Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ailean
I don't think the original PVR plans involved HD or Mpeg4 so that's going to add a lot of extra work and investment to do. As the user end is rented it makes sence to do it in one go (if they charged us £300 for the box I'm sure we'd have one by now and they'd be happy to charge us another £300 for an HD/Mpeg4 version 6 months later  ). |
If they're going to keep delaying shipment to add even more features, they're never going to get it out the door and earn money from it.
Quote:
|
They also want to maximise VOD deployment first as it's more of an earner for simular features.
|
There is nothing at all similar between VOD and PVR. VOD is a way of selling chargeable content; PVR is a way for customers to time-shift broadcast content. The miniscule amount of 'highlight' content on VOD is pointless.
Quote:
And as for the mess, well it's a very expensive mess to sort and I think without government backing to get fiber to every urban door it won't happen anytime soon. If they'd tried to do it before now I don't think they'd still be in business.
It's a shame we've never had much of an open market in this country, if the government laid/owned the fiber to the door and providers laid there cable to the street nodes then you could shop around a bit.
|
It was ntl's choice to merge all these companies and create the mess in the first place. And why should the taxpayer pay for any of it?
Quote:
|
But hey, I've got 10MB and can just download all my TV in HD now instead... or at least 75GB/month.
|
That may well be the future, at least until the content providers catch on and start charging for it. All the more reason for ntl to try to make some money before it happens.