The Future of TV (believe it or not)

[rumplestiltskin]

http://news.com.com/Joost+signs+major+advertisers+for+TV-over-Web+plan/2100-1026_3-617...l?tag=nefd.top

Joost is signing up advertisers for their TV-over-Internet project. IMHO, this is the future of television.

We're close to reaching the saturation point in HDTV adoption; probably 30% will be the number. After the early adopters bought their sets and realized that SDTV looks absolutely terrible on an HDTV set (and told their friends and now we all know), why go down that road?

Digital TV (in the next decade) doesn't mean HD; it just means "digital". So why do I need a separate system to "get" my TV? I already have broadband so why not just surf to the appropriate "channel" (webpage) and get my news, weather, sports, entertainment? (especially if it's advertiser-supported, exactly the same as how I get my TV today.

Say what you will about HD-DVD and BluRay as justifications for HDTV; those are just the industry's "talking points". One of the other of those technologies may end up in my next computer (as a decent backup/archiving option), but for movies? Don't be silly; let's all admit the Emperor has no clothes.

(Now, if that doesn't start a discussion, everyone is asleep. :P )

[jman98]

I hear that story all the time that "SDTV looks absolutely terrible on an HDTV set". Well, a lot of it has to do with how your TV feed is connected to the HDTV. If you use a low quality source like a standard cable connection to an HDTV, it's not going to be very good. If you use a high quality connection like component, DVI, HDMI or cable card, then SDTV looks fine on an HDTV.

I think that basically you might be right about the adoption rate. Most of the people I know don't have HDTVs and have no plans to get them. I think a lot of people do want to watch TV over the internet, but my question for now is whether Joost will have the content that people want to see or not.

[bendixG15]

(Now, if that doesn't start a discussion, everyone is asleep. )

You are correct ... zzzzzzzzz

[DVWannaB]

dont know about all that. Sure there are early adopters of the HDTV format and bought sets to match, but to me this rational makes no sense.

So you are saying people will not buy a HDTV in say 2010 because they heard about SD broadcasts not looking on HD sets. I think first off that you underestimate the power of TV consumer. In 2010 he/she will walk down to Best Buy see a 50" HD Plasma for $649 and see the great picture and buy it to match the conversion to DTV. The alternative as you laid it out, is to upgarde your PC for a similar price to watch TV on a 20" screen. Hmmmm.......$649 for a large screen that I can lounge in the lazy boy and even invite friends over to watch the game or relatively speaking much smaller screen that becomes unwatchable from 20 feet away.

Nope. It may be an alternative, but not mainstream.

[edDV]

I doubt the HTPC concept ever reaches 5% market penetration. People prefer dedicated consumer hardware over a computer GUI. Lets face it, computers are a pain to maintain.

I see TV over internet as a supplement to normal TV for short timely clips and narrow segment targeted programming. I don't see it as useful for movies or major drama series.

I do think movie and series downloads will become popular but these will be downloaded to secure video servers rather than computers for playback.

[rijir2001]

Go into any Best Buy or cicuit City and you will see a lot of HDTV that looks like crap on a HDTV. I don't think anyone in those stores knows how to correctly hook tht stuff up. And a standard 4:3 picture doesn't look good stretched widescreen.

[dphirschler]

I think there is something to your idea about the way we will be surfing for our shows though. Many of us are used to watching TV from our DVR. We have no idea when our shows come on. Wouldn't be much different if we went to a webpage to get our content. Or perhaps the show might come to us on the DVR.


Darryl

[SatStorm]

The future is on mobile tv (DVB-H).

[somebodeez]

I don't want to watch TV on my computer.
That's what my TVs are for. My computer is usually kept busy doing other things.
Besides, it would be impossible for us as a family to gather comfortably around my PC to watch TV!

[DVWannaB]

Go into any Best Buy or cicuit City and you will see a lot of HDTV that looks like crap on a HDTV. I don't think anyone in those stores knows how to correctly hook tht stuff up. And a standard 4:3 picture doesn't look good stretched widescreen.

When did that ever matter? Take yourself out of the picture and look at the mainstream and what their buying habits are. Secondly, when DTV channels are being aired in 2010, for example, I bet that 4:3 picture stretched on a widescreen TV is going to be pretty good. Then again, they might start broadcasting in widescreen format fulltime.

