|
|
 ConferencesWebinarsSeminarsExhibitsSymposiaDemonstrations
|
|
|
|
ABELISMS
A-bel-ism (n): a thought or point-of-view from John Abel, a person with an in-depth understanding of technology, and how businesses and the public consume, exploit and fail to grasp the value of technology.
To receive the weekly Abelisms via emial, please send an email to Mark Rebholz at mrebholz@lightbulb-communications.com
#1: Telecom was AT NAB2007 - sent on May 2, 2007
#2: More Abelisms from John Abel - sent on May 9, 2007 > It’s Becoming an On-Demand World > A Related Observation: On-demand and Set Top Boxes
#3: Even More NAB2007 Musings from John Abel - sent on May 15, 2007 > Storage and More Storage and that leads to Search
#4: Yes, Even More NAB2007 Musings from John Abel - sent on May 23, 2007 > A Money Issue: Retransmission Consent
#5: More Abelisms - sent on May 31, 2007 > Network-Based DVRs: A huge opportunity for carriers! > Turning Off Television Broadcasting: I don’t really mean it!
#6: Abelisms The I-Me-My Digital Syndrome - sent on June 8 > The I-Me-My Digital Syndrome > Digital Technology Has Killed Real Time > Wireless is from the Old World > Digital to Analog Converters – A Post Script
#7: My Wireless World...Part I - sent on June 22 > NAB Show in 2008 and the DTV Coupon Program
#8: My Wireless World…Part II - sent on June 28 > The Service/Coverage: Verizon vs. Sprint vs. T-Mobile vs. AT&T > Improving Mobile Signal Reception in My Home (800MHz and 1900MHz)
#9: Turning off Broadcast TV, Part 2 - sent on July 12 > Harry’s wrong and here’s why
#10: VoIP, Mobile Video and More - sent on July 26 > The Crashing and Burning of SunRocket: Who Wins and Who Loses? > Mobile Video in the iPhone Era: Let the Boom Begin > Making NO Sense of Wireless Data Plans
This is a first in a series of emails where I share my thoughts on how telecom and broadcasting technology will affect your business…today and in the future. My first few emails will focus on what I saw and heard at NAB2007
If the telecom industry is serious about providing broadband video services to consumers, then the best place to learn about the unique requirements of network-provided video production and delivery is at the annual NAB Convention. Telecom professionals can learn a great deal about offering video services at the annual NAB Convention.
I’ve attended every (and I mean EVERY) NAB Convention since 1982 …consecutively…no misses, and I had attended sporadically prior to 1982. Also, I’ve attended numerous telecom, cable, satellite and tech trade shows over the years. In the interest of full disclosure my company, Lightbulb Communications, was contracted by NAB to produce Telecom@NAB2007 which included conferences, exhibits and other activities. But more on my background at the end…scroll down if you are interested in reading more about John Abel.
Feel free to forward my emails to co-workers or send me (jabel@lightbulb-communications.com) their email addresses and I’ll add them to the distribution list.
The consumer makes few distinctions among satellite, cable, telecom and broadcast video providers. At the same time, consumer expectations are ever rising for video services…they want more HDTV, they want more channels of service, they are turning to the Internet for even more video choice, they want to produce their own video and post it on the web. Video is the king of digital content and this is unlikely to change for the foreseeable future.
The consumer electronics industry is also focused on digital content devices (or gadgets) that can display all quality levels of digital video content. Many of these devices are attached to broadband Internet (wireless or wireline) provided by telecom carriers. Whether telecom carriers like it or not, these carriers are the new distributors of video for the consuming public.
The future is about broadband video…broadband video content is the king and will continue to be the king for years to come. If you are a telecom service provider you can no longer ignore how your network is being used for video delivery…whether it is for Internet-based video or for your own private label bundle of video services. And as the network becomes more intelligent, you, the telecom provider, will have more opportunities to serve the public through the features and benefits of broadband.
For the time being, we are calling these Abelisms about the NAB2007. And I’ll do my best to put these musings in the context of why I think they are important for telecom carriers; however you wish to define “carriers.”
Some of my observations or musings are more obvious than others, I think. So, let’s start with an obvious one:
It is true: content is king…we all know this…it is and it is not a cliché. In my view, the NAB Show is the best place to find out about the future of digital content, the process of capturing digital content, the technology of manipulating the content, the process of producing digital content, and the technology and business of distributing digital content. The NAB Show is a multimedia digital content show, perhaps more than it is a “broadcasting” show. I was at NAB when we started NAB Multimedia World (old timers will recall that it was first at the Hilton and later at the Sands) and the multimedia focus has eventually overshadowed all of NAB. NAB now is the digital content Mecca for anyone interested in producing, touching, securing, altering, and distributing digital content of all kinds. It just so happens that the most interesting digital content tends to be video and digital video content is the king of NAB.
