[opendtv] Re: Google Fiber and Verizon FiOS
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 11:19:01 -0400
On Aug 31, 2016, at 9:39 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
Time will tell when the need is eliminated.
The need has been eliminated, except in those rural areas that still have no
broadband. The technology now exists, Craig. Whether some people continue on
with the legacy service over legacy technology, just as a matter of momentum,
does not translate to "the need has not been eliminated."
Sorry, but we're not there yet.
For some, like you, the Internet offers enough TV content to satisfy your
needs. But for most, the MVPD bundles are still the only place to get all the
content they want on multiple screens...
Think families with kids.
And then there is the reality that the capacity does not exist yet for everyone
to move to VMVPD services. The transition will take years.
The telcos have managed to stretch out "End Of Life" for their
twisted pair networks, despite the fact that the new wireless telco
services offer MANY advantages over POTS.
POTS? POTS is a service, Craig, not a medium. The twisted pair lines are only
the medium. I don't know what the stats say, but my guess is that far more
twisted pair lines are now repurposed for DSL use, than just being used for
POTS.
All irrelevant to my comment. The point is that many people still have land
lines, even though they could get by will cellular alone. We keep ours just to
screen out calls, but might switch to VOIP to reduce the cost.
So, the proper comparison would be between using twisted pair for broadband
and using coax cable for broadband, both having been repurposed from the
original service they carried. And wired broadband is still very different
from wireless broadband, in the pricing structure. It doesn't make a lot of
sense to compare twisted pair with telco wireless. Not yet, anyway.
It was not a comparison. Just a clear statement that old technologies tend to
take a long time to disappear, even after clearly superior technologies become
commonplace.
Not really. According to the FCC, 10% of U.S. homes do not have
access to 25/3
You don't need anywhere close to 25 Mb/s, for streaming media. There are
still households with no form of broadband, for sure, but using 25 Mb/s as a
minimum is not credible.
25/3 is the FCC definition. And yes you do need 25/3 to replace MVPD service
for a family that might have multiple TVs.
There is certainly ongoing demand for the most popular live
linear networks;
Dwindling demand, mostly sports, and irrelevant to this discussion. Linear
does not require walled gardens or monopolistic head-ends. Linear can be
achieved with streaming too.
No REAL demand. What has declined significantly is viewing library content
filled with commercials. Netflix and Amazon Prime Video have made SVOD service
nearly as popular as MVPD service.
It is highly likely that the next evolutionary step is to
replace the local MVPD head ends with edge servers that offload
traffic from the national MVPD servers operated by the content
owners through joint ventures like Hulu.
And this was YOUR argument, Craig? Since when? I've said that MVPDs
themselves could become OTT sites, but of course, there's no reason to limit
themselves to only their own infrastructure, as you do.
To paraphrase what you said above, MVPD bundles are the service. The medium may
be cable, FTTH, DBS, or the Internet. No existing wired MVPD can become an OTT
site, as they are geographically limited by both their franchise agreements and
their licenses with the content congloms.
The DBS systems might be able to offer OTT bundles, as we are seeing with the
Dish Sling experiment, but that service is intentionally crippled. If the
government lets the congloms get away with it, it is more likely that the
congloms will operate the OTT sites, as they are doing now with Hulu, which
will soon become a full VMVPD service.
They can locate their own mirrored servers anywhere they need, they can
outsource that to CDNs. They can compete against, or cooperate with, other
OTT services. Or they can just decide to be the neutral pipe, and not worry
about distributing content, acquiring rights to content, and all the rest.
The only logical place to co-locate edge servers is at the local hubs of the
major broadband services. And logic dictates this will be the wired cable and
FTTH services, now entrenched by Title II regulation. These companies already
have the business relationship with the content congloms.
CDNs don't solve the problem unless they co-locate servers at the local cable
and FTTH head ends. They can help, ala Akamai by operating a global edge
network service, but that falls apart once you move tens of millions of homes
from the local broadcast MVPD service to Internet based VMVPD services that
ALSO offer VOD access alongside live linear service. That is why Netflix had to
move from CDNs to their own server far ms, augmented with edge servers at
Comcast and other MSOs.
So essentially nothing changes, as these natural monopolies have
always been neutral with respect to Internet service.
That's funny. Nothing changes, says Craig. For one thing, minor point, the
MVPDs were never required to be neutral with respect to Internet service,
until just recently.
True. But the Internet culture assured neutrality.
More importantly, their infrastructure will gradually become neutral for all
services it carries, as opposed to being neutral for a very small fraction of
its total capacity.
I guess you are saying that the local broadcast portion of these wired systems
will be recovered for broadband. This is happening, but neutrality has nothing
to do with it.
The reality is that you are just moving from MPEG-TS to IP delivery, with the
potential for many more UDP streams accessing TV content on demand versus live
linear (multicast type) streams. This is what I was implying with "nothing has
changed."
That's the broadband medium aspect of the change. As to the TV content
distribution aspect, no local content distribution monopoly. How can you say
"essentially nothing changes"? The local monopoly remaining is the broadband
service aspect, but now mandated to be neutral.
Neutrality has nothing to do with it. These systems will still be delivering
content bundles (services) from Hulu, Netflix, et al. Everyone has had multiple
choices for MVPD service for several decades. But the local monopolies are
protected now that the medium is regulated by Title II.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
