Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
There’s no conflict that I can see. Those 100s of channels will end up being streaming channels, which are a very poor substitute for the established channels that are most watched in this country.
|
Did you not read my comments a few posts back about Freely delivering channels by DVB over IP, so no different to the existing terrestrial network. It certainly isn't your dream vision of on-demand streaming only and the end of linear channels.
Quote:
|
As for broadband not being able to cope, that’s for the birds. I don’t think anyone is sleepwalking into this.
|
Studies have shown that the existing broadband infrastructure cannot cope with events attracting a mass audience. It is one of the scenarios being examined by the DCMS. "The cloud" isn't designed to massively increase bandwidth at the drop of a hat.
Quote:
|
I seem to recall some scare story appearing on here some time ago that there wouldn’t be enough electricity to support the whole TV experience being provided by on demand over broadband. Don’t fall into the same trap, episilon, that would be embarrassing.
|
Now you are just being silly, although I'm not sure why I should be surprised by that.
However, totally unrelated to TV or broadband, electricity grids are becoming more susceptible to load balancing failures and even hacking (e.g. the recent outage across Spain & Portugal). Recent news stories of kill switches built into solar panels made in China are also enlightening. That said, such failures would have the same impact on broadcast tv so a little beyond the scope of this thread.
---------- Post added at 19:27 ---------- Previous post was at 19:24 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul
We may come up short on Electricity, but not for TV, it uses a fraction of what EV's require.
|
I'm guessing the electricity comment is just one of his typical obfuscations.