Why is this important to telecom carriers? Because most of this digital content is on your networks and more and more of it will be on your networks in the future. And the network providers are going to be asked to distribute more of it at faster and faster speeds. For the immediate future, the demand for broadband is going to continue to grow at a very, very fast pace…more bandwidth is the mantra of today’s consumer. And more bandwidth will lead to more video being on that bandwidth. There is no turning back to the narrowband days of the past. It is my guess that this year the number of telecom companies represented at NAB at least doubled over last year. It is very clear that the telecom industry is awakening to NAB as the telecom broadband providers also deploy more broadband video services.
Another obvious observation about this year’s NAB…HDTV is everywhere.
HDTV was everywhere and in everything. Analog NTSC is virtually dead, at least at the production level. I saw few NTSC cameras and almost no 4x3 aspect ratio monitors. If you are not providing HDTV as a carrier or as a cable or satellite provider or as a broadcaster, you are yesterday’s news. Of course, nearly everyone you meet at NAB has at least one HDTV receiver/display device in their home and we all joked about who is not in HDTV. For example, I had one conversation with a group of people from the Washington, DC area (where I also live) and we started talking about local news in HD. We all remarked that although WUSA was not our favorite local news source, we all watch WUSA’s local news now because it is in HD. It is beautiful! I am shocked to see other local news programs on my HDTV displays at home when they are in 4x3 fuzzy upconverted NTSC. They look awful!
Speaking of news…there were also several companies looking to convince broadcasters that they should be producing news in HD. This will happen. There are significant competitive pressures now and most of the major market (and several smaller markets) TV stations will, I predict, be transmitting their local news programs in HD within the year. Probably field production will be the last element to be in HD, but the studio news production will be in HD.
So, what’s the point for telecom carriers? You cannot think about your future as a video provider without being fully prepared to distribute all channels in HD. Your customers will expect it and if you do not provide HD service you will be viewed as being out of touch and out of date. The HD tide is one that will not be stopped. We are approaching the tipping point if we are not already there…everything will be available at some point in the distribution chain in HD. And the local stations that produce in HD will expect you to carry their local HD content.
A related point…remember that we are entering a treacherous time for local broadcasters and this is where local telecom companies can help local broadcasters. Local broadcasters need to make the conversion to local HD production…but at the same time; they will be turning off their local analog transmissions in February 2009. If nothing else, telecom carriers should be in contact with their local stations and planning for these two transitions (from NTSC to HD and from analog to digital transmission). The end of analog video is very near…as a telecom carrier you cannot ignore this change.
This email has become rather long so I’m going to end it here. Stay tuned for more of my musing coming to your inbox in a few days. I encourage you to send me your thoughts on NAB2007.
Don’t forget to check out the PowerPoint™ presentations from the Telecom@NAB2007 Technology Papers. This is a great opportunity to hear from some of the leaders in telecom technology.
And before I forget, put May 24th 1PM ET, on your calendar for our complimentary webinar Scaling Your IPTV Service Delivery sponsored by Kasenna. Also, view an archived recording of our last webinar, sponsored by IneoQuest.
More Abelisms from John Abel
This is the second in a series of emails where I share my observations of the NAB2007 exhibit floor and how the technologies on the show floor will affect your business. Abelisms will not always be about the NAB Show...eventually we will focus more on how telecom and broadcasting technology will affect your business. But, the NAB Show is so rich in substance that we are concentrating on the NAB Show for the first few issues.
The NAB Show has grown dramatically over the years and this growth has largely been fueled by the realization that if you are in the content distribution business...especially if you are a facilities based network operator, terrestrial or satellite broadcaster, telecom carrier or post-production house that prepares content...then you MUST be at the NAB Show. It is THE destination for video. If the telecom industry is serious about providing broadband video services to consumers, then the NAB show is the best place to learn about the unique requirements of network-provided video production and delivery.
I encourage you to forward my emails to co-workers or send me their email addresses and I’ll add them to the distribution list.
It’s Becoming an On-Demand World An observation of NAB 2007 that was not so obvious to me until I arrived at the Show is this...it's becoming an on-demand world.
All video content is moving to an on-demand world. It is not just that movies will be on-demand or that DVR’s will be used for some specialized content for me…it is that all video content will be available in an on-demand mode. The obvious exceptions will be live sporting events and perhaps live breaking news and perhaps some major speeches. If this observation is correct, it will have major implications for the advertising support system for television broadcasting and other video content that is “appointment” based. In this regard, appointment television as we know it from the broadcasting and cable model has a wobbly future. And although it may not be obvious now, there may be new opportunities for broadcasters in an on-demand world (this is already the case with network broadcasters...like Desperate Housewives on my iPOD) and in any event I think broadcasters are up to the task of finding the opportunities in the on-demand world. In print, they call this "pass along readership"...increasingly there is "pass along viewership." When you get right down to it, there is very little video content that requires real time; almost all video that is produced is better viewed in non-real time. The obvious exceptions are live sporting events. As we move more and more to a non-real time environment, the value of the broadband network will increase because the network will be used more to access this non-real time video.
And speaking of VOD, I was very impressed with a company called Edgeware. This is a Swedish company and their major product is a VOD server that is based entirely on solid state flash memory technology for content storage. A key here is no moving parts. I was with about a half-dozen carriers when I went to their booth and although this technology was of great interest, the biggest downside for Edgeware is that they are new and have few deployments and not many deployments in the U.S. Carriers prefer to deal with companies that have been around for a long time. But, if you are interested in providing VOD services I encourage you to investigate this company…Edgeware….low cost and low maintenance VOD servers.
