I love the Colgate athletics dept

[atb9]

[Q]KeithK Wrote:

(Yes I know this runs against some of my hyper-capitalist beliefs.  So what?)[/q]

I don't think it does.  There's no competition so you're forced to accept crappy service.  When Real runs the program it's extremely difficult to fix problems because they can't micromanage all of the programming (although it's easy to get refunds--because they know they can't fix individual problems).  If Cornell runs the program, then we at least have the ability to get face time to improve the problems.

[Jordan 04]

[Q]KenP Wrote:

 Jordan,

If you want another reason why people are upset (myself included), just look at the long list of links to free net audio.  Cornell is one of the few schools in ECAC that consistently charge for audio feeds.
[/q]

True, but those free audio links are quickly becoming the exception rather than the rule.

Obviously many univerisities have gone to paid audio, NFL audio broadcasts used to be free but are no longer, MLB audio was free for all games but are no longer, and if and when the NHL returns I would be surprised them to no longer have free audio.  

Obvoiusly I'd love if our home feed was free.  But unfortunately it isn't.  But it's not as if we're being charged through the nose for the ability to listen to (and watch, at $5/game) Cornell hockey from anywhere in the world.

[atb9]

[Q]Jordan 04 Wrote:
Obvoiusly I'd love if our home feed was free.  But unfortunately it isn't.  But it's not as if we're being charged through the nose for the ability to listen to (and watch, at $5/game) Cornell hockey from anywhere in the world.[/q]

But that's because, as was pointed out, it takes almost no bandwidth to provide streaming audio.  It's absolutely insane to me that CDs and DVDs are almost the same price even though one has 40x more information than the other.  If Real charged as much as XMI I think I would develop a twitch.

[Greg Berge]

I would think having a universally-accessible, free, high quality Cornell internet video channel, featuring sports, lectures, research briefings, images from around the campus, PSAs, and messages from the administration, would be a tremendous asset to the university.  But that's just me...

[Will]

[Q]Greg Berge Wrote:

 I would think having a universally-accessible, free, high quality Cornell internet video channel, featuring sports, lectures, research briefings, images from around the campus, PSAs, and messages from the administration, would be a tremendous asset to the university.  But that's just me...[/q]

Just to play devil's advocate here...how would the university pay for that?  I can't imagine having such a thing would be cheap, and a drastic tuition hike probably wouldn't be good for recruiting potential applicants.

[nyc94]

[Q]Greg Berge Wrote:
I would think having a universally-accessible, free, high quality Cornell internet video channel, featuring sports, lectures, research briefings, images from around the campus, PSAs, and messages from the administration, would be a tremendous asset to the university.  But that's just me...[/q]

How many write in votes do you think it would take to win an alumni elected trustee position?

[atb9]

[Q]Will Wrote:

 [Q2]Greg Berge Wrote:

 I would think having a universally-accessible, free, high quality Cornell internet video channel, featuring sports, lectures, research briefings, images from around the campus, PSAs, and messages from the administration, would be a tremendous asset to the university.  But that's just me...[/Q]
Just to play devil's advocate here...how would the university pay for that?  I can't imagine having such a thing would be cheap, and a drastic tuition hike probably wouldn't be good for recruiting potential applicants.[/q]

I know my local high school (Shenendehowa, graduates 800+ kids each year) already does something like that.  I can't imagine it would be too big of a deal since they already film just about everything.  Hell, a company I worked for a few years back, Applied Materials, did exactly that on their internal website.  Do we have some kind of AV degree at Cornell?

[mha]

Streaming audio takes a lot less bandwidth than streaming video, but it isn't negligible by any means. 28-30 simultaneous 24 kbps audio streams from WVBR's streaming server fills about half of a T1. Serving even audio to more than a couple dozen people takes serious bandwidth over a serious network connection, and that gets pricey.

[CowbellGuy]

Well, this server can do 4,165 simultaneous 24kbps streams or more than 300 high quality video streams. I would hope athletics could be at least as resourceful as, well, me. On the other hand...

