CBS Brings TV.com Content to iPhone

[MacRumors]

CBS has released TV.com [App Store], a new free iPhone application providing access to streaming content from the CBS family of networks.

While full episode content is currently limited to older series such as "Beverly Hills 90210", "MacGuyver", and "Star Trek: The Original Series", more limited clips are available from a variety of CBS-owned 'channels', including CBS Entertainment, The CW, Showtime, CNET TV, CBS Sports, GameSpot, CBS News, ET (Entertainment Tonight), CBS Radio, The Insider, and Chow.

Saul Hansell of The New York Times tested TV.com's ability to stream over cellular networks in a real-world setting and was pleased with the results.

But the TV.com application appears to be the first with a lot of mainstream network content that can gain access to full episodes over both the cellular network and Wi-Fi. My test of watching Spock confront a strange cube-like object in space was perfectly acceptable in quality while I was riding on the bus in New Jersey.

Article Link: CBS Brings TV.com Content to iPhone

[branjosef]

Awesome. I am all for streaming tv to the iphone. That would only make the iphone experience better...and the app is offered for free, even better. Take a cue from CBS, AOL free apps are better.

[pilotError]

This is great news, hopefully NBC and ABC will follow. Even if they only have new shows up for a week after it has aired.

[j5045096]

I just downloaded and installed this on my iPhone and tried to watch NCIS but it ultimately sent me to you tube and the episode was broken into 8 minute segments. DELETED.

[justflie]

You had me at, "Star Trek." Downloading now

[SimonJ]

Not in my App Store... *sigh*

Why are all the good apps only available in the US? Licensing problems?

[Niiro13]

Hopefully Disney (get over it >_<) will come out as well as USA Network.

CBS is fun too, though .

[DavidLeblond]

Hulu on the iPhone would be all I need.

[Darrin Bell]

I know I might be alone in this, but I think it's awful news that they're releasing this free of charge (unless it's ad supported). Original content providers from cartoonists to actors to journalists are dropping like flies because we're too used to getting our content for free. Actors in SAG are currently trying to strike, not because they're greedy (most are dirt poor -- the rich ones, like Tom Hanks and George Clooney, are opposing the strike; "coincidentally," they have their own production companies and heavily invest in the studios). They're trying to strike because producers and studios are trying to deny them any royalties from digitally transmitted content (along with lunch breaks and other "luxuries" every other worker in America probably considers basic rights).

We might be in a Depression sometime soon. They should be charging 99 cents for this, at least, and paying royalties to the content providers. I'd much rather pay a small fee for content-streaming apps like this than contribute to this "content is free" mentality that's driving several different industries into the ground.

[jayducharme]

Originally Posted by justflie

You had me at, "Star Trek." Downloading now

Same here. The video doesn't appear to stream from YouTube. But each episode is broken up into small pieces, and they aren't well divided. Why not just stop each section at the commercial breaks? Instead, scenes fade out in the middle of dialogue. The video stream is a bit choppy. And the Favorites and My Feed functions don't seem to be working, which is a pity because I have to keep searching for the shows I want instead of just having them in a queue.

The episodes of Star Trek do seem to be the originals, though (not the "special editions" with new effects), so that's a plus. And I agree that it's great to be able to stream TV (even old shows) to my phone.

[MacTheSpoon]

Oh man, Star Trek, I am all over this!!

[bytethese]

Star Trek AND Macguyver? The geek hairs on the back of my neck just stood up...

[manhattanboy]

God finally!!
How long have we been waiting to stream TV over 3G!!!!!!!!!!!!
Somewhat happy today about the iPhone, finally.

[SFStateStudent]

Survivor and Amazing Race = Awesome! I missed both this past week; SHAMWOW... lol

[wolfshades]

Originally Posted by Darrin Bell

I know I might be alone in this, but I think it's awful news that they're releasing this free of charge (unless it's ad supported). Original content providers from cartoonists to actors to journalists are dropping like flies because we're too used to getting our content for free. Actors in SAG are currently trying to strike, not because they're greedy (most are dirt poor -- the rich ones, like Tom Hanks and George Clooney, are opposing the strike; "coincidentally," they have their own production companies and heavily invest in the studios). They're trying to strike because producers and studios are trying to deny them any royalties from digitally transmitted content (along with lunch breaks and other "luxuries" every other worker in America probably considers basic rights).

