[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Horizon

.... its because sometimes you are confusing different things, ie using the word streamed, which can have different meanings. When you say streamed, you are thinking of it in on demand terms, I believe. Whereas others here are thinking of it as another way to "broadcast" channels. It can be both and that's one of the things causing confusion. You can have streamed a live linear channel, a non-live linear channel, a live on demand programme and a non-live on demand programme.

From a technical point of view, streaming is basically a way of downloading a little bit of a file, viewing that bit, then downloading the next bit, viewing that and so on. The advantage of streaming for the user is they don't have to wait for the entire film or show to download (which could be a long time on some connections) before they can watch it. Streaming also allows them to watch live TV (which, of course, would never be possible without streaming as you would never be able to download the whole thing). The advantage of streaming for the provider is that the show or film is only ever stored on their own, secure, storage systems. It is never stored on the user's own systems (which may or may not be secure).

Now that's not true in all instances, as some streaming services do allow downloads (Amazon Video, All 4 and iPlayer spring to mind), but that is streaming from a technical point of view.

It's also worth noting that that definition is not tied to any particular technology or platform. All digital TV services do it, regardless of whether they are broadcast via Satellite, Cable, Terrestrial TV or IPTV over the internet. It's also the same definition used in computing. Games, for instance, often don't load entire levels into memory (even with many gigs of RAM, there wouldn't be room for some game levels). They either load a section of a level or map (the process is often hidden from the user by playing a cut scene while the section is loading), or stream sections into memory as and when needed.

---------- Post added at 15:47 ---------- Previous post was at 15:41 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

To the older generation, all this is new and many either find it more difficult to understand or don't really know where to start. However, it will be familiar and much more straight forward to our younger generation as they move into more advanced years.

True, although it's worth noting that some studies have found that the younger generation is increasingly using TVs to watch TV, while using their tablets and phones (which they previously used to watch TV) to do other stuff.

Perhaps you can tell me why you think that the younger generation, as they get older, would want to substitute their world of on demand without ads for the more conventional model of scheduled TV full of irritating commercial breaks in their busy lives? True, some will do this, but I am certain that the majority will not. This is certainly being borne out in my experience, seeing how my daughters' friends watch TV in an entirely different way to your way, Chris.

You are, of course, assuming that the various On Demand services won't insert their own commercial breaks, and stop people watching the stream skipping the ads. Some services already do this (ITV Hub, All 4). Although their CEO said they would never carry ads in this way, your beloved Netflix clarified his comments to say they had no plans to do so at the moment, which implies they are reserving the right to introduce it in the future.