By the way, it is also now clear to me after NAB that we will see more and more flash memory in all kinds of devices from laptops to large servers. Flash memory will significantly reduce the problems with hard disc drives.
A Related Observation: On-demand and Set Top Boxes There were many, many companies showing set top boxes (even though many of these companies were not selling STBs) and how their middleware would work with these STBs. One of the many STB features that drew my attention were boxes that had 3 inputs or tuners in them so that the DVR in the box could record three channels at a time or the subscriber could watch one channel and record two. This is where it also struck me that we are moving more and more to the video on-demand world.
STBs that are also DVRs are, in my view, a short term phenomenon...and when I mention this to the consumer electronics people they think I've been around telecom too long. What we as consumers want is all video on-demand. Most of these DVR functions will reside in the network. Let's say that I get home 10 minutes after the Redskins game has started and I want to see it from the start and I did not set my DVR…I’d pay 50 cents to see it from the start and play catch up to the real time game. This intelligence (and storage) does not need to reside in the STB…it should reside in the network so that I can get access to any content at any time. The world should be on my time. With the intelligence and storage in the network...this will be a huge opportunity for telecom companies to have their networks provide these services to consumers.
So, again, maybe only obvious to me, but it seems highly likely that ALL video will be available in an on-demand world. The “need” to watch real time TV will be significantly diminished in the future.
What are the implications for telecom carriers? The faster that you can deploy VOD and move your network to higher levels of intelligence the more that you can capitalize on the consumer’s desire to put the world on their time. And I think they will pay for it.
One other feature on STBs that will be more evident in 2008 is that there will be more boxes that will handle MPEG-4. Ultimately this seems to me to be a big advantage of telecom companies entering the video world…you will want to be providing your video services in MPEG-4. To me, the obvious advantage is that other providers (such as cable and satellite) are stuck in the MPEG-2 legacy. These providers will ultimately change to MPEG-4, but they will likely have more difficulty in making the transition than if they were starting off in MPEG-4.
And probably the most obvious application of IPTV is VOD or even better if it could be all video on-demand. Yes, interactivity is important, but if a network provider could provide all video in an on-demand environment, it would be the future of video. We will get there. My point is that the most important future prospect for IPTV is all video in an on-demand mode. This on-demand function may be the element that immediately distinguishes IPTV from linear (broadcast-model) carriers like cable and satellite.
But at NAB I observed an IPTV bandwagon developing. By this I definitely mean that whether a vendor has an IPTV product or service available today, they have a sign in their booth that says “IPTV.” Given my past observations about the growth of things like “TV stereo” (for you old-timers) or HDTV (in the late 1990’s)…everyone will have IPTV in their booth in 2008…if for no other reason than to attract buyers into their booth. So, whether it makes sense or not, the entire vendor market is much attuned to IPTV and IPTV as a product category is already established and will grow more in 2008. I still found many people whom I admire and respect walking around and saying and thinking…I wonder what IPTV REALLY is.
It’s time to end this email but stay tuned for more of my musing coming to your inbox in a few days. I encourage you to send me your thoughts on NAB2007.
Don’t forget to check out the PowerPoint™ presentations from the Telecom@NAB2007 Technology Papers.
And before I forget, put May 24th 1PM ET, on your calendar for our complimentary webinar Scaling Your IPTV Service Delivery sponsored by Kasenna. Also, view an archived recording of our last webinar, sponsored by IneoQuest.
Even More NAB2007 Musings from John Abel
This is my third email where I share my observations on what I saw on NAB2007 exhibit floor and how this technology will affect your business.
I really enjoy reading your thoughts on NAB2007 so keep them coming. Don’t forget to forward this email to co-workers. Send your comments (and co-workers emails) directly to me at jabel@lightbulb-communications.com. And not all of these emails will be about the NAB Show, but I have a few more items that caught my eye at NAB2007.
One of the key elements of IPTV deployments is middleware…this is the software that runs between the headend (the ingestion point) and the STB that makes communication possible between the content library at one end and the services provided through the STB at the other. Normally, one would not think about seeing middleware at the NAB Convention, since the concept of “middleware” assumes a wired environment in the context of IPTV. But, I was only somewhat surprised that virtually every IPTV middleware provider was there in some form…not always in their own exhibit and many times present in a partner’s booth. But, what was surprising is that one of the carrier professionals that attended our Telecom@NAB2007 from a telecom company in Iowa (it was Justyn Miller and thanks Justyn for sending us to Quative) introduced me to a new middleware provider…a company called Quative. I and one of my colleagues went to the Nagravision booth (Quative is a part of the Kudelski Group). This is not an advertisement for Quative, but if you are looking at middleware providers I encourage you to take a look at Quative. Very interesting and very thoughtful about the future of MPEG-4 on STBs. I should also point out that virtually every other middleware provider was in attendance at NAB…at least all of those that are familiar to me.