We might be in a Depression sometime soon. They should be charging 99 cents for this, at least, and paying royalties to the content providers. I'd much rather pay a small fee for content-streaming apps like this than contribute to this "content is free" mentality that's driving several different industries into the ground.

Unfortunately you'll find you're in a minority Darrin. Your argument is logical and, being in the acting business myself at times, I know your comment about the "wealth" of actors in general is dead-on.

That said, you obviously know that our society revolves around getting the most value for the least cost, so not many are going to be convinced that charging for this is a good idea. And not wanting to be hypocritical here, I can't recall ever deciding to buy a higher-cost sofa (for example) over a cheaper one with the same quality because the former one was built by someone in this country who needed the work.

I don't have an answer. Wish I did.

[The Phazer]

Originally Posted by Darrin Bell

I know I might be alone in this, but I think it's awful news that they're releasing this free of charge (unless it's ad supported).

It is ad supported.

And US only, and will stay that way for the forseeable future.

Phazer

[guzhogi]

Originally Posted by wolfshades

Unfortunately you'll find you're in a minority Darrin. Your argument is logical and, being in the acting business myself at times, I know your comment about the "wealth" of actors in general is dead-on.

That said, you obviously know that our society revolves around getting the most value for the least cost, so not many are going to be convinced that charging for this is a good idea. And not wanting to be hypocritical here, I can't recall ever deciding to buy a higher-cost sofa (for example) over a cheaper one with the same quality because the former one was built by someone in this country who needed the work.

I agree with both of you. Most people in show biz are paid lousy (I have a few friends in the biz) and they're not paid well.

As for your second point, also very true. People today want everything for nothing. And they'd be willing to pay more for stuff that's interesting rather than what's necessary. Example: people would probably rather Pay $20 to see a basketball game than see a sanitation worker do his job. If only people would think of it this way: would they rather go without a basketball game for 30 days or go without sanitation? Hmm… Puts things into perspective, huh? While people WILL pay for their basic necessities, and maybe forgo something fun, people don't want to pay for boring things.

[Hawkeye411]

Just tried it here in Canada. Got a message that says "We apologize but video content viewing is available only within the United States."

[bbydon]

Originally Posted by Darrin Bell

I know I might be alone in this, but I think it's awful news that they're releasing this free of charge (unless it's ad supported). Original content providers from cartoonists to actors to journalists are dropping like flies because we're too used to getting our content for free. Actors in SAG are currently trying to strike, not because they're greedy (most are dirt poor -- the rich ones, like Tom Hanks and George Clooney, are opposing the strike; "coincidentally," they have their own production companies and heavily invest in the studios). They're trying to strike because producers and studios are trying to deny them any royalties from digitally transmitted content (along with lunch breaks and other "luxuries" every other worker in America probably considers basic rights).

We might be in a Depression sometime soon. They should be charging 99 cents for this, at least, and paying royalties to the content providers. I'd much rather pay a small fee for content-streaming apps like this than contribute to this "content is free" mentality that's driving several different industries into the ground.

Not only is it ad supported but tv.com is owned by CBS. They are posting these shows and I'm sure all the unions out there will make sure they get there fair share of the profits. I don't think you need to worry.

[manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by DavidLeblond

Hulu on the iPhone would be all I need.

Been said a BAZILLION times...everyone agrees except for the one poster above.

[Peace]

Useless app. There's no full length TV shows. Only 1-2 minute clips.

[macfan881]

agreed this app is lame and falsey advertises dont bother waisting time downloading it.

[Watabou]

Stream over 3G? I'm sold.

This is really good news.

[Doctor Q]

You can use the search tool to find video clips of CBS shows (videos from YouTube). I used that method to find The Who playing on the Smothers Brothers show, when Pete Townshend's suffered hearing loss from an exploding drum.

[loco7]

Sadly, this service is not vailable in Europe.
The only way to watch TV content is still online streaming TV sites such as:

Free TV