Many of us are used to watching TV from our DVR. We have no idea when our shows come on.
Darryl

Really? I wonder what have I been doing over these last few years on my sat receiver. I think that feature will be there after DTV conversion.

[dphirschler]

Really? I wonder what have I been doing over these last few years on my sat receiver. I think that feature will be there after DTV conversion.

Yes, I agree. I think theses changes have little to do with the DTV conversion. It has more to do with the internet and the way we receord shows now.

In my previous post, I was illustrating a new way of delivering content. I think in the near future we may be viewing lots of our programming from the internet, or it will be delivered to us via the internet. Maybe it will be surfing for content Youtube style, or maybe we will browsing for different "stations", but I think there will be many more options available to us in the future. The way we watch TV has changed drastically since broadband internet.

Even with satellite and cable TV, our viewing habits have changed. Many of us don't watch the shows live, but some time afterwards. A friend here at work just signs up for a season pass and each episode shows up on his DVR whenever it airs. He doesn't even care when it comes on. That could also happen with web-delivered content, and I think it will.


Darryl

[rumplestiltskin]

I'll try to address a number of the critiques:

1. I don't watch TV on my computer. That's what my TV is for.

True, but connectivity between computer and TV is fairly trivial these days.

2. CircuitCity personnel don't know how to connect HDTV.

True, but many locations just have a lousy signal. And even if they don't have a lousy signal, the broadcast is not necessarily HD, but SD.

3. HTPC won't replace TV.

You're thinking 20th Century. Tivo changed everything not because of hardware but (so my friends tell me) because of the user interface. Look at AppleTV and tell me how long it will take for something like that to get just a little bit better and have the ability to connect with Joost "channels". HTPC = TV. Think about tomorrow, not yesterday.

4. If you hooked up to an excellent quality signal and spent the mega-bucks to get that large screen HDTV (and more megabucks to get HD content), then you'd have a great picture.

Okay, so what? To paraphrase Gallagher: The TV set has a brightness knob on it and I turn it but it doesn't seem to do anything to the content. So I now can get Gladiator in HD? Big effin' deal.

Let's also not forget that many folks just don't want an enormous slab of LCD taking up the space on the shelf (or on the wall). While Architectural Digest may show homes equipped thusly, the reality is that the vast majority of us don't have the space nor even the desire to spend the money or time to alter our homes simply to become the BluRay-consuming drones for which the MPAA prays.

I mentioned the connection of the computer to the TV; this "golden convergence" (a very old term, BTW) was predicted quite a number of years ago and, if you've been paying attention, this is Apple's business model.

However, it didn't take AppleTV to get me to understand how it might all work tegether. Heck, I didn't see the need for an iPod until the 5G (Video) model. At that moment, I understood how downloadable media could be converted to MP4/H264, dropped into the iPod, and plugged into my TV. *Presto* Internationally available content on my TV. Apple limits this (at this moment) with the AppleTV but you can expect software upgrades in the next year that will change the capabilities of the product for the better. (Remember, it runs OSX and is loaded from a disk; see elsewhere in the forums, etc. for posts about how people are hacking this product.)

5. DVR

Oh yes; absolutely. I do this now with the TVMicro so it would be a snap to add something like this device to an AppleTV's USB2 port (once the hackers have fully understood how to make that puppy sing, eh?).

Of course, we might not even find such a product as a DVR strictly necessary. Live sports you watch live; if the future of TV is as I imagine it, why not simply link into the live streaming video if it's important you watch now, or link in to a recorded version of the live stream when you have the time. If advertisers are paying for this (and you're not) you'll probably have to sit through the commericials. Well, that may not be true because do any of us really "sit" through the commercials now? I use that time to pee or make a cup of coffee or return a phone call...so why would any of our viewing habits have to change in this instance? Better yet, you can still pause the video if you need more time to finish whatever you were doing during the commercial break.

All of this depends on the business model, of course. If we have advertisers supporting Internet TV (the Joost model), they win. Ask Mr. & Mrs. America if they'd rather pay $50/month for their limited TV offerings or simply get it in the Internet and have potentially thousands of channels from which to choose. You do the math.

Cheers and thanks to all who are participating in this discussion!

[bacardi/avt]

I do not understand what you are talking about. Where does the need for a PC come into play?

