Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Yep, my mistake. The original figure I found said 9m had watched EE, so saying about a third would be right, then I found the 11m figure and forgot to alter the one third statement, which is, of course, now incorrect.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

At a guess, the 9m figure would be the overnight, available the day after transmission. The final consolidated figure adds those who time-shifted their viewing by watching within, IIRC, 7 days of transmission. Crucially, BARB's timeshift figures don't count iPlayer downloads. Certainly, they don't count those direct from the BBC via the interwebs. Not sure what the status is with VM, with it being to some degree integrated with the STB.

iPlayer stats really are an enigma. If the BBC has devised some formula for determining what proportion of them are unique views which should be added to the BARB figures, they've not said so. Actually it would be nigh-on impossible for them to arrive at accurate figures simply based on downloads, as they have no way of knowing how many people are viewing the download at the other end of the connection. Only BARB's somewhat intrusive audience monitoring hardware can do that.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

This Horowitz Research report agrees with you and suggests that the exodus from linear to OTT/SVOD television is somewhat exaggerated:

http://www.rapidtvnews.com/201502063...#axzz3QxdUTb7P

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

It is, and the point is, it's growing rapidly.

It would be wrong to assume that the figures are going to remain much as they are now over the coming years. I think there will be a sudden surge at some point, and as technology improves.

At present, Freeview only viewers need a Freeview box to access on demand for example. What will happen when most people have a TV that allows this - and indeed video streaming?

Big changes are on the way, IMHO.

---------- Post added at 12:50 ---------- Previous post was at 12:43 ----------

The problem with this is that the report concentrates on what is happening now - not in 10 years' time.

The logic of the flow of this report is clear in this sentence:

'Perhaps one of the most stand-out stats was that the overwhelming majority of multiplatform viewers who have both a multichannel service and OTT SVOD services are not ready to give up easy access to broadcast programming, even when presented with the option of adding standalone, à la carte SVOD services like the new services offered by HBO, Showtime and CBS.'

I'm not sure what that proves, because I too would not want to give up broadcast services at this stage. Where would I access the News for example? However, in the future, all of this will be sorted and would no longer be a problem.

Look at how recently 3D came to TV sets, and enthusiasm came and went. Things are moving fast, and once people get a taste for access to what they want, when they want it, the move towards VOD and streaming services will be unstoppable.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Again, you're simply reading your own enthusiasm for these things on to everyone else. How long do you think a TV lasts? My mum's still using a 4:3 21" CRT that is well over 20 years old, with a Freeview PVR attached, and she only got a PVR because the digital switchover forced obsolescence on her VHS video recorder. She doesn't have any kind of internet connection (by choice).

Plenty of people only buy basic and would end up with a connected TV only if that feature was universally available across the range.

We get 2Mb internet on a good day, by the way, and barely receive standard-def quality pictures when we access iPlayer via our Freesat PVR. Slow 'broadband' is a widespread issue in the UK.

And even when the capability to do it is in every home, there is nothing as convenient as a TV schedule when you're tired at the end of a day in the office, and there's nothing as attractive to an advertiser as a commercial break viewed simultaneously by 10 million people.

I confidently predict that linear broadcast TV will be around and well used for the rest of my lifetime.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Again, you are posting what is now, rather than what is to come.

First of all, the Government is committed to extending good broadband speeds to the whole country. So the 2MB issue you mention will not be a problem forever.

The newer TVs don't last as long as the old ones did because the technology is getting so complicated. My TV needed a new motherboard after just three years. I'm sure I will have to change it within the next 5.

You've only got to go on a walk to see the number of people watching TVs with widescreen, so although there are still people, particularly pensioners, who still have archaic TVs, the majority will have more modern sets than they do now, and the price is coming down all the time.

I've heard more than once on these forums people saying that when they were tired, they just wanted to watch what was on. And yet, if you want to watch something you are actually interested in, you still have to look up in the TV magazine or EPG what is on, or channel hop. Yesterday, when my wife fell asleep in the middle of something we were watching, I just went to Netflix and chose 'My Lists' and there was my pre-planned selection just waiting to be viewed. Chose 'Damages' and it was all done about 15 seconds after going into Netflix.

Frankly, I think people are putting problems in the way - I do understand that people are resistant to change. But the confidence expressed that things will remain as they are forever astounds me!

Incidentally, it's pretty easy for the TV industry to force people to change to a newer technology, just as your Mum had to when her VHS recorder became obsolete.

All they need to do is have all programmes in 4K!

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Sorry, but you're just being ridiculous now.