Storage and More Storage and that leads to Search Although storage has been a popular product at NAB for several years, there seemed to me to be even more companies focused on digital storage and then the logical offshoot of storage is search capability. If you store digital content and as your digital storage grows then the need to search through that storage also grows. All of us have experienced this with our computers…we get larger and larger hard drives to store more and more, but then we can’t find what we want so then we need better search capabilities to search our desktop machines to find the relevant content in the piles of storage. In February of this year I spoke with some large broadcasters that have huge vaults of old videotapes of their newscasts or B-roll video and they are all wondering how to invest in this asset to digitize it, store it and make it accessible for on-air use as a video library. Given the attraction of things historic, the growth of storage and digitizing of old video assets will grow and then there will be the need to search through those video files for relevant clips. As the pile of digital content grows, as more companies recognize the value of their old analog assets, the value of storage and search functionality will grow exponentially. On searching, watch out for Google!
During the summer of 2006 I attended a conference about sports content and I was surprised by the number of university sports departments in attendance. They have old content assets (“our team won the national championship in 1987 and we have video of it, but how do we digitize it and make money from it?”) and they are looking for ways to monetize the value of these old assets. Again, a sign that non-real time video has value…it’s going to be an on-demand world.
Another surprise for me was the size of the Ascent Media booth at NAB2007. There are two companies that are sort of in the same space that I recommend to those who are building large network operation centers for digital content assets. These two companies are Ascent Media and AZCAR. The largest telecom carriers in the world use the services and expertise of these companies. When Verizon decided to build large network operations centers for their FiOS TV operations, they went to Ascent Media. AZCAR, I believe, is used by AT&T. All of the companies in the mobile TV operations (such as Qualcomm and Crown Castle) are looking at these companies to build and manage their network operation centers. These companies (Ascent Media and AZCAR) have some excellent ways of looking at the storage, content management and access to digital content. If you are building out larger NOCs or big headends, I strongly encourage you to go to the professionals and these two companies are far ahead.
Local broadcasters and local exchange carriers have a lot in common. For the most part, they both serve local communities and in many cases the local coverage of a broadcast station is about the same as the service territory of a local exchange carrier. From my perspective, these two longtime communication service companies should get to know each other and work together.
From what I saw at NAB2007, the number of telecom companies represented and the number of people from those companies probably doubled from 2006. Telecom companies are awakening to the fact that NAB is THE place to learn about video production and distribution. It was surprising to me how many large telecom companies had buying groups that were on tours of the show floor.
The carriers that attended our telecom conferences were profoundly amazed at the amount of technology on the show floor that is relevant to their businesses.
An element of Telecom@NAB2007 was a series of technology presentations that were the central theme of the Telecom Technology Papers Conference. Nearly all of these presentations have been posted here. Most of these presentations were of very high quality. One of the presenters was a gentleman by the name of Wes Simpson, the President/Founder of Telecom Product Consulting. I had not met Wes before our conference, but I found out after the event that he recently authored a book (along with Howard Greenfield) entitled “IPTV and Internet Video,” published by Focal Press in March 2007. I have not read the book but intend to do so. This book is available from the NAB Store at www.nabstore.com.
It’s time to end this email but stay tuned for more of my musing coming to your inbox in a few days. I encourage you to send me your thoughts on NAB2007.
Don’t forget to check out the PowerPoint™ presentations from the Telecom@NAB2007 Technology Papers.
And before I forget, put May 24th 1PM ET, on your calendar for our complimentary webinar Scaling Your IPTV Service Delivery sponsored by Kasenna. Also, view an archived recording of our last webinar, sponsored by IneoQuest.
If you interested in advertising in future editions of Abelisms, please contact Sean Sullivan at ssullivan@lightbulb-communications.com for creative ways to deliver your marketing message.
Abelism 4: Yes, Even More NAB2007 Musings from John Abel
This is the fourth email in a series of my observations on what I saw on NAB2007 exhibit floor and how this technology will affect your business. Let the musing begin…
Of course you cannot talk about the NAB Convention without talking about one of the hottest things at both NAB2006 and NAB2007 and that’s mobile TV. It is ironic to me that mobile TV is such a big deal…and it is ironic for two reasons. First, it is ironic because the two largest companies that are currently providing (or will provide) mobile TV are providing it in former broadcast spectrum. To me, it looks a lot like broadcasting. I wonder why the telecom industry ended up providing mobile TV as opposed to television broadcasters providing mobile TV. Second, it is ironic to me because mobile TV of sorts on a small handheld device has been around for at least 20 years. So, what’s the difference in mobile TV today: smaller devices, more channels, more reliable reception, digital transmission, IP-based, marketed by telecom companies. Mobile TV is probably a new opportunity for both broadcasters and telecom companies. The Mobile TV providers will need access to content and some of the most relevant content will be local content and broadcasters tend to have lots of local content. Telecom companies, through mobile TV, will now be local and national broadcasters. A strange twist of events.