At the moment I use a service form Telia (swedish IP) where I get digital TV over my broadband connection. This solution uses my ADSL modem and a decoderbox that are connected with a ethernet cable. The decoderbox is a Motorola 1510 ( http://broadband.motorola.com/business/videoProductsOverview.html ), they also have a HDTV solution there. I have also used DVB-T before but this is a better solution I think since the channel surfing is easier and you have the added bonus of being able to rent movies and surf the webb.

The only thing I do not like is the use of the MPEG-2 codec (should have been AVC or something instead).

This might be the future since it is easy to install and use and you do NOT need a computer to get it running, all you need is an telephone line, ADSL-modem and a decoder box.

[GMaq]

Hi,
I love the concept of Internet TV, I already have a poor man's HTPC hooked up to our family TV, but I am from a rural area and am one of the first to have wireless high speed where I live. I can't foresee having the bandwidth for reliable internet TV (in rural areas anyway). But the kids can surf and watch YouTube, and Music Videos etc, I can see that these kinds of things already lend themselves to being Internet TV of a sort. I agree with edDV that it will not be a suitable alternative to every kind of programming though.

[rumplestiltskin]

I do not understand what you are talking about. Where does the need for a PC come into play?
{snip}
This might be the future since it is easy to install and use and you do NOT need a computer to get it running, all you need is an telephone line, ADSL-modem and a decoder box.

Wow! An example of the "golden convergence". However, the model is based upon an extremely proprietary set of technologies.

The beauty of the Internet is that we have the opportunity to standardize the model to expand the benefits to all rather than narrow it to only those who would pay big bucks.

Let me use another example:

Q: What's the difference between the Internet and the old Telephone System?

A; The Telephone System is a very smart network with dumb devices on the ends (your telephone). The Internet is a dumb network with extremely smart devices on the ends (your computer). If two individuals want a new service, all they need in the Internet model is that both of them have the same "service-enabler" (software or hardware that speaks TCP/IP). The Telephone System requires 100,000 people who want that service and must alter the programming of their system -and- charge each person an extra $20/month for it.

Which model would you rather see? This is really quite analogous to what is happening to Television. (You can list the proprietary technologies into which you are being asked to buy.)

I'll stop posting for a while and let others ponder the possibilities.

[cteas]

I don't want to watch TV on my computer.
That's what my TVs are for. My computer is usually kept busy doing other things.
Besides, it would be impossible for us as a family to gather comfortably around my PC to watch TV!

I think the point is that a lot of people are buying or building Media Center PCs, and hooking it up to there 50" Sony HDTVs.

[edDV]

3. HTPC won't replace TV.

You're thinking 20th Century. Tivo changed everything not because of hardware but (so my friends tell me) because of the user interface. Look at AppleTV and tell me how long it will take for something like that to get just a little bit better and have the ability to connect with Joost "channels". HTPC = TV. Think about tomorrow, not yesterday.

Let's separate technologies. By HTPC I'm talking about a PC OS (XP, Vista, MAC, Linux GUI). I'm saying the XP media Center PC type device won't penetrate more than 5% because it is too difficult to maintain a PC OS.

Tivo and cable/sat DVR type boxes will evolve into media servers that will be controlled by the media providers for security. It is this type of box that will be used for down loadable media and some IP video access. These servers use embedded operating systems. It is my prediction that these will dominate for the vast majority of users.

IPTV is a different technology than computer internet access. It is a closed network that uses IP technology to move media over fiber/coax. For video distribution it is usually a switched network. It competes with cable and satellite as a distribution system. At the user level it is just one more set top box.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPTV

[usually_quiet]

People are doing a lot of interesting things with broadband these days. TV, Internet, phone, and heaven knows what else on the horizon. The ability to have all these things working cooperatively will undoubtedly present some exciting opportunities. However, if you have an all-in-one connection, what happens when it goes out? You loose everything for a while. This may or may not be a legitimate concern, but has anyone else thought about this?

[edDV]

People are doing a lot of interesting things with broadband these days. TV, Internet, phone, and heaven knows what else on the horizon. The ability to have all these things working cooperatively will undoubtedly present some exciting opportunities. However, if you have an all-in-one connection, what happens when it goes out? You loose everything for a while. This may or may not be a legitimate concern, but has anyone else thought about this?

