<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Applications for your future TV&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogmaverick.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogmaverick.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/</link>
	<description>the mark cuban weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 15:18:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg Daniluk</title>
		<link>http://blogmaverick.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4585</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Greg Daniluk]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogmaverick.wordpress.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4585</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[TV ads are annoying. Most people will agree with this. It hard to guess when it will go mainstream, but at some time TiVo and similar devices will gain possibility to cut off ads. Whatever method it will be, it is no important. Content providers will have to protect against this. So I would suggest then to use Apple iPod business model, which is obvious here. The small thing: it might take off earlier if people will have a choice between free, with ads content and paid, free of ads. For Hollywood all money is green.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TV ads are annoying. Most people will agree with this. It hard to guess when it will go mainstream, but at some time TiVo and similar devices will gain possibility to cut off ads. Whatever method it will be, it is no important. Content providers will have to protect against this. So I would suggest then to use Apple iPod business model, which is obvious here. The small thing: it might take off earlier if people will have a choice between free, with ads content and paid, free of ads. For Hollywood all money is green.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brad Sears</title>
		<link>http://blogmaverick.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4586</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brad Sears]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogmaverick.wordpress.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4586</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[These are 3 good ideas.   I especially like #1 as it could keep advertising from penetrating further into programming.  I love pvrs as much as anybody who has owned one but I fear the increase of advertainment as traditional ad&#039;s get skipped more and more.Keep the ideas coming.(I help good ideas get funding at: http:www.ideacradle.com)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These are 3 good ideas.   I especially like #1 as it could keep advertising from penetrating further into programming.  I love pvrs as much as anybody who has owned one but I fear the increase of advertainment as traditional ad&#8217;s get skipped more and more.</p>
<p>Keep the ideas coming.</p>
<p>(I help good ideas get funding at: http:www.ideacradle.com)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Moore</title>
		<link>http://blogmaverick.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4587</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bill Moore]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogmaverick.wordpress.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4587</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A guide to show you great programming plus a recording service to put in on your iPod.  http://www.radiotime.com]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A guide to show you great programming plus a recording service to put in on your iPod.  <a href="http://www.radiotime.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.radiotime.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lucas Gonze</title>
		<link>http://blogmaverick.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4588</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lucas Gonze]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogmaverick.wordpress.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4588</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Mark,My site at webjay.org has already implemented personal TV station playlists, with RSS for each playlist.  See http://webjay.org/by/webjaybs/newsvideo-daily for just one example.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Mark,</p>
<p>My site at webjay.org has already implemented personal TV station playlists, with RSS for each playlist.  See <a href="http://webjay.org/by/webjaybs/newsvideo-daily" rel="nofollow">http://webjay.org/by/webjaybs/newsvideo-daily</a> for just one example.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Derek Tumolo</title>
		<link>http://blogmaverick.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4589</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Derek Tumolo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogmaverick.wordpress.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4589</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The little info button that gives you a summation of the program should be updated more frequently so you can pick out little bits of trivia that you wouldn&#039;t otherwise be able to find out.  Each show should have a small databank, with the full, readable credits, so you can figure out exactly which actor is in it, who directed it, and other nitpicky trivia.  Like webTV, but with people more ready for it, and not as invasive, keep it all in the little info bar on the bottom.  I liked the ideas about making TV like a cd collection, or a mp3 playlist, but expand that so that not just whats on TV lately is available.  