will kill you, they’ll come to love dogfood and revile steaks for being awful and poisonous.
And as for Android, outside of a few hardcore Linux fanatics wearing blinders, I don’t think anybody loves it. It’s just that thing you get if you want a smartphone but don’t have ATT. Or if the endless BOGO deals appeal to you and you’d rather have two mediocre phones for the price of a single good one.
And as for Google… They aren’t feeding anything besides their own massive ego and dreams of world domination at this point. Which… Yeah, that does describe Microsoft pretty well too.
@@dijonaise
Call it what you want, but Google steals – It “thieves” other peoples ideas, concepts, books, images, newspapers, tv production, passwords, content, information, data …
Also ask Jammie Thomas-Rasset if copyright infringement is not theft as of November 4, 2010 her fine for the appropriation and copyright infringement by unauthorized downloading and sharing of 24 sound recordings is $1,500,000 ($62,500/song).
theft –
Dictionary
theft |θɛft|
noun
the action or crime of stealing
theft
noun
robbery, stealing, thieving, larceny, thievery, shoplifting, burglary, misappropriation, appropriation, embezzlement; raid, holdup; informal heist, stickup; five-finger discount, rip-off; formal peculation.
misappropriation –
misappropriate
verb
embezzle, expropriate, steal, thieve, pilfer, pocket, help oneself to, make off with; informal swipe, filch, rip off, snitch, pinch.
misappropriate |mɪsəˌprəʊprɪeɪt|
verb [ trans. ]
(of a person) dishonestly or unfairly take (something, esp. money, belonging to another) for one’s own use
appropriation – noun
1 the action of taking something for one’s own use, typically without the owner’s permission : the appropriation of parish funds.
• often derogatory the artistic practice or technique of reworking images from well-known paintings, photographs, etc., in one’s own work.
2 a sum of money or total of assets devoted to a special purpose.
copyright |ˌkɒpɪrʌɪt|
noun
the exclusive legal right, given to an originator or an assignee to print, publish, perform, film, or record literary, artistic, or musical material, and to authorize others to do the same.
verb [ trans. ]
secure copyright for (such material).
infringe |ɪnˌfrɪn(d)ʒ|
verb [ trans. ]
actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.) : making an unauthorized copy would infringe copyright.
• act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on : his legal rights were being infringed | [ intrans. ] I wouldn’t infringe on his privacy.
However, I am not a lawyer and I do not play a lawyer in a daytime soap opera.
So Google got out-Foxed…
Google TV is basically worthless now. No surprise. Google likes to use other people’s work for their own profit. That’s what Google is all about.
Ohhhhh, Poor Google!