Verizon has launched their version of Qualcomm’s MediaFlo as part of the Verizon V Cast service. On the Verizon web site it says that there are two handheld devices available (one from LG and one from Samsung). Verizon also says that their service is available in about 28 markets, but sadly not Washington or Northern Virginia. As soon as it’s available in the Washington market, I’ll try it out and let you know what I think.
In my view, Verizon should have branded this V Cast MOBILE TV service differently from their original V Cast service. When V Cast was first available a couple of years ago, I subscribed to the service and was quite disappointed with it after the initial thrill of seeing video on my mobile phone. The video clip service that Verizon initially offered through V Cast was very slow to load and acquire and sometimes it simply froze the phone. In addition, I cannot really say that the content was overwhelmingly compelling. I dropped my V Cast clip service about 8 months ago, but I will definitely try the live Mobile TV when it is available.
It appears (from the Verizon web site) that the current Verizon MOBILE TV V Cast has content from CBS, FOX, ESPN, MTV, NBC, MSNBC and Nickelodeon.
Broadcasters are coming to mobile TV sort of late. As I noted above, Verizon’s mobile TV service and Modeo from Crown Castle will actually be riding in old broadcast spectrum (about 700 MHz). But, now the ATSC (Advanced Television Systems Committee)…which set the broadcast DTV standard back in 1996 has announced that they will test various versions of mobile TV in broadcast spectrum. This was also a hot issue at NAB with several broadcast engineers in a buzz about this push through ATSC to set a mobile TV standard along with the existing ATSC standard. Well, it seems sort of late for broadcasters to finally awaken to this, but perhaps better late than never.
So, the overall irony to me is this. Broadcasters had the spectrum. Some of it was taken away and auctioned to Qualcomm and Crown Castle and then Verizon ends up with a Mobile TV service in this same old broadcast spectrum. Then, in a sort of “me too” moment, the broadcasters see these new applications of mobile TV and think that now they need to set a standard within ATSC for mobile TV. We might ultimately end up with three different and probably incompatible standards: Qualcomm’s W-CDMA that Verizon is using for their Mobile TV service, Crown Castle’s DVB-H standard and then a broadcast standard riding inside of the ATSC DTV standard. And I think it is likely that it will take three separate devices to demodulate the three services. It seemed so simple when I had NTSC TV on a small handheld that received services from several different broadcast sources. And why didn’t the broadcasters think about mobile TV back a few years when they had the spectrum. In general, mobile phone operators are better at cultivating their existing (and new) spectrum and coming up with services for which the consumer pays than are broadcasters are at cultivating their spectrum for new services. Thus, broadcast television, at one time, had over 400 MHz of spectrum, but after the next spectrum repacking, the broadcasters will have less than 300 MHz. While mobile telecom operators expand their spectrum, broadcasters are losing spectrum. And the broadcasters don’t seem to care much about this issue because they assume that if there is less spectrum for broadcasting, then there will be less competition. But, then, competitors using broadcast spectrum devise services which look much like broadcasting and are perhaps better uses of the spectrum and come in right on top of what we have called “broadcasting.” Something is wrong here!
A Money Issue: Retransmission Consent Finally, there was lots of behind the scenes discussion at NAB about one money issue that involves cable, telecom companies, satellite companies and broadcast stations. The issue: retransmission consent. I have two perspectives on this. First, from the perspective of the TV broadcaster, retransmission consent is a good thing. Cable, satellite and telecom video providers should be compensating broadcasters for the carriage of their signals. And as more providers want to retransmit broadcast signals (such as cable, satellite, telecom companies and mobile TV operators), this can only be a good thing for broadcast stations. Broadcast stations have a value in the local community and the service providers should compensate them for this value. And the subscribers to cable, satellite or telecom-provided video services will not tolerate services that do not provide local TV stations as a part of the package. The second perspective is from that of a telecom carrier. Telecom carriers cannot be successful without having access to local stations as a part of their service offerings. At the same time, almost all telecom carriers have to pay more for content than do the cable and satellite competitors because of the vertical integration that exists in the linear cable programming services. So, if telecom companies have to pay high prices for local stations, the cost of the bundle for the consumer gets so high that the bundled price is no longer competitive with cable. I don’t have a solution to offer, but this issue is only going to grow in importance. Broadcasters and telecom operators are going to be embroiled in this issue in 2008 in a big way. It will be an even hotter topic by NAB2008.
It’s time to end this email but stay tuned for more of my musing coming to your inbox in a few days. I encourage you to send me your thoughts on NAB2007.
Don’t forget to check out the PowerPoint™ presentations from the Telecom@NAB2007 Technology Papers.
And before I forget, view our complimentary archived webinars Scaling Your IPTV Service Delivery sponsored by Kasenna and first webinar, sponsored by IneoQuest.
