[opendtv] Re: Serivces and Applications
- From: "John Willkie" <jmwillkie@xxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 13:28:58 -0700
Tom;
Please don't let my opinions squelch what you want/have to say.
I was trying -- unsuccessfully, I suspect -- to get you and Craig and others
to think about how to actually serve the markets, rather than offering out
half-baked "technological solutions" that would not fly in the market place.
During this discourse, I actually came up with a consumer-friendly service
to automobilists. One that they will enjoy as a free service, and that
could have premium aspects as well. The market is people who are driving in
traffic, or are about ready to leave home. The services will work with
applications in suitably-equpped cars.
Hell, it will LENGTHEN people's productive lives because they'll spend much
less time in traffic than they do now. And, it's a clear enhancement of
something that is done on broadcast stations now, but never done "well."
NO VIDEO is involved. Just data. Data that is rendered in different forms
depending on how the consumer's car is equipped.
I should be able to get funds from car manufacturers, consumer electonic
companies, Federal, state and local governments, advertisers, broadcasters,
even consumers.
And, it will work PERFECTLY over 2-VSB, 8-VSB, even 9-VSB, Ibiquity,
RadioMondiale, DVB. Indeed, the transport doesn't matter, since the
underlying data changes maybe a dozen times an hour, and the transmitted
data set is less than 100K per second. Probably much less.
So, you keep on trying to force video into the back seat of cars so that
kids can watch DVDs that weren't available before they left home, all in a
vain attempt to "prove" that people need to watch live transmissions at 90
miles per hour.
Me, I'll stick with services and applications that travel over ANY
transport.
John Willkie
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Tom Barry
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 4:10 PM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: Serivces and Applications
John -
If we are not allowed to discuss bit rates or return channels then I'm
not sure it is possible to determine which types of content are most
economically "broadcast" vs which types are best ordered on demand
through interactive channels like ordinary cell phones and the Internet.
And without the economics numbers of the data communications it may
not be possible to evaluate the possible business models. It would
seem the business models would have to compare the cost/availability
of content and the cost of the comm channel used to the possible
ongoing revenues (and inconveniences) any customers might pay for all
this.
That is maybe over simplistic but content itself has limited value
with no proper way to deliver it. Just as in physical goods, commerce
often involves transport. (wagons, shipping lanes, railroads,
information superhighways)
- Tom
John Willkie wrote:
> In recent posts on this list on several topics, Kon and I have "converged"
> on services and applications.
>
> Services are of course transmitted collections of packet streams.
> Applications travel over and use these streams to provide (hopefully)
useful
> services to consumers.
>
> What tend to be opposed to these concepts is talking about bits. That
makes
> as much sense as talking about the last 50 years of television but
confining
> the discussion to ionized atoms. Sure, ionized atoms are essential to
> transmission, but people tune in to programs, channels and networks.
>
> There is much technology out there. Some of it has no "useful purpose."
> Mostly, it fails.
>
> One of the keys is figuring out how to get from here to a a "rich media
> services" model. We can rail about broadcasters defending "the NTSC
> franchise" and their "business model." The truth is that the broadcast
> business model, in the U.S. and elsewhere, evolved as people tried to
figure
> out how to run a transmitter as a business or non-profit service.
>
> Dissing broadcasters won't help: they will have much free bandwidth to
> offer new services, and will have the incentive to try to make new
services
> profitable and useable.
>
> Talking about the "lack" of a return channel is not helpful. There are
> multiple return channels, for mobile and fixed users, provided one has
some
> type of an Internet connection. The truth is that these are not likely to
> be used much in the next ten or twenty years: most people still use
> broadcasting to be entertained or informed, not to interact.
>
> And, there are plenty of complimentary ways to interact, using devices
more
> suitable to interaction than a button-laden remote control. Like, for
> example, a telephone.
>
> John Willkie
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