This is a major issue with cable and sat delivery. For example, with cable tri service (TV, internet and phone), an outage takes all services out. Same with bad weather issues and satellite. Most people have a backup with cell phones. Each needs to think these things out.
Factor in that cable has lots of outages during the local rebuild cycle.

If I lose telco DSL, I usually can still get in with dialup or even over the cell phone. Third backup is Starbuck's Wifi as long as they have power.


PS: Recently I had a 4 day power outage when a storm took out two high voltage towers that required a helicopter to replace. Without power, the Starbuck's wifi backup was needed (+ a power outlet) to keep email going.

[buttzilla]

I hear that story all the time that "SDTV looks absolutely terrible on an HDTV set". Well, a lot of it has to do with how your TV feed is connected to the HDTV. If you use a low quality source like a standard cable connection to an HDTV, it's not going to be very good. If you use a high quality connection like component, DVI, HDMI or cable card, then SDTV looks fine on an HDTV.

I think that basically you might be right about the adoption rate. Most of the people I know don't have HDTVs and have no plans to get them. I think a lot of people do want to watch TV over the internet, but my question for now is whether Joost will have the content that people want to see or not.

I agree. When they delivered my hdtv i wasn't there. They just hooked the cable box to it with coax cable. I cam home and rehooked it up with the boxes coponent out and it improved the pic 100%

[rumplestiltskin]

3. HTPC won't replace TV.

You're thinking 20th Century. Tivo changed everything not because of hardware but (so my friends tell me) because of the user interface. Look at AppleTV and tell me how long it will take for something like that to get just a little bit better and have the ability to connect with Joost "channels". HTPC = TV. Think about tomorrow, not yesterday.

Let's separate technologies. By HTPC I'm talking about a PC OS (XP, Vista, MAC, Linux GUI). I'm saying the XP media Center PC type device won't penetrate more than 5% because it is too difficult to maintain a PC OS.

Tivo and cable/sat DVR type boxes will evolve into media servers that will be controlled by the media providers for security. It is this type of box that will be used for down loadable media and some IP video access. These servers use embedded operating systems. It is my prediction that these will dominate for the vast majority of users.

IPTV is a different technology than computer internet access. It is a closed network that uses IP technology to move media over fiber/coax. For video distribution it is usually a switched network. It competes with cable and satellite as a distribution system. At the user level it is just one more set top box.

Exactly my point. You've said "Let's separate technologies" and I'm saying "There is no separation except for what you are willing to accept". If you vote with your wallet to pass on extremely proprietary and DRM-laden technologies, where will the advertisers go who pay the bills? Joost (or something like it). I should stress that Joost isn't just for a little window on your computer screen; their technology is scalable and, with a cheap adapter, will find its way onto your TV (so you'll be happy). At that point, the "set-top box" may, indeed, simply be a brick or Tivo-like DVR. For we really don't care whether a "real" computer is the controller. For you and me, a computer will be fine because we're technophiles who are comfortable with a computer. There probably are many more TV-watchers who are not so we just need to give them the appropriate connection and a remote control.

Certainly the method by which TV shows get to the subscriber's TV will change. Why send 1000 channels when you're only watching one? So send only the one and use the remote to signal the device to "surf" to the next "channel". This is done in GB today (don't remember the name of the cable company) but the controller (a dumb device) sends the signal to the cable company (think Telephone System like in one of my previous posts) where their "smart network" may change the channel and send the correct show (already in progress) down the wire. Would it not be better simply to use an Internet-based model whereby a slightly smarter device "surfs" to the correct channel and makes the connection (just like a web browser does)? Of course, the cable companies hate this idea because then they add no value except a good connection; and you can't create a "billable event" when all you do is provide connectivity.

Why do you think the cable companies are fighting 'net neutrality tooth & nail? They want to deny equal access to their network to anyone who is NOT paying them extra "squeeze" just to be able to provide media that the cable company didn't create (and control and bill for).

[edDV]

If you have a choice of cable, satellite or IPTV you choose one and usually rent their DVR/Media Server. Then you subcribe to a program service.

The alternative is a HTPC that is a pain to setup and maintain. Programming choices will be limited unless you also rent a set top box.