There should be an on-demand video archive of past shows, discontinued series&#039; that aren&#039;t syndicated, all payable through microroyalties a la paypal.  It should also be possible to share video you have on your own box in a peer to peer fashion in the area you live.  The cable connection is very fast, using it to stream one show down to someone else could free up other bandwidth and enable people to see shows they wouldnt otherwise.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The little info button that gives you a summation of the program should be updated more frequently so you can pick out little bits of trivia that you wouldn&#8217;t otherwise be able to find out.  Each show should have a small databank, with the full, readable credits, so you can figure out exactly which actor is in it, who directed it, and other nitpicky trivia.  Like webTV, but with people more ready for it, and not as invasive, keep it all in the little info bar on the bottom.  </p>
<p>I liked the ideas about making TV like a cd collection, or a mp3 playlist, but expand that so that not just whats on TV lately is available.  There should be an on-demand video archive of past shows, discontinued series&#8217; that aren&#8217;t syndicated, all payable through microroyalties a la paypal.  It should also be possible to share video you have on your own box in a peer to peer fashion in the area you live.  The cable connection is very fast, using it to stream one show down to someone else could free up other bandwidth and enable people to see shows they wouldnt otherwise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James King</title>
		<link>http://blogmaverick.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4590</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[James King]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogmaverick.wordpress.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4590</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[While the ideas are interesting I&#039;m particularly vexed by the comments preceding them. I&#039;ve been struggling for years to get my concepts into the market and I&#039;ve watched many of my more compelling concepts (tablet PC, e-reader, media center PC) languish in the market because someone had the money to throw at them but not the vision to implement them properly. For Mark Cuban to insinuate that people who patent ideas but do not produce products based on them are opportunists or unethical is an insult. Businesses are created from opportunity and not everyone has access to the same resources that another may have; should they be penalized for that? Should I not profit from my ideas just because someone else had richer friends? I read that the guys at Google raised over $25,000 dollars from family and friends ... I come from a lower middle-class family and I wouldn&#039;t be able to raise even the legal fees for patenting my ideas.There&#039;s a saying ... &quot;It&#039;s not what you know, it&#039;s WHO you know.&quot; That&#039;s so true in business it hurts. I&#039;ve busted my ass trying to establish the necessary relationships and gain the capital necessary to get my ideas off the ground, all the while watching rich individuals and companies beat me to the market just because they had or were able to make &quot;friends&quot; and get money. Hell, I&#039;ve contacted Mark Cuban twice just to get 30 minutes of his time and he hasn&#039;t given me the time of day. But, if he were to come to the market with one of my concepts, I guess that would make him better or smarter than me. Very hypocritical.It&#039;s easy to preach about &quot;patent terrorists&quot; when you&#039;ve reached the top of the mountain. The thing that upsets me most about people who build their own fortunes is they seem to forget they used to be the guys humping, trying to get others excited about their ventures for partnerships and capital. Hell, I WISH I could afford to be a patent terrorist ... at least I wouldn&#039;t have to bust my ass trying to get someone to pay attention to my ideas. Must be good to forget where you came from ... or the folks who are still on the road.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While the ideas are interesting I&#8217;m particularly vexed by the comments preceding them. I&#8217;ve been struggling for years to get my concepts into the market and I&#8217;ve watched many of my more compelling concepts (tablet PC, e-reader, media center PC) languish in the market because someone had the money to throw at them but not the vision to implement them properly. For Mark Cuban to insinuate that people who patent ideas but do not produce products based on them are opportunists or unethical is an insult. Businesses are created from opportunity and not everyone has access to the same resources that another may have; should they be penalized for that? Should I not profit from my ideas just because someone else had richer friends? I read that the guys at Google raised over $25,000 dollars from family and friends &#8230; I come from a lower middle-class family and I wouldn&#8217;t be able to raise even the legal fees for patenting my ideas.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a saying &#8230; &#8220;It&#8217;s not what you know, it&#8217;s WHO you know.&#8221; That&#8217;s so true in business it hurts. I&#8217;ve busted my ass trying to establish the necessary relationships and gain the capital necessary to get my ideas off the ground, all the while watching rich individuals and companies beat me to the market just because they had or were able to make &#8220;friends&#8221; and get money. Hell, I&#8217;ve contacted Mark Cuban twice just to get 30 minutes of his time and he hasn&#8217;t given me the time of day. But, if he were to come to the market with one of my concepts, I guess that would make him better or smarter than me. Very hypocritical.