Posts Tagged ‘IPTV’

Broadband Definition in U.S. is Too Slow

February 18th, 2010 No Comments

I just read an article about the FCC’s new broadband competition map on GigaOm, where they say that it’s pretty much useless. I agree that the U.S. defines broadband as way too slow. According to old FCC rules, broadband is defined as under 200Kbps.

New rules say broadband is 768Kbps. Still pretty slow, and not enough to handle IPTV or even some HD Internet video sites.

Recently, Google announced that it was looking to supply 1Gbps broadband connections to communities that apply for assistance. This has spurred many to say that a) it’s too expensive and b) Google is trying to be a last mile provider.

I think if Google is trying to increase the bandwidth speeds in the U.S., it’s not a bad thing. Sure, current broadband providers might howl, but I think competition drives lower costs and faster speeds.

As I wrote last month, the U.S. has one of the slowest broadband speeds in the world.

The Broadband Stimulus program is trying to change this, but many programs have been focusing on under-served areas. Yes, there are some communities that will get higher speeds, but I think Fiber is the key to moving forward. Fiber really resonates with consumers, and provides Service Providers higher ARPUs and ROI.

Currently, only Verizon has gone full steam ahead on its Fiber strategy. AT&T is still using DSL, and doesn’t plan on switching to FTTX in the near-term.

The U.S. government needs to step up its commitment to providing super-fast last mile connections into the home, or be left behind by other countries.

Posted in Broadband, Google Tags: , , ,

Why IPTV? It’s About Interactivity

February 11th, 2010 No Comments

I’ve already discussed what is IPTV last year, so I wanted to follow-up with a series of articles on Why IPTV?

In other words,  why should anyone care about IPTV? Speaking about the why’s of IPTV also means talking about the many benefits of IPTV over technologies like Cable and Satellite TV.

Essentially, IPTV enables much more interactivity than other TV delivery methods, because it uses IP-based technology. That means that IPTV is more web-like which means that it can use some of the same technology, software and equipment for Internet video delivery or streaming. Interactivity via IP is what makes IPTV special. Now, it should be noted that we are just in the beginning stages of interactive TV applications. Providers like AT&T and Verizon are using IPTV in very cool ways.

Twitter on FiOS TV

For example, Verizon allows users to use Twitter on their TV screen via FiOS TV. It’s not the full Twitter experience, but subscribers can tweet about what show they are watching, or read messages from friends while watching TV. This is the start of Social TV–the fusing of social media and TV. It’s going to be big.

In Portugal, local telecom company Sonaecom has Wikipedia on its IPTV service. It calls the service Clixopedia, named after its service called Clix TV. Accedo Broadband, a provider of interactive services like video games, was the vendor for Sonaecom.

And these are just the tip of the iceberg. Other telcos around the world have enabled things like interactive ads, TV shopping, multi-screens TV, video games, remote DVR programming, TV widgets, and lots more. Cable and satellite providers don’t have the infrastructure and back-channel IP support to handle these features easily.

But as a whole IPTV service providers aren’t using interactive elements to their full advantage.  Primarily, that’s because these telcos are spending lots of time and money to roll-out these TV services, and aren’t putting much attention to adding new interactive features–yet.  Larger providers, like AT&T and Verizon are leading the way, especially with the addition of Twitter and Facebook.

So far, IPTV brings with it the promise of the future of interactive TV. Cable technology, like DOCSIS 3.0, Tru2Way and EBIF have been slow to come to market and don’t bring the richness that IPTV allows. The future, it seems, is with IP.

Posted in IPTV, Interactive TV Tags: , , ,

Broadband Speeds Very Slow in U.S.

January 22nd, 2010 1 Comment

One of the biggest arguments that people have about watching TV over the Internet is bandwidth. Especially last mile connections. Everyone seems to think that there’s no way that we can watch HD programming over the Internet. “There’s too much buffering!” people say. Or they claim they can barely watch a YouTube video without pausing.

