Check out http://www.indiaJobPlace.com (IndiaJobPlace.com)

IndiaJobplace.com searches jobs posted on major India Job Portals and newspapers ( currently

more than

3,50,000 jobs are posted on IndiaJobPlace.com (http://www.indiaJobPlace.com) and

thousands of jobs are added everday.)

You dont have to go to multiple job sites to search for jobs posted. IndiaJobPlace.com does

that for you and shows you jobs from all the job portals in one place!

You can do a search on IndiaJobPlace (http://www.IndiaJobPlace.com) by location and keyword

easliy with one click can even email the job results to yourself or anyone that you know!

They also provide a way to filter the job results by the job board.

Try IndiaJobPlace.com It’s cool! and its free… no advertisements or annonying pop ups!

without every user having broadband ....it SUX.
i can tell...coz i tried it ....i have broadband,and my IP provider,whom i have telephone + internet via cable from, last week started to launch streaming TV ( videofilms on demand).... for starters ,i could chose a free film to look at ...but if i go over my 10 Gigs a month ,they put me on smallband....and they did ...lol...so ...if i wanted speed again on my regular internetconnection i had to pay more(1 Gig/1 euro)......

Microsoft probably has the cash to muscle out (or buy out) a lot of start ups in this area, but It wouldn't suprise me to see someone like apple, or maybe someone less consumer oriented like cisco stand up to microsoft and not let them take the market without a fight. Apple has a patent out on an implementation of TV in quicktime.

###elid commented on 23 February 2005:
The real question is how much will something like this cost to the consumer? ###

The other question: how crap will this be? Given the problems involved in doing VoIP, the mind boggles as HDTVoIP with its far bigger hunger for hbandwidth.

The real question is how much will something like this cost to the consumer?

Verizon has far more ambitious plans.

They are in the process of wiring several states with Fiber lines to the home to provide phone, internet, and in the future, television (most likely provided by some form of DirecTV due to verizon's recent dealings with DirecTV).

I believe service is already live in a few cities with reported speeds of 50mbps down/15mbps up. All for about $60/month.

This regulation should speed up deployment in a few states such as NJ, which have the networks in place but cannot be turned on due to the regulatory hell that is NJ telecom.

...Digital rights management implications? I fear so.

Broadcast is dying, I think this year is the tipping point (at least it is for me). With the exception of live events like Sports and News why would you need simultaneous broadcast over the air? Storage is large and cheap and getting more so. Download your favorite programs and watch them at leisure on a portable player.

I had thought this was at least 10 years away, but inevitable. Perhaps it is now only 4 or 5 years away.

You're still probably watching "NTSC" based HD TV. Most HD broadcasts in the US today are in what's known as 1080/59.94i (to give it its full name). "1080i" stands for resolution of 1920x1080 pixels and the magic little 'i' means that the video is being interlaced. The "59.94", which is usually just rounded up to 60, refers to the Hz refresh rate. NTSC is at 60Hz, while PAL is generally at 50Hz.

Plus, most of the shows your watching have probably been upconverted from Standard Definition (SD). Granted, there's still a quality improvement over SD for upconverted footage, but it will largely depend on the originating format. So if a fairly newish show was originally produced on 16mm or 35mm file, or even DigiBeta tape, the upconversion will look pretty good. Older shows that may have been recored on 16mm, and others on formats like BetaSP or D3, will in general not have the same level of upconverted quality.

Actual production in HD is still in its infancy. And the whole NTSC vs PAL fun is about to begin again. The US seems to have adopted the 1080i HD standard, while Europe is leaning more towards 720p (progressive).

i have trouble watching standard def tv now.
with a plasma 50" tv and the hidef tivo, the picture quality on shows like CSI, Law & Order, Lost, and all the hidef hbo films...it's unbelievable.
PBS in HD is incredible. watching great nature documentaries with the fully lifelike saturation and tonal quality that ntsc cannot deliver is pure goodness.

HDTV on IP - no thanks, I'd rather surf the net. Whilst developing all these new television technologies, perhaps someone will eventually consider that the majority of television programs are terrible regardless of their high quality sound and pictures etc.

Whether the program is interactive or on demand, or how it's delievered, doesn't matter to me so much as what I'm actually watching. and I'm getting less and less impressed every year.

I find myself watching less and less television, and using the Internet more and more. As for the phone, most people I know use it mainly to talk about television. I'm getting close to the point where I almost solely use email.

MS is late to the party. Companies like Minerva and Pace have TV over IP stuff that works and is deployed today. Microsoft is going to have to offer something either cheaper or better if they want to take over the TV over IP market.

On the flipside, one could take their failure as an important lesson that they will build upon.

I would think a project like this would actually be easier if it is digital the entire way through. Microsoft also has plenty of experience with streaming media these days.

I'm not sure how much this tale impacts expectations of this project.

MS failed at this before, with plain old NTSC. A friend of mine worked at a TV station that I am not permitted to reveal (but is right in MS's backyard somewhere). They had a multimillion dollar pilot project to use Microsoft software to deliver digital signals between the studio and the transmitter (and cable distro point) with dedicated, unlimited bandwidth digital circuits. Microsoft threw millions of dollars of research money into the project, it was to be their showpiece, to demonstrate how MS could provide end-to-end digital infrastructure for TV stations.

It was an utter failure. Despite the use of supposedly uncompressed video, everyone started complaining the picture was fuzzy and the audio didn't sync perfectly. The station abandoned the project after millions of dollars of their own investment, MS lost even more money.

And this was plain old NTSC video, not even HDTV. If MS couldn't get this project to work with the entire company behind it, what in the HELL makes people think they could succeed at HDTV?

So it's starting. As much as I wonder how this is going to play out in terms of cost and DRM issues, I'm glad to see at least a few introductory steps taking us in the direction.

I really look forward to getting rid of the old standard twisted-pair copper wire infrastructure that we're currently using and moving towards a "one connection for everything" system. Assuming we don't run into issues with monopoly-dictated pricing and/or start revisiting the old problems with massive telecoms, I'd love to get all my services through a single cable and a single provider, not to mention a kickass Internet connection.

How much federal regulation will eventually need to come into play to prevent history from repeating itself as with the telecoms? Should something as huge and important as the nation's information infrastructure be regulated directly by the government as the railroads were for a time?