[harrisonford]

Has anyone use Joost yet I have a beta version they allowed me to download, if anyone would like it I can give you the download, addy I think, I think your allowed to give it to friends, I am not sure of the their policy, They have a wide range of tv networks channels, I will not comment it yet as I have not seen enough of the channels to comment yet, to busy. if you leave me a message I night be able to send you a link.

Yeah I can invite someone I know, do I know everyone here, some this is pretty good and very different channels. Good so far the sound on my Z5500 is even very good. Video encoding could use some work, but I might figure it is my 2.8 gig intel no HP CPU or half gig of ram or maybe internet with telephone company so I will blame them yet, but other channels are very good.

[rumplestiltskin]

If you have a choice of cable, satellite or IPTV you choose one and usually rent their DVR/Media Server. Then you subcribe to a program service.

The alternative is a HTPC that is a pain to setup and maintain. Programming choices will be limited unless you also rent a set top box.

Yes, we choose one of the three today but tomorrow it all changes. I don't rent a DVR/Media Server from my cable provider. Never have; never will. Totally unnecessary.

Programming choices today are limited. Internet TV changes everything.

HTPC? Plug a Miglia TVMicro into the USB2 port of a Mac and click a few buttons to set the programming. Nothing difficult about that. Play the recordings either on-screen, to the TV (via the video-out port), or drop the (automatically converted) file into your iPod and plug it into your TV. Yes, this is not the true "set-top" box but it's not a "pain to setup and maintain".

[edDV]

If you have a choice of cable, satellite or IPTV you choose one and usually rent their DVR/Media Server. Then you subcribe to a program service.

The alternative is a HTPC that is a pain to setup and maintain. Programming choices will be limited unless you also rent a set top box.

Yes, we choose one of the three today but tomorrow it all changes. I don't rent a DVR/Media Server from my cable provider. Never have; never will. Totally unnecessary.

Programming choices today are limited. Internet TV changes everything.

HTPC? Plug a Miglia TVMicro into the USB2 port of a Mac and click a few buttons to set the programming. Nothing difficult about that. Play the recordings either on-screen, to the TV (via the video-out port), or drop the (automatically converted) file into your iPod and plug it into your TV. Yes, this is not the true "set-top" box but it's not a "pain to setup and maintain".

You and I have HTPC but we are talking here about all the others who will not bother with a PC OS in the TV room. I still think 5% max will want a PC OS.

I guess I am in their camp. I like the HTPC in my computer room but am happy with a DVR in the TV room where others need to use it.

[rumplestiltskin]

The other 95% won't even know what an OS is.

[edDV]

The other 95% won't even know what an OS is.

Or some do an choose to confine it to the computer.

[harrisonford]

IPTV will do away with over the air tv, cable, satellite, it seems no one has looked at
internet encoded IPTV, your way behind the curve. No drop or micro-blocking and
sound is good, try the new internet tv, joost.com. but the commericals suck, but at
least there are not 10 commericals in a row like regular tv

[DVWannaB]

the only way IPTV is the future as you said, then the delivery of IPTV will have to fundamentally change. If you need a PC with modem connection, it aint gonna be adopted mainstream. If you need a specialized PC/modem that connects to a large screen TV, that aint gonna fly either. The only way this works is for a large screen HDTV with built-in modem that connects directly to the IPTV service. This scenario is many years off, because with the millions of dollars that have been and still to be spent on converting local broadcasters from analog to DTV the political climate will not allow nor will these broadcasters stand by and watch this investment pissed away by a competing technology or video delivery service no matter how good anyone think it looks.

Sorry to inform you, but we are not "way behind the curve". OTA (DTV) and satellite are here for many years to come.

[edDV]

Yes and simply do the math. Even h.264 or VC-1 HD feeds need a 6Mb/s sustained feed*. 3 TV sets in the hous need >15Mb/s. The only way you get a 6-15Mb/s sustained feed is if the service runs a fiber close to your house. The only way you get 200 channel choices is to have a switched network server in your local area.

Only two types of companies are installing fiber close to your home: cabletv and telecom. IPTV is a natural for the phone company. They already have buildings to house the servers. After 10-20 yrs, both will evolve into the same thing.

*cable HD is currently 19-25Mb/s MPeg2. Broadcast ATSC is 14-19Mb/s