Abelism #5:
Network-Based DVRs: A huge opportunity for carriers! Several years ago, I was constantly searching for the latest and greatest telephone answering machine that I could find. And nearly 10 years ago I gave up on finding the best answering machine and went with a service from Verizon called (at the time) “Answer Call.” It’s a service that has various options, but the basic functionality of Answer Call was to replace the poor quality, difficult to use, answering machines that I had before. I paid for the service and I don’t really know how much I paid for it. My wife and I used the service multiple times each day. Now, about 18 months ago, I also signed up for Iobi from Verizon. Iobi is not perfect, but I love it. Iobi integrated the old “Answer Call” service into an entirely new and expanded service. I can hear my voicemails in a variety of formats, the voicemail service is integrated with my email, I can change forwarding rules and other features online…it is wonderful. I use it everyday…without fail. Again, I don’t know how much I’m paying for this service, but I think it’s about $10 per month.
Currently, I have seven DVRs in my home; four of them that are integrated with Motorola STBs for Verizon’s FiOS TV service and three of them are DVR software programs running on computers where I can schedule recordings ahead of time…a poor man’s DVR. Since Tivo was first introduced, I’ve had three of them, some of them standalone and some of them packaged with services that I’ve had from DirecTV. My wife is the biggest user of DVR technology. She loves it. I’d love it more, but it requires too much planning on my part. So, I rarely use it, even though I am constantly looking for new features in DVR technology. Four of the DVRs (the ones in the STBs) I’m paying an extra fee to Verizon to enjoy the DVR technology…or, at least so my wife can enjoy the DVR features.
Frankly, I think both my wife and I would use DVR technology even more if it were part of the network service (or what is now referred to as nDVRs) and not part of the device. To me, it seems quite similar to the old answering machine dilemma…a new answering machine came on the market every six months. Now, a new DVR is on the market every six months, or Tivo adds a new bell or whistle. I just want the service; I don’t care much for the device and I’d rather that the service be bundled in with other services. If the DVR is bundled in with the service and is not a device in my home, then I will likely have fewer problems. No device to act up, have a glitch when it is updated over the network, or has other hiccups. It’s about the same concept as voicemail on an answering machine except now it is video and not just voice alone.
So, it seems to me that the biggest opportunity in IPTV-land for the immediate future is to work out all of the business and technical kinks to have network-based DVRs (or nDVRs). The business issues, I’m certain, revolve around copyright and content ownership. The technical issues are probably easier to solve through brute force. In my view, the carriers should be putting more pressure on suppliers to solve the storage, retrieval and searching capabilities so that content can be recovered quickly for customer access. The immediate result is that telecom-based video services WITH nDVRs will then be able to leapfrog cable and satellite providers and make a real challenge to the consumer electronics industry.
Perhaps one way to address the business and copyright issue is to make the nDVR content only available for a limited period of time. For example, the past 7 days of everything is always available on the network and other content older than 7 days might be available only on the web site maintained by the carrier and only for an additional fee.
Another benefit of carrier-provided nDVR services is that once the service is built into the network there is no need to pay for devices that might go into the home and then pass along the device costs to the consumer. Theoretically, it should mean that a nDVR service ultimately will yield a higher margin and return than using a device in the home. And it is easier to repair a service than it is to constantly repair the customer’s device-based DVR when most of those “repair calls” are not really repairs at all but result in a truck roll because the consumer does not know how to use the device. Using a service is easier to explain over the phone than is “fixing” a box over the phone.
I might want to use this kind of nDVR service to do “catch up” viewing where I can catch up with a few things that I missed in the past 12 hours or so, or recent sporting events that I missed in the “live” mode, or the local news that I missed only minutes ago, or last night’s David Letterman. Some of these things are available on the web and undoubtedly more will be available on the web in the future. The opportunity for carriers may be only be a small window of opportunity until all of the “nDVR functionality” resides on the web. I’d like for carriers to give the nDVR more business and technical attention; I think it is a huge opportunity for IPTV providers.
And speaking of nDVR technologies… Scaling IPTV Service Delivery: Understanding Tier 2 Telco Requirements When Modeling IPTV Deployment Strategies, and Infrastructure Necessities I want to draw your attention to a free webinar that Kasenna conducted for us as a result of Telecom@NAB2007. Kasenna was one of our sponsors at the event and agreed to do this webinar on Scaling IPTV Service Delivery. There is no fee to view the archived webinar …it includes the audio of the webinar and the data images.
Kasenna bills themselves as “The IPTV Company™.”
I highly recommend this webinar. It is one of the best, if not THE best webinar that I have ever seen/heard on IPTV. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that it is THE best webinar on IPTV that I’ve seen/heard that focuses almost entirely on business issues…the Kasenna webinar is non-technical in nature. The web seminar has three sections:
The first section reviews a benchmark test that was done by Intel and HP with Kasenna. This section is presented by Allan Linden of Kasenna. Although you might think this section would be highly technical, but it is not. This section tackles the issue of how many servers it would take to serve 1 million subscribers. The answer is in Kasenna’s presentation.
The second section of this webinar is called “The Business Case for IPTV” and is presented by Doug Hilmes, VP of Solution Sales at Kasenna. This section is really, really great at identifying the business issues and assumptions for the Tier 2 carrier preparing a business plan for IPTV.
And the third and final section is about “Scaling Telco Video Programming” presented by Steve Curran, VP of Biz Dev for Kasenna. This section is all about CONTENT.
