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

[Raider999]

Originally Posted by Hugh

It’s, like, the future, man!

No it's not, certainly not for sport.

I like to be able to watch what I like when I have the chance to - not be given a list of things someone thinks I should watch.

Recordings allow me to do this just as streaming can - the difference as far as I can see is that recordings are better quality than streams.

I should add, over the last few weeks I have Amazon Prime purely to watch the rugby internationals (free 30 day trial).

As Prime's 20 football matches are coming in the next month, I am paying for a months subscription.

The big questions are

will the experience be good enough to make me want to keep it permanently?

Will there be enough content that I want to watch after the end of the year?

Sorry, I should have put <sarcasm> markers on my post...

I agree with you.

[Raider999]

I read an article in today's Telegraph, suggesting that streaming should be restricted to SD as it is greener than streaming in HD/UHD

If it had been April 1st I would have understood it.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Raider999

I read an article in today's Telegraph, suggesting that streaming should be restricted to SD as it is greener than streaming in HD/UHD

If it had been April 1st I would have understood it.

I think it was just refering to mobile devices. I guess that would be due to increased battery use?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I think it was just refering to mobile devices. I guess that would be due to increased battery use?

I'm not sure it's just mobile. Laptops and tablets would consume more power along with well configured set top boxes in terms of processing power/fans etc.

Strikes me as fairly small beer in the grand scheme.

The increased power consumption occurs on all devices, but the scientists argue that you should stream at a lower quality on smaller screens because you can’t tell the difference anyway.

[OLD BOY]

Lifetime is the latest channel to bite the dust.

https://www.mediamole.co.uk/entertai...nd_434970.html


Lifetime will close down in the UK, Ireland and Malta on February 28, we can confirm.


They have been forced by sheer economics to admit that the future is the internet, not DTT broadcasting. I am sure that all forward looking forum members will see the wisdom of that assessment. I, however, could not possibly comment.

Lifetime will close down in the UK, Ireland and Malta on February 28, we can confirm.

The channel - a joint venture between A&E and Sky in the UK - launched more than seven years ago as a replacement for The Biography Channel, offering programming such as Little Women and The Real Housewives franchise.

According to the latest data from BARB, Lifetime has an average audience share of just 0.03%, lagging significantly behind sister channels Blaze (0.29%), Sky History (0.22%) and Crime+Investigation (0.16%).

A spokesperson told Media Mole: "AETN UK will close its TV channel Lifetime across the UK, Ireland, and Malta, on both linear and non-linear platforms on 1st March 2021.

"Lifetime UK has entertained audiences with shows such as Britain's Next Top Model, Born This Way, and Little Women.

"Across EMEA, Lifetime remains available in Africa and Poland. AETN UK's Sky HISTORY, Sky HISTORY2, Crime + Investigation, and BLAZE brands and content will continue to be available across the UK and Ireland."

The closure of Lifetime is just the latest in a spate of channel shutdowns in recent months as broadcasters embark on a long-term shift away from linear television.

Channel 5 owner ViacomCBS has been one of the most active in closing down channels, axing three MTV music channels, VH1 and most of its +1 stations in 2020. Disney has dropped all of its Disney-branded UK channels following the launch of Disney+, while Discovery has cut channels including Home & Health, Discovery Shed and Travel Channel.

You just did...

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

You just did...

No, I didn't. I am simply repeating the conclusion reached on the website.

I am truly sorry that this doesn't match your narrative. My apologies to everyone who has been in any way touched by this revelation. I really am.

[jfman]

It's a long way to zero. Meanwhile La Liga TV has joined Amazon Prime. 24/7 linear Spanish football goodness.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

No, I didn't. I am simply repeating the conclusion reached on the website.

I am truly sorry that this doesn't match your narrative. My apologies to everyone who has been in any way touched by this revelation. I really am.

Nothing in the article mentioned

They have been forced by sheer economics to admit that the future is the internet, not DTT broadcasting

That was your comment...

fwiw, I don’t have a "narrative" - you are the one spinning a fantasy...

