[opendtv] Re: Mobile TV
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 03:34:21 +0000
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
Your first statement is very important. Why is this content out of
reach of broadcasters?
It is because the viewing public enabled Disney/ESPN to grow
dramatically via the second revenue stream from the MVPDs;
But this is a whole 'nother discussion. You were trying to make the case that
"broadcasters" have to change the OTA standard, and you used ESPN in your
argument. The argument doesn't fly, because the OTA broadcast standard is not
used for ESPN, nor is it used for the majority of TV viewing in the US.
This other subject you're broaching, that addicts pay through the nose year in
and year out, to fund overpaid pro athletes, to get much of this sports
content, is another subject entirely.
As far as the future is concerned the content owners have all
said that they will offer some form of ala carte or direct to
consumer service via the Internet...
And ESPN has already largely done that, via Sling TV, as have the various
leagues through other Internet schemes (e.g. NFL-Verizon). Someday is today.
The future will only add more of this, not less.
Sorry Bert, but you cannot place this blame entirely on the telcos.
They no longer control many of the devices connected to their
networks.
You've tried to sell this before, and it continues to be wrong. Broadcast
reception features are commonly disabled, even when in principle, they exist.
What you are ignoring is reality.
You went on at length, but eventually only to prove my point.
You just posted an article about the media consumption habits
of 18-24 year olds. They do listen to broadcast radio, most
likely while driving. But this group, and most other
demographics have moved on to online streaming for both music
AND radio.
Yes, which they can receive over the neutral Internet pipe. Which makes the
broadcast option for reception that much less essential. And the same applies
to TV material. The wireless telcos would much prefer you to use their
broadband service than to allow use of broadcast receivers. Also why easy
mobile reception of ATSC is not essential. Even though it is available, and
could have been improved.
Because rights must be negotiated.
The owners of content negotiate the rights with whatever middlemen they think
they need. If the owners of content want to use a particular medium, they do,
Craig. No one is going to get in their way. You keep bringing up this question
of rights, as if I'm *ever* trying to wedge in some non-essential middleman.
The point is that sports right are complex and many existing
rights deals were put together before Internet streaming was
even an issue.
Which makes no difference to the owner. The NFL does not have to fret over
permissions, if it wants to use direct to consumer Internet streaming. Nor does
the NFL need to worry about the ATSC standard, if it wants to get that presence
on the Internet. So please stop with these canards. I'm always talking about
the owners and what they can decide.
The content owners are broadcasters
Completely false. That's why you continue to get confused. What confuses you is
the artifact that your local station owns all of the content it transmits. It
does not. ABC/Disney does not need to beg anyone for the rights to stream its
content online. Your local ABC affiliate might, only because, surprise, it DOES
NOT own that content (other than its own news/weather/local content).
Sorry, but broadcasters have the live rights to most NFL games.
And the NFL does not need to beg anyone for streaming rights. They won their
content. The broadcasters are out of that picture, unless they take on these
new roles.
Exactly. And the numbers clearly indicate that we are not ready to shut
off the transmitters, DBS satellites, and wired MVPD services.
Again, that's completely false. Not only do you never quote any numbers to make
this point, but you also ignore the numbers you SHOULD be using, to understand
the issues. You should know by now, Craig, that your proclamations are not
credible to me. Prove your point.
For example, the amount of capacity the cable companies COULD apply to
broadband is way greater than what they are advertising, even with DOCSIS 3.1.
You keep ignoring this point, for some odd reason. By repurposing their
spectrum, and not making many expensive infrastructure changes, the existing
cable companies and FiOS COULD come a whole lot closer to providing broadband
to just about any urban and suburban household. If we're now at 70+%, it would
not take a huge infrastructure change to reach more like 95% or more, with
adequate broadband. I already did the numbers for you, Craig. The number of PON
headends would not have to change, to provide many more homes with all the
broadband they need, on average, for excellent Internet TV viewing.
Rural households will continue to be problematic, although they can use
satellite broadband.
And the best way to start moving in this direction is to adopt
the standards that they will use to feed the Internet for their
broadcast operations
What do those words even mean, Craig? For broadcasters to take an active role
in Internet distribution of content, they need to become either cellcos
themselves, possibly, and/or CDNs, more credibly. To go in this direction,
fussing over the codec used on the legacy one-way broadcast medium is totally
immaterial.
Your opinion. I provided well reasoned arguments to support my
position.
No, you did not. You merely assert non sequiturs, with no proof or even logical
thread.
Btw, on the fact that TV sets are stable rather than constantly changing, this
is not much different from the Apple's walled in approach, and for the same
reasons. TV sets are expected to last for years, where Apple toys aren't, so
let's leave that important difference aside.
If broadcasters want to be certain that their signal can always be reliably
decoded, by any TV set out there, this is quite similar to Apple limiting its
customers to Apple-only peripherals. It is easy to install a new printer, if
you use a Mac. Why? Simple. Because Apple pre-loads all of the necessary
drivers, for all of its printers.
Same applies to OTA TV. If Table 3 hasn't been updated in years, it's **not**
because the text in A/53 is chiseled in stone, it's **not* because we have run
out of packet identifiers, it's **not** because ATSC receivers can't be
replaced. It's only because the broadcasters want to guarantee that any ATSC TV
out there can receive their signal correctly. Over years and years. And the OTA
TV using public also wants this.
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