View this complimentary archived webinar Scaling Your IPTV Service Delivery sponsored by Kasenna and four irst webinar, sponsored by IneoQuest.
And speaking of webinars….if your company has an interest in reaching the telecom service provider marketplace, you should consider sponsoring a webinar through my company Lightbulb Communications. Webinars truly are a cost effective way to reach your target market. Please contact Sean Sullivan at ssullivan@lightbulb-communications.com for more information on our webinar program.
Turning Off Television Broadcasting: I don’t really mean it! I don’t mean turning off television broadcasting forever. What I’m referring to here is the end of the current analog standard for television broadcasting, called the National Television Standards Committee (NTSC) TV standard. This standard was the original TV broadcast standard set in the 1940’s and updated throughout the years to include color, stereo TV, etc.
It’s about 630 days until February 18, 2009 and this will be an important day because it will be the first day when there will no longer be any (NTSC) standard television broadcasts in the United States. All NTSC broadcasting in the U.S. is supposed to be turned off on February 17, 2009. Although the broadcast transmitters will be turned off, many old analog TV sets will remain in operation…or at least those that own those analog TV sets will want them to continue operating for another “X” number of years. That’s the problem…turning off the TV broadcast transmissions is a relatively easy thing to do (even though fraught with many political and business issues), but what about all of those analog TV sets in consumer’s homes? How many of those TV sets ONLY receive an over-the-air signal? Well, the best estimate by the government will be about 30 million analog TV sets that are not connected to cable or satellite or a telecom video service provider…that is, those 30 million only have rabbit ear antennas or an outdoor (or attic-based) antenna.
Why is this issue important to telecom carriers? Because every telecom carrier out there that is providing a video service is likely to be called by customers in 2009 and the customers will wonder why some TV sets (in a multi-set home) work and others do not.
In a time earlier in my life…like about 15 years ago, I would have said that NTSC will NEVER be turned off in the U.S….at least in my lifetime, but it appears that this might happen. My cynical friends tell me that I should still be saying that it will never happen because it will be very, very disruptive in the marketplace. Frankly, I’m less certain now that it will be that disruptive, but there are bound to be some big or little blips that could become bigger headaches for cable, satellite and telecom carriers providing video services. More about this later…
The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 was enacted on February 8, 2006. Title III of this Act sets the digital television transition for February 17, 2009 and allocated up to $1.5 billion (of U.S. Government funds) for a digital-to-analog converter box program to be administered by the Department of Commerce (DOC). You can learn more about this government subsidy program at www.dtv.gov. Just to be clear, the government will be giving coupons for consumers to purchase digital to analog converter boxes so that those old analog TV sets can receive the new digital transmissions of DTV.
After February 17, 2009 all television broadcasts will be digital. If the consumer’s TV set is connected to cable or satellite or a telecom carrier providing video services, then the consumer should continue to receive service on their analog TV set if it is connected to the set top box installed by the service provider. On the other hand, if the consumer’s analog TV set is connected to rabbit ears or to an outside antenna and has no converter box (to convert digital broadcasts to analog), then the TV set will no longer work.
The $1.5 billion is for a digital-to-analog converter box program. In short, this program provides that beginning on January 1, 2008 every household in America can request up to two coupons from the government to use toward the purchase of the converters. I should point out that NOT all converters are covered by the government subsidy, only plain old vanilla converters with no bells or whistles on them. For example, if the converter is built into a DVR or some other device, then it does not qualify for the coupons. Each coupon is worth $40 and coupons will expire 90 days after they are issued.
Again, my cynical broadcast friends tell me that I should be betting that this changeover won’t happen….that analog NTSC broadcasts will continue far into the future in the U.S. I’m not so sure. For one thing, the broadcasters themselves have supported this conversion. I’m not entirely sure why it is in their business interests to support this conversion, although I can see why it is in their political interests to do so.
There is an entire team of people at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (part of the DOC) that are in charge of this program. Two of the leaders of this project are former colleagues of mine, Anita Wallgren with whom I worked at Geocast Network Systems and Bernie McGuire, with whom I worked at the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB). Both of them are very capable executives and if any executives can make the coupon program work, it is Anita and Bernie.
I think the analog to digital converter boxes were on display at NAB2007 in Las Vegas, although I did not see them there. However, I did have the chance to see a prototype box that was built by LG and I saw it in operation here in the Washington metro area. It works. And, it had a couple of side benefits that were not obvious to me until I saw it in action.
The first benefit of the converter box is that if the digital broadcast signal is available, the quality of the picture on the analog TV set is much better than is the analog NTSC picture on the same set. The box is receiving a digital signal and seems to have far less noise and eliminates some of the multipath and interference…so, the picture is much better IF the box can adequately receive a digital signal. On the other hand, if the converter box does NOT receive a very good signal, then it will display a highly pixilated, highly blocked, messed up picture that is NOT as easily watched as the old analog picture where you are looking at some fuzz but can still see pictures and hear audio. There were significant audio dropouts when the digital reception was not solid…in the little test that I observed.