Well, these are arguments that worked about 10 years ago when I was working with streaming media. Today, AT&T and Verizon are delivering HD programming over a managed connection. AT&T is delivered over regular DSL lines. Verizon, of course, uses fiber, but they also are a hybrid service that still uses cable technology (QAM) to deliver live TV to subscribers. (Verizon’s VOD is IPTV based, however.)

Anyway, the reality is that last mile connections have improved dramatically since the early days. When I wrote my book on streaming media in 1998, there wasn’t much broadband at all. Dial-up was the norm. Think about it. 1998. That was pretty early. I understood the concerns then.

Today, consumers have a lot more bandwidth coming into the home. However, the U.S. is still very far behind other countries. An article from TeleCompetitor shows that the average broadband in the U.S. is 3.9 Mbps. The fastest average speed is from South Korea with 14.6 Mbps. (These numbers come from Akamai.)

Of course, Akamai only measures traffic over the open Internet. IPTV providers use closed, managed networks, so it’s hard to compare the two. Still, South Korea has a very high penetration of fiber broadband connections, which means they are ready for IPTV.

One live HD stream can be delivered in about 8 Mbps, while SD streams can be delivered in about 2 Mbps. I think MPEG-4 encoding can take it even lower, depending on encoding streams, so the last mile is critical.

The U.S. needs to catch up to the rest of the world when it comes to broadband speed. This news story from Ars Technica says that the U.S. ranks number 15 in the world for broadband speeds, and that was written in 2008. That’s too slow. Telcos and Cable providers need to work on improving this. Verizon is banking on its fiber deployments to carry it into the future. And cable companies are looking to DOCSIS 3.0 to carry broadband speeds faster.

However, fiber is still a long way off here in the U.S. Most consumers here get broadband via cable. But fiber really resonates with consumers. They understand what it means and what it can give them. But most consumers don’t even know how slow their broadband really is.

Posted in Administration Tags: , , ,

Cord Cutters

January 20th, 2010 No Comments

PC World has an article today looking at the phenomenon of the “cord cutters” or those that want to drop their cable or satellite TV provider and just get their entertainment from Internet-based providers, like Hulu.

I think it’s an interesting look at all the different options available for getting rid of your IPTV, Cable or Satellite Provider. There’s Vudu, Hulu, Roku, Boxee, NetFlix, Amazon, iTunes, Sezmi and lots more. I just know lots of them have pretty weird names. Which gives you  lots of options, which is great.

I do know some people that cut the cord already, and don’t seem to miss their old life. Earlier today, Harry McCracken from Technologizer asked his readers whether he should dump his cable provider. He’s even thinking of hooking up a computer next to the TV to get some added functionality.

Sure cutting the cord is a great way to save money, but you give up a lot. First of all, there’s live TV, since the Internet is really great for catching up on episodes you missed. That means giving up watching live news and sports, primarily. However, if paired with over the air (OTA) HD signals, it doesn’t mean giving up much since you can receive all the major local stations in HD, while getting the rest of your content from Internet providers.

But I think the real thing that you give up is convenience. Getting all your content live (or even on-demand via DVR) delivered to the big screen in the living room is very convenient. And it works. If you get rid of your Service Provider then you have to go out and hustle for your programming. You have to buy DVDs, or go to your PC, or buy a new set top box, or do something else to get you out of the mood to watch TV. And take you out of your comfort zone. (Of course, after reading this article about watching too much TV, it may be good to cut back on TV time.)

Other than news and sports, it probably is possible to get a lot of the content you want, over the Internet for free or just a few dollars an episode from iTunes or Amazon. Or even streaming instantly from NetFlix, like your own virtual DVR in the sky. (I’ve been watching 30 Rock  Season 1 for the first time this week via NetFlix streaming on my Tivo.)

I guess what it really comes down to is that the Internet is great for on-demand content. TV is great for live.

I don’t plan on cutting the cord. In fact, I think the number of people actually doing it are low. I’ve heard that most Service Providers have seen customers drop some premium channels and services, but not too many outright cancellations. American consumers are cutting back, not cutting the cord–at least not in any big way.

Posted in Administration Tags: , ,
Buy VerizonCell Phones and Save. | Thanks to Bank Rates & Reviews, CD Rates and UK Loan