[RichH]

[Q]Jordan 04 Wrote:

True, but those free audio links are quickly becoming the exception rather than the rule.[/Q]
They are?  Of Cornell's 17 opponents this season, 3 require a fee, 2 have no online audio to offer, and 12 have some method of listening online for free.  What's your definition of "exception?"  Last season, Princeton was part of the Sports Pa$$ plan, and now has moved back to free, university supplied audio.  Brown and Harvard are both part of the Sports Pa$$ network, but they both also offer a free feed to the radio station.

[Q]Obvoiusly I'd love if our home feed was free.  But unfortunately it isn't.  But it's not as if we're being charged through the nose for the ability to listen to (and watch, at $5/game) Cornell hockey from anywhere in the world.[/q]
"Well, I'll just accept a crappy system because that's the way it is.  Why bother trying to change things for the better?" is basically your attitude.

My main objection, and refusal to sign up for this College Sports Pa$$ isn't even because it isn't free.  It's a poor business model for my (and many other CU Hockey fans') needs.  (For this argument, I'm even going to ignore the fact that there were and are people willing to supply the work and equipment needed to provide free and reliable service.)  I go to a majority of the games in a given season.   For the few road games I don't get to, I would gladly pay a couple bucks to cover the costs of a quality, reliable product...on a per-game basis.  I don't appreciate being muscled into a bloated, unreliable subscription system where one of the selling points is that I get access to "thousands of games" from schools I really have zero interest in.  Yeah...I'll be able to listen to the University of Tulsa basketball games....woo-hoo, what a value.  I'd basically wind up paying $35 for audio of a handful of CU Hockey games each season.  Sorry, but no thanks.  MLB Gameday Audio costs $14.95 for the SEASON.  Also, the "free trial," system has had its share of problems...I'm sure several posters here could tell you horror stories of their credit card being charged for months after "cancelling" this service.  And lets not forget the spotty service that this gives; all you have to do is look through the eLF archives for people bitching about the feed cutting out...often.

By comparison, the current business model of the video webcasts (currently supplied by XMI) is much more ideal.  With a choice for either a season-rate or ala carte, it makes a lot more sense.  And $5/game for video is a reasonable price, IMO.  I go to every home game, so I have yet to have a need to purchase a webcast, but if I ever have to, I'd be very happy to buy a game for a one-time shot.  Not only that, but the customer service seems to be much more attentive.  When there are service interruptions, they seem to have been good about giving subscribers and single-game customers credit.

If CU Hockey audio broadcasts had a way for me to purchase a single game for $2 or so, I'd gladly do it.  

[Pete Godenschwager]

[Q]I'm sure several posters here could tell you horror stories of their credit card being charged for months after "cancelling" this service[/Q]

Yep. That's exactly why I didn't sign up again this year.  I wouldn't mind giving my money to Cornell for the broadcasts, but I'm not giving anymore money to Real Networks for a bunch of extra crap I don't want and have to pay for even after I've cancelled.

[Jordan 04]

[Q]RichH Wrote:

 "Well, I'll just accept a crappy system because that's the way it is.  Why bother trying to change things for the better?" is basically your attitude.

 [/q]

That's not anywhere close to my attitude; rather, those are words you've chosen to put into my mouth.

My attitude was -- and actual words were -- that for a month such as this one, where there are 8 games for the monthly price,  only 3 of which I may attend, it's more than worth it to pay less than $7 to listen to a consistent, home broadcast.

[jtwcornell91]

[Q]RichH Wrote:a bloated, unreliable subscription system[/q]

Don't forget the software bloat factor.  The pay feed only works through the RealOne player, which doesn't work on my preferred platform.  Compare that to the video, which is an mms stream which I can watch with a variety of players.

[puff]

No kidding there on the software. of any of the half a dozen or so different programs i have for playing media files or anysort, Realplayer falls to the bottom of favorites.

[Pete Godenschwager]

Realplayer used to have tons of spyware bundled with it.  Supposedly they've cleaned up their act, but I refuse to install it and find out.