View Single Post
Old 16-05-2024, 11:46   #856
jfman
Architect of Ideas
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,476
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
Re: The future of television

These threads would be much shorter if OB would stop doing that.

I think there's pretty broad agreement on a number of things if he'd just define his terms clearly so we know what he means.

FAST channels are a red herring - the term doesn't add anything meaningful to the discourse at all. A 24 hour a day TV channel (sometimes called a 'linear' channel) is just that whether it broadcasts news, sports, general entertainment, documentaries, or 24 hours a day of Casualty episodes. Being able to do this over IP has reduced the barriers to entry (cost) but it's fundamentally the same thing using a new technology.

There's two (quite interesting) but distinct conversations to be had.

The technologies to deliver television (both linear, channels and on demand). Digital television in the UK will be 30 years old in four years time.

DTT: There's competition for that bandwidth from mobile operators.

Satellite (in the UK): The three satellites broadcasting from 28.2E reach end of life on paper in five years. In practice however, lifespan could go beyond 20 years. Elsewhere in Europe the satellite operator (SES) is commissioning Astra 1P and 1Q - taking their broadcast commitment well into the 2040s across the continent.

Cable: Virgin with long term plans to retire the old network could push an all IP solution over their new full fibre network (when complete).

The second conversation - is how people consume television. This has always been a moving picture (pun intended). VHS in the 80s to PVR products in the early 2000s have always given people the capability to timeshift and watch what they want, when they want, from the previously broadcast content. Sky+ was a gamechanger in this regard with no degradation of quality and the ability to watch one channel while recording another from the subscription channels. Cable had on demand services that were good but hamstrung by weak STBs and interfaces. Yet still watching television, as and when it was broadcast, has remained resilient.

IP creates 'streaming' opportunities for on demand content. It removes the need for additional hardware as with on demand services over cable and to consciously choose to record something from the end user. Despite this streaming services such as Peacock in the US carry around 50 linear channels as well as their on demand library.
jfman is offline   Reply With Quote