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

It's a long way to zero. Meanwhile La Liga TV has joined Amazon Prime. 24/7 linear Spanish football goodness.

Maybe so, but if that's what you are relying on as a measure of your success, you must be getting rather desperate.

---------- Post added at 20:16 ---------- Previous post was at 20:08 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

Nothing in the article mentioned

That was your comment...

fwiw, I don’t have a "narrative" - you are the one spinning a fantasy...

Maybe a literal interpretation of what they actually said, yes. But there was no comment from me. And despite any protestations from me, you and a few others are desperate to dispel any mention of the idea that our scheduled linear TV broadcast channels are time limited. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, you continue to believe in this fantasy that DTT will still exist forever.

OK, let's just live and let live and see how this all plays out. I'll stock up on the popcorn.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Maybe so, but if that's what you are relying on as a measure of your success, you must be getting rather desperate.

I'm quite sure you'll find that, throughout this entire debate, I've never put a precise figure on how many linear channels would persist at the end of your 15/20 year timeframe so by definition one would suffice.

It's your own personal desperation that has you cheering on the demise of each individual channel ignoring the economics that those that are in most immediate danger are the least viable. It's a long way til Sky Sports Main Event gets the chop.

---------- Post added at 20:28 ---------- Previous post was at 20:27 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Despite all the evidence to the contrary, you continue to believe in this fantasy that DTT will still exist forever.

Straw man alert.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

I'm quite sure you'll find that, throughout this entire debate, I've never put a precise figure on how many linear channels would persist at the end of your 15/20 year timeframe so by definition one would suffice.

And that, of course is what I was alluding to. One surviving channel would be claimed as a victory for you, but everyone else with any common sense will take my view of the future to be a darned sight more accurate than yours. The extremely high bar you have set simply shows the extent of your desperation to be proved right.

The essential issue for me is that conventional scheduled TV channels will simply not be necessary in (now) 15 years' time. Everything will be on the internet, and having programmes grouped by channel will be ridiculous. They may be grouped by category, and that would make sense, but by channel? Why?

Pluto type channels will continue as long as people keep watching them but I think audience figures will be low. I notice that even Pluto are making on demand selections more prominent now, and I can understand why.

Anyway, it will all come out in the wash, as they say. Let's just watch and learn. I won't say I told you so in 15 years' time (if I am still here). I'll let you figure that out for yourself.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

And that, of course is what I was alluding to. One surviving channel would be claimed as a victory for you, but everyone else with any common sense will take my view of the future to be a darned sight more accurate than yours. The extremely high bar you have set simply shows the extent of your desperation to be proved right.

A darned sight

Old Boy it's you who have made absolutely definitive statements in ignorance of the evidence and, as I've pointed out on many occasions, the extreme difficulties in moving consumer behaviour in such a drastic manner without state intervention.

I've described a fairly accurate future in the past - customers will continue to enjoy a diverse range of content over IP and traditional broadcast, on demand and linear. I don't see huge amounts of people running to disagree me, I just see you moving the goalposts, over and over spinning the words of others in a desperate attempts to give yourself any credibility at all.

The essential issue for me is that conventional scheduled TV channels will simply not be necessary in (now) 15 years' time. Everything will be on the internet, and having programmes grouped by channel will be ridiculous. They may be grouped by category, and that would make sense, but by channel? Why?

Pluto type channels will continue as long as people keep watching them but I think audience figures will be low. I notice that even Pluto are making on demand selections more prominent now, and I can understand why.

Anyway, it will all come out in the wash, as they say. Let's just watch and learn. I won't say I told you so in 15 years' time (if I am still here). I'll let you figure that out for yourself.

Old Boy if this is going to be another Saturday night where you are going to contradict yourself I'm tired of the contortions of your argument. In one paragraph linear is dead, in the next plucky upstarts Pluto TV will do what Sky (and others) can't - maintain a linear presence while moving 75, 80, 90+ per cent of their business to streaming.