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s easy to preach about &#8220;patent terrorists&#8221; when you&#8217;ve reached the top of the mountain. The thing that upsets me most about people who build their own fortunes is they seem to forget they used to be the guys humping, trying to get others excited about their ventures for partnerships and capital. Hell, I WISH I could afford to be a patent terrorist &#8230; at least I wouldn&#8217;t have to bust my ass trying to get someone to pay attention to my ideas. Must be good to forget where you came from &#8230; or the folks who are still on the road.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas Hawk</title>
		<link>http://blogmaverick.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4591</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Thomas Hawk]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogmaverick.wordpress.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4591</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mark as usual you bring up some great points.  However, the biggest idea for the future of television after HDTV, which you are doing a phenomenal job with, is that broadband content delivery will become extremely important... not just for television and hit movies but by turning 500 channels into 500,000 channels... and you might be just the guy to do it.The opportunity in the fragmented content world that includes everything beneath the current 500 cable/satellite channels (the tail, as it has become the recent catch phrase) is a huge collective market. Both Microsoft and TiVo would be wise to address this market and be the first to offer this content via their living room devices.A print ad you might see in the future would look something like this, &quot;Sure you can get 500 channels on your cable television box... but after you&#039;ve finished watching the Yale interview with author Kurt Vonnegut, can you get the 2004 rock climbing championship from Joshua Tree California?&quot; TiVo... your tv. Who you want, What you want, When you want, How you want it (did we mention without the commercials?)... Why would you want anything else?There will be a huge market in organizing, monitoring and broadcasting this new media. Tools will be needed to filter content and create a truly unique experience. Guides will need to be written and monitored along with these search tools.This new content will become a stepping stone for the most creative to be picked up by the traditional mainstream content distribution channels -- to be discovered so to speak.As the hand held video content becomes avaialable to every creative college kid, new shows like MTV&#039;s jackass will be developed without the constraint of media censorship. This new content will be promoted both by word of mouth but as well as by tracking services like today&#039;s Technorati ranks blogs and their popularity.  Every college kid in America wants their 15 minutes of fame.  Reality television will REALLY take off in all of this.It is going to be a very exciting time for television over the next 10 years.Although as fantastic as the TiVo service is, it&#039;s numbers are still tiny comparred to the potential. Two million subscribers is just tiny. Microsoft even smaller. But Bill Gates is putting $20 billion into this living room initiative and that may change some things.The biggest barrier to adoption of a living room PC, either Microsoft&#039;s MCE or TiVo&#039;s Linux based system (really it&#039;s a computer and not a set top box), is the initial cost and that consumers NEED A REASON to upgrade and adopt the technology. The problem is the chicken vs. the egg and herein lies the rub. Those that truly understand how great TiVo is already have TiVo. You hear over and over again... &quot;I wish I had just bought it earlier... it&#039;s so fantastic.&quot;HDTV is one reason to buy it and upgrade, especially as the sale of HDTVs are exploding. Unfortunately Microsoft or TiVo still haven&#039;t gotten this one right yet. TiVo is ahead of Microsoft with a satellite HDTV unit but Microsoft&#039;s MCE 2005 and it&#039;s limited OTA capability is not enough to drive the consumer to buy the machine for HDTV.Offering viewers alternative television programming at the smallest level is a reason to upgrade. We all are fanatics of something, hobbyists, enthusiasts -- fractured in our pursuits, but even more enthusiastic about them than television. This is the power that is eBay. They tapped the commercial market of the fractured hobbyist.  You got this right with broadcast.comInitially research should be done to find the most profitable niches below mainstream television for maximum penetration. However it will not stop there.As crazy as it sounds, you may be able to TiVo your kids&#039; Little League game and watch it later as someone on the team picked up the responsibility of videotaping it... or perhaps the Little League organization itself subsidises these tapings to promote their organization and bills the teams through the standard fees and dues.Television is kind of important to a lot of people, but if your son plays Little League then this is much much more important than television could ever be to you. To be able to watch a Little League game afterwards with your son when you were out of town on business and missed the actual game or to let grandpa back in Maine get a season pass to the games, now THIS will drive box sales and TiVo subscriptions. And with such personalized athletics it won&#039;t even matter that it&#039;s not real time.  