It took almost 10 years from the launch of DTT for the government to have the confidence to even begin switching off analogue TV signals, and that was with digital switchover as the intended end result, right from the outset. It took a further five years to complete that process. During that initial 10-year period, DTT was re-branded and re-launched *twice* before it began to penetrate sufficient homes to be considered viable. So no, there is no "all they have to do" when it comes to forcing people to upgrade. It is a long, complex process and it is led by regulators who are empowered by government, not by the TV industry. Even today, DTT doesn't have the capacity to support a complete switch from SD to HD broadcast. "Forcing" everyone on to 4K isn't going to happen. Whether the UK's internet infrastructure would be capable of sustaining HD video streams to 20 million households simultaneously, I don't know. I suspect not.

Most people, by the way, have not the slightest interest in spending time pre-planning a "My List" in Netflix or wherever. In doing so, you are simply marking yourself out as someone who uses TV in a way that the vast majority of other people, don't. That would be why you're so perplexed by those of us who say the linear broadcast schedule is the simplest and most convenient way of watching TV.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

The problem with posting what is to come is that what is to come changes. As such, no one knows what we will be watching 10 years down the line for sure. Sure, the "experts" are telling us that we'll be watching streaming services, but 10 years ago, they were telling us we'd be watching everything on HD-DVD. Look what happened there.

Let's wait and see how well that goes. The Government have been saying they will improve rural broadband for nearly a decade now, and don't seem to have achieved much so far.

That's my point. You had to pre plan your selection, and even then you had to make a conscious decision to watch Damages. I'm talking about just hopping through the channels, seeing if something catches my eye and looks interesting. No conscious decision involved. I've discovered many programmes that I've gone on to absolutely love just by channel hopping. It's very shallow of me to say this, but I discovered Buffy The Vampire Slayer because I was channel hopping, and saw Sarah Michelle Gellar and thought "Wow, she looks pretty". It's likely I would not have discovered it had I relied on a text description such as those provided by Netflix.

I'm not really resistant to change, or On Demand video services. I frequently watch things on Netflix, Amazon or the various channel on demand services.
That is unlikely to happen soon. Not because the consumer will resist it (although there are signs consumers are starting to resist new technologies - look at how 3D fared), but the programme makers might slow it down. They are *starting* to upgrade to 4k cameras, but may still want several years more use out of the editing suites and other infrastructure they have that is limited to 2k.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Well, apart from Eastenders and Coronation street :D :rolleyes:

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Just shows how sick some people are. :rolleyes:

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

This article warns that the whole concept of streaming video may be undermined by lack of investment in infrastructure:

http://www.rapidtvnews.com/201502073...newsletter_454

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

This is not a negative article, Richard. The key words are:

At its inaugural meeting, the Streaming Video Alliance (SVA) issued an assurance to start tackling such issues, which it fears could fracture the market.


and

The SVA says that achieving success in streaming video relies heavily on creating an open architecture and infrastructure model that fosters broad collaboration throughout the online video ecosystem. The alliance confirmed that it has made this its mission, as the organisation plans to develop, publish and promote open standards, policies and best practices that allow the online video streaming ecosystem to flourish.

Yes, there are problems, but this doesn't mean they cannot be overcome and things won't change.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Hi, Stuart, I've scissored your reply to concentrate on the main points that I wanted to make on this.

I think you may be reading more into my 'selection' than actually was the case. It was a few months ago when I went through part of the Netflix library and added the programmes I thought were worth watching to 'My List'. I don't do it on a regular basis, but it only took me a short time (about 20 minutes from memory).

That list remains on the system each time you access it, so by going to 'My Lists', all the selected programmes are on there. All you have to do is choose one - I had no idea I was going to watch 'Damages' until I saw it on there.

Although there is a little time delay getting into Netflix, once you are in, this process takes just seconds and I would be willing to bet that I can find something worth watching long before you do when 'channel hopping' (unless you are easily pleased!). I have found that method of selecting programmes extremely frustrating and even if I find something worthwhile, I find myself in the middle of the programme or a series that I hadn't watched before. A most inefficient means of finding a programme that you want to see, IMHO.

My comment about 4K was just meant to remind everyone that a change in technology can generate major change that we have little control over. Obviously a change to HD only is more likely than 4K in the foreseeable future, but who knows what may prompt a change in the present system?

I understand completely that some of you on the Forum are comfortable with what you have now, but many of us want more. It's not my decision whether they actually withdraw the current system; all I am saying is that it is unlikely to last forever.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

But you seem to want less, not more.

Linear and streaming will continue to co-exist. They each serve their own purpose.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Sorry if I have led you to that belief. I certainly want more streaming and the maximum choice of programmes.

I am happy for broadcast TV to continue, but I just think that once new ways of viewing really catch on, broadcast TV will decline to a point when it is either diminished substantially or discontinued altogether, and this could happen sooner than we think.