VOD : Linear is old tech - on demand is the future

[Raider999]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

H’mmm. How do you explain this, then?

“I think a lot of people are seeing 5G as possibly the replacement of digital terrestrial television transmission in general. If you talk to key broadcasters in the UK as well as other countries, broadcasters are looking to internet-based delivery as the main channel to the consumer in the next 10 years. Digital satellite, digital terrestrial, digital cable, whilst they are the main tenets of getting to our key audience at the moment, they are going to diminish significantly. There will still be requirements for efficient multicast to consumers and the use of the 5G technology toolkit outside of the service provider offering of 5G is something that’s of interest to broadcasters in that space.”

https://www.tvbeurope.com/media-deli...ption-of-media

It starts with 'I think' - so obviously one persons opinions - hardly enough to set anything in stone.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Raider999

It starts with 'I think' - so obviously one persons opinions - hardly enough to set anything in stone.

The 'I think' relates to what he believes is the opinion of the majority of people. He then goes on to talk about what key broadcasters believe, which is the issue.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The 'I think' relates to what he believes is the opinion of the majority of people. He then goes on to talk about what key broadcasters believe, which is the issue.

I think followed up by ‘possibly’ followed closely by an ‘if’.

A staple of speculative evidence-lacking blog pieces.

If you look carefully at what is actually said and not what you’d like it to say all that’s in the piece of substance is the relatively uncontroversial statement of internet based delivery increasing and traditional delivery decreasing.

There’s nothing about use of UHF spectrum, viability of 5G for mass content delivery over long range in rural areas (like UHF) or the multitude of other conclusions you have reached in your own head on the basis of a blog.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The 'I think' relates to what he believes is the opinion of the majority of people. He then goes on to talk about what key broadcasters believe, which is the issue.

Caveat upon caveat...

I believe the opinion of the majority of the people on this forum disagree with your proposition.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

I think followed up by ‘possibly’ followed closely by an ‘if’.

A staple of speculative evidence-lacking blog pieces.

If you look carefully at what is actually said and not what you’d like it to say all that’s in the piece of substance is the relatively uncontroversial statement of internet based delivery increasing and traditional delivery decreasing.

There’s nothing about use of UHF spectrum, viability of 5G for mass content delivery over long range in rural areas (like UHF) or the multitude of other conclusions you have reached in your own head on the basis of a blog.

The 'I think' and 'possibly' both refer to the opinions of the majority of people. Why are you obssessing about that'?

The following 'if' does not indicate doubt. Read it properly.

I really don't care about the point you've made regarding the UHF spectrum - that's your argument not mine. What I am focussing on is what industry chiefs believe, and if you think you know better than them, I would be interested to see your evidence.

Instead of denigrating people and links provided in these forums, why don't you start concentrating on the actual arguments being made? Perversity, I suspect.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The 'I think' and 'possibly' both refer to the opinions of the majority of people. Why are you obssessing about that'?

The following 'if' does not indicate doubt. Read it properly.

I really don't care about the point you've made regarding the UHF spectrum - that's your argument not mine. What I am focussing on is what industry chiefs believe, and if you think you know better than them, I would be interested to see your evidence.

Instead of denigrating people and links provided in these forums, why don't you start concentrating on the actual arguments being made? Perversity, I suspect.

Industry chiefs? Not in that blog you weren’t.

Not a single quote, from anyone, except the writer. Who thinks... possibly... if... might... something.

The only perverse argument going on around here Old Boy is yours now that scheduled linear television will no longer (in your opinion) see it’s demise by 2035 you are now pretending to have made an entirely different point altogether. I know it’s an entirely different point because I’ve been sat here debating it for the best part of 5 years.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Industry chiefs? Not in that blog you weren’t.

Not a single quote, from anyone, except the writer. Who thinks... possibly... if... might... something.

The only perverse argument going on around here Old Boy is yours now that scheduled linear television will no longer (in your opinion) see it’s demise by 2035 you are now pretending to have made an entirely different point altogether. I know it’s an entirely different point because I’ve been sat here debating it for the best part of 5 years.

What a load of twaddle - as I said, you just try to discredit everything people say on here and every link they provide.

I guess we are just going to have to accept that you know better than everyone else, regardless of any evidence to the contrary.

Yes, well dream on.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

What a load of twaddle - as I said, you just try to discredit everything people say on here and every link they provide.

I guess we are just going to have to accept that you know better than everyone else, regardless of any evidence to the contrary.

Yes, well dream on.

I don't know why you have decided to personalise it Old Boy. I'm not asking anyone to accept I know better than everyone else.

I think that I've a fairly uncontroversial opinion in this thread and that if you were to canvas wider opinion you'd maybe find that to be the case.