High school football, missed class reunions, church services, obscure sports, anything and everything will be recorded and offered through guides, rankings, searches, etc. from the comfort of your living room. Whether Microsoft or TiVo taps it first remains to be seen.This idea is not original. The movie Dodgeball did a wonderful job of prediciting it with Dodgeball championship coverage from Las Vegas via ESPN8... which will, in the future, I&#039;m sure be broadcast over broadband.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mark as usual you bring up some great points.  However, the biggest idea for the future of television after HDTV, which you are doing a phenomenal job with, is that broadband content delivery will become extremely important&#8230; not just for television and hit movies but by turning 500 channels into 500,000 channels&#8230; and you might be just the guy to do it.</p>
<p>The opportunity in the fragmented content world that includes everything beneath the current 500 cable/satellite channels (the tail, as it has become the recent catch phrase) is a huge collective market. Both Microsoft and TiVo would be wise to address this market and be the first to offer this content via their living room devices.</p>
<p>A print ad you might see in the future would look something like this, &#8220;Sure you can get 500 channels on your cable television box&#8230; but after you&#8217;ve finished watching the Yale interview with author Kurt Vonnegut, can you get the 2004 rock climbing championship from Joshua Tree California?&#8221; TiVo&#8230; your tv. Who you want, What you want, When you want, How you want it (did we mention without the commercials?)&#8230; Why would you want anything else?</p>
<p>There will be a huge market in organizing, monitoring and broadcasting this new media. Tools will be needed to filter content and create a truly unique experience. Guides will need to be written and monitored along with these search tools.</p>
<p>This new content will become a stepping stone for the most creative to be picked up by the traditional mainstream content distribution channels &#8212; to be discovered so to speak.</p>
<p>As the hand held video content becomes avaialable to every creative college kid, new shows like MTV&#8217;s jackass will be developed without the constraint of media censorship. This new content will be promoted both by word of mouth but as well as by tracking services like today&#8217;s Technorati ranks blogs and their popularity.  Every college kid in America wants their 15 minutes of fame.  Reality television will REALLY take off in all of this.</p>
<p>It is going to be a very exciting time for television over the next 10 years.</p>
<p>Although as fantastic as the TiVo service is, it&#8217;s numbers are still tiny comparred to the potential. Two million subscribers is just tiny. Microsoft even smaller. But Bill Gates is putting $20 billion into this living room initiative and that may change some things.</p>
<p>The biggest barrier to adoption of a living room PC, either Microsoft&#8217;s MCE or TiVo&#8217;s Linux based system (really it&#8217;s a computer and not a set top box), is the initial cost and that consumers NEED A REASON to upgrade and adopt the technology. The problem is the chicken vs. the egg and herein lies the rub. Those that truly understand how great TiVo is already have TiVo. You hear over and over again&#8230; &#8220;I wish I had just bought it earlier&#8230; it&#8217;s so fantastic.&#8221;</p>
<p>HDTV is one reason to buy it and upgrade, especially as the sale of HDTVs are exploding. Unfortunately Microsoft or TiVo still haven&#8217;t gotten this one right yet. TiVo is ahead of Microsoft with a satellite HDTV unit but Microsoft&#8217;s MCE 2005 and it&#8217;s limited OTA capability is not enough to drive the consumer to buy the machine for HDTV.</p>
<p>Offering viewers alternative television programming at the smallest level is a reason to upgrade. We all are fanatics of something, hobbyists, enthusiasts &#8212; fractured in our pursuits, but even more enthusiastic about them than television. This is the power that is eBay. They tapped the commercial market of the fractured hobbyist.  You got this right with broadcast.com</p>
<p>Initially research should be done to find the most profitable niches below mainstream television for maximum penetration. However it will not stop there.</p>
<p>As crazy as it sounds, you may be able to TiVo your kids&#8217; Little League game and watch it later as someone on the team picked up the responsibility of videotaping it&#8230; or perhaps the Little League organization itself subsidises these tapings to promote their organization and bills the teams through the standard fees and dues.</p>
<p>Television is kind of important to a lot of people, but if your son plays Little League then this is much much more important than television could ever be to you. To be able to watch a Little League game afterwards with your son when you were out of town on business and missed the actual game or to let grandpa back in Maine get a season pass to the games, now THIS will drive box sales and TiVo subscriptions. And with such personalized athletics it won&#8217;t even matter that it&#8217;s not real time.  </p>
<p>High school football, missed class reunions, church services, obscure sports, anything and everything will be recorded and offered through guides, rankings, searches, etc. from the comfort of your living room. Whether Microsoft or TiVo taps it first remains to be seen.</p>