There's no evidence in that blog, or anywhere else, that indicates that 5G will be any sort of game changer in eliminating digital terrestrial television.

The first real consideration is coverage. DTT has 98% coverage. After a £1 billion of investment 4G will only hit 95% in 2025 with the least commercially viable rural areas left outside that. A 4G transmitter will have a range of about 2-3 miles in each direction.

On top of that the highest bandwidth 5G will be short range transmitters on lamp posts, buildings, bus stops. Nobody is going to deploy that much infrastructure in commercially unviable rural areas (plus the associated backhaul) to chase your 2035 pipe dream through 5G coverage.

People with industry experience would know this, of course. Your average blogger, maybe not so much. Although in fairness to the most recent blogger I think, possibly, if you asked him, maybe he would never have intended it to be used to make the point that you proposed it did.

[Legendkiller2k]

Linear tv is dead you know guys so dead that Freeview are starting to catch up with SKY and VM by having HD versions of channels in place of sd channel, not to mention a online service coming too. https://www.cordbusters.co.uk/freevi...annel-changes/

A major overhaul to Freeview channel numbers (HD vs SD in particular) might take place, in addition to a long-awaited capability of watching some live channels without an aerial – following a consultation published today by Digital UK.

Established in 2002, Freeview is the United Kingdom’s terrestrial television platform. It provides free-to-air TV channels and radio stations (via a Freeview aerial), including more than 80 standard and HD channels (See our full Freeview guide here).

Digital UK leads the development of Freeview, and holds Ofcom licences to provide an Electronic Programme Guide and its listing of Logical Channel Numbers (LCN). Those channel numbers are then used by Freeview, Freeview Play, BT TV, TalkTalk TV, YouView, EE TV and NOW TV.

Another exciting change proposed on the consultation, would seamlessly let viewers without an aerial (or with a bad signal), watch the internet (streamed) version of the channel – if one exists.

Technically this is already possible today, but with some work: You can already stream live versions of some of the major Freeview Play channels via their apps (BBC iPlayer, ITV Hub, etc’).

Freeview Play on TV

However, with the proposed change, you would not need to manually run each app and look for the live feed.

Instead, you would simply switch to a channel that is similar to a linear, over-the-air channel – but would broadcast its content over your broadband connection, instead of over-the-air.

This can be implemented either by replacing the original channel, or with a set of dedicated, IP-only channels.

And, for the time being, this would only be supported on Freeview Play devices, which are already connected to the internet.

[Raider999]

That sounds like they are making streaming appear to be a linear channel.

I wonder why they would do that - it flies in the face of OB's predictions

What do they know?

[Horizon]

Originally Posted by Legendkiller2k

Linear tv is dead you know guys so dead that Freeview are starting to catch up with SKY and VM by having HD versions of channels in place of sd channel, not to mention a online service coming too. https://www.cordbusters.co.uk/freevi...annel-changes/

Thanks for that link about Freeview, very interesting.

---------- Post added at 16:36 ---------- Previous post was at 16:34 ----------

Originally Posted by Raider999

That sounds like they are making streaming appear to be a linear channel.

I wonder why they would do that - it flies in the face of OB's predictions

It will all converge one day, so the difference between a linear channel and on demand/streamers will be far less noticeable than now.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Raider999

That sounds like they are making streaming appear to be a linear channel.

I wonder why they would do that - it flies in the face of OB's predictions

My view of the future is still fixed on 15 years ahead - you are clutching at straws, Raider.

Open your eyes and see what is actually happening. Even the main terrestrials will not be here forever. To wit:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...t-away-from-tv

To be honest with you, I thought the smaller channels would be the first to go...but Channel 4? Wow!

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

My view of the future is still fixed on 15 years ahead - you are clutching at straws, Raider.

Open your eyes and see what is actually happening. Even the main terrestrials will not be here forever. To wit:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...t-away-from-tv

To be honest with you, I thought the smaller channels would be the first to go...but Channel 4? Wow!

Where in that article does it say anything about Channel 4 ‘going’ anywhere?

4 is a public service broadcast channel, and the company that runs it is state owned.regardless of where they see future *growth* in their overall business, Channel 4 itself will continue to exist, has the same hours to fulfill and the same legal obligations as to what it fills those hours with.

[Legendkiller2k]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

My view of the future is still fixed on 15 years ahead - you are clutching at straws, Raider.

Open your eyes and see what is actually happening. Even the main terrestrials will not be here forever. To wit:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...t-away-from-tv

To be honest with you, I thought the smaller channels would be the first to go...but Channel 4? Wow!

Considering Channel 4 have a 20 years plan i highly doubt they're going anywhere will check Monday though when we're back in work but nothing about Channel 4 closing has ever been mentioned or even been on our systems.

Are you on about more4? As that has a question mark on it.