<p>This idea is not original. The movie Dodgeball did a wonderful job of prediciting it with Dodgeball championship coverage from Las Vegas via ESPN8&#8230; which will, in the future, I&#8217;m sure be broadcast over broadband.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James King</title>
		<link>http://blogmaverick.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4592</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[James King]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogmaverick.wordpress.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4592</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[They idea that TV should become interactive is somewhat contrary because TV&#039;s success is largely related to it being such a passive medium. I don&#039;t think people want to &quot;manage&quot; content, contrary to what Microsoft believes. Being able to personalize television in the least demanding way pssible is a more worthwhile goal and presents a much greater opportunity for profit than creating an &quot;interactive&quot; television experience. People play games for interactivity and watch TV for nice, relatively brainless entertainment.The most important thing to me when it comes to TV is a crystal-clear picture, great audio, and compelling content brought TO me. Make it EASY for people to get the content they want WITHOUT EXCESSIVE CRAPPY GUIs, MENUS, OR OTHER RELATED NONSENSE and you&#039;ll have a winner.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They idea that TV should become interactive is somewhat contrary because TV&#8217;s success is largely related to it being such a passive medium. I don&#8217;t think people want to &#8220;manage&#8221; content, contrary to what Microsoft believes. Being able to personalize television in the least demanding way pssible is a more worthwhile goal and presents a much greater opportunity for profit than creating an &#8220;interactive&#8221; television experience. People play games for interactivity and watch TV for nice, relatively brainless entertainment.</p>
<p>The most important thing to me when it comes to TV is a crystal-clear picture, great audio, and compelling content brought TO me. Make it EASY for people to get the content they want WITHOUT EXCESSIVE CRAPPY GUIs, MENUS, OR OTHER RELATED NONSENSE and you&#8217;ll have a winner.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Suomela</title>
		<link>http://blogmaverick.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4593</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brian Suomela]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogmaverick.wordpress.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4593</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What if, just for a moment, we forget about this metaphorical concept of the TV station?  What if we were able to watch what we want, when we want (i.e. PVR boxes like TiVo or Myth) but we also only pay for the content we actually watch?  In this way we get a better signal to noise ratio for our dollar and time investment.  Perhaps this won&#039;t be a very attractive pricing strategy for people that watch 6+ hours of TV a day, but you could entice subscribers by reducing the advertising footprint.  10 minutes of commercials for 20 minutes of content is excessive and should be provided to consumers for free (or at a reduced rate).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What if, just for a moment, we forget about this metaphorical concept of the TV station?  What if we were able to watch what we want, when we want (i.e. PVR boxes like TiVo or Myth) but we also only pay for the content we actually watch?  In this way we get a better signal to noise ratio for our dollar and time investment.  Perhaps this won&#8217;t be a very attractive pricing strategy for people that watch 6+ hours of TV a day, but you could entice subscribers by reducing the advertising footprint.  10 minutes of commercials for 20 minutes of content is excessive and should be provided to consumers for free (or at a reduced rate).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg Daniluk</title>
		<link>http://blogmaverick.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4594</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Greg Daniluk]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogmaverick.wordpress.com/2004/10/17/applications-for-your-future-tv/#comment-4594</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I hope that someone will read this and will make my life less annoying of TV ads. It is one week after Mark&#039;s log :-) A digital TV will have a huge advantage over traditional broadcast TV. It will be possible to personalize commercials, just like on Google. This won&#039;t require to change current TV business model. You can even have the same fixed program schedule as now but commercials right for you. It is such obvious.Greetings for everyone from Poland!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope that someone will read this and will make my life less annoying of TV ads. It is one week after Mark&#8217;s log <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' />  </p>
<p>A digital TV will have a huge advantage over traditional broadcast TV. It will be possible to personalize commercials, just like on Google. This won&#8217;t require to change current TV business model. You can even have the same fixed program schedule as now but commercials right for you. It is such obvious.</p>
<p>Greetings for everyone from Poland!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