The second benefit is that the converter box receives the additional multicast channels. For example, two Washington stations carry additional weather services on their digital service as additional video services. If you can receive the digital signal, then these other multicast video channels are receivable through the converter box onto the old analog sets. Of course, these additional digital services must be video based services (as opposed to data services intended for a PC or other intelligent device, as an example). The consumer benefit is that for each digital channel that can be received with their converter box, then theoretically they can receive more video services.
One other benefit of the LG converter box that I saw was that it had a connection for a smart antenna…an antenna that takes in information and reorients itself to the best reception.
So, what’s the problem? Here’s what I see as the issues:
1. I frankly don’t know how many consumers are familiar with this converter box program. But, in general, I just do not think that consumers are very interested in having someone mess around with their TV service. Consumers won’t like it because it sounds pretty complicated to obtain the coupons, then go online or to a store and get the right converter box, then take the converter box and connect it to another antenna and their old TV set. And the consumer must do this for EACH old TV set that is not connected to a telecom, cable or satellite video service provider.
2. This has changed some for my own home now because I’m a FiOS video customer, but before FiOS I had both satellite and cable, BUT I did not have all analog TV sets connected to either satellite or cable. And I had more than two analog sets that were not connected to cable. In this case, I’d have a problem. Multi-set homes will be a problem, I think. One day all TV sets are working, the next day only those connected to a video services provider will work.
3. Consumers, once confused, are going to try to get some solutions. Who will they call? Well, their first try might be to call the local TV stations. I can tell you that local TV stations are NOT set up to take a large number of calls from consumers. Currently, TV stations do not have call centers, they do not have customer service reps - TV station employees do not deal with the consuming public regarding TV reception. The most likely answer that a consumer would get by calling a TV station regarding their reception is that they will be told to call their local cable company (or maybe a satellite company). The first point here is that broadcasters should be getting ready to take these calls; they also need an on-air campaign to educate consumers on the availability of the converter boxes, etc. But consumers hear many messages, will this one really stick? I think there could be massive dissatisfaction and many phone calls to TV stations on February 18, 2009. (Just as an aside…who are the customers of TV stations? The customers of TV stations are advertisers. The end users, the viewers, are not the direct customers. This is totally different with cable, telecom companies and satellite providers.)
4. Consumers will also likely be calling their cable, satellite and telecom companies. I am telling you now that if you are a video services provider, please get ready to see an increase in call volume around February 2009. (Fortunately, this cut-off of analog TV in 2009 is after the 2009 Super Bowl.) And you will need an answer for the consumer. This may be a huge opportunity for cable, satellite and telecom companies…get ready for it if you are not already doing so. Perhaps one solution is to offer specials to connect ALL sets in a home to your video service before February 2009 rolls around.
In closing…my cynical side tells me that this coupon program has so many moving parts that it is bound to have glitches or widespread abuse (one electronics retailer gets $300 million in bogus coupons, for example). Also my cynical side tells me that the consuming public may be very annoyed at this entire plan to push them over to the digital TV side. They might write and/or call their congressmen and senators. They might be very angry, but at least it comes after the November 2008 election.
Japan is waiting to see what happens here. The Japanese plan to turn off their analog NTSC in 2011. It’s probably smart to wait and see what happens here.
It’s time to end this email but stay tuned for more of my musing coming to your inbox in a few days. I encourage you to send me your thoughts on NAB2007.
Don’t forget to check out the PowerPoint™ presentations from the Telecom@NAB2007 Technology Papers.
And before I forget, view our complimentary archived webinars Scaling Your IPTV Service Delivery sponsored by Kasenna and first webinar, sponsored by IneoQuest.
The I-Me-My Digital Syndrome About 15 years ago there was a popular marketing concept called “marketing to one.” This concept makes sense but I wonder if this really was a marketer’s concept or the result of being on the road to digital. What has happened to us as we have moved along the road to digital?
Digital technology has made most technologies and digital services less expensive, it has made telecom and media companies much more efficient and it has made us all very self-centered because now we expect to be marketed to me.
I think the transition to digital has been about “me”…the many “me’s” out there…not about me, John Abel, personally. One of my friends says that the transition to digital has made us all feel more immortal than we really are largely because our customized and personalized digital lifestyles will live on after us…in some cases for a long time.
But let me give you just a few examples and the examples here are endless…
Tivo and DVRs/PVRs have taken a mass medium like television and made it “my TV.” Mobile phone technology and especially digital mobile phone technology has made phones (personal communicators) that are very inexpensive and it has made it into “my phone”…my personal communicator. The home phone that is connected to a landline is “the phone.” But when my mobile phone rings, those around me say “your phone is ringing” or I say “is that my phone ringing?” It’s my phone with my number and my ring tone and my ringback tone. It’s my address book in that phone and on MY laptop…which is MY computer. It’s MY music on MY ipod (even all of the Apple ipod, itunes, ilife marketing is about the “I”). My movies are available through my VOD service. On MY computer, it is MY Documents, MY email, My buddies on MY IM. It’s MY games, MY home page, MY blog, MY Space, MY social network, MY content (as in MY news, MY sports, MY stock quotes, etc.). On MY watch I have the MSN Direct service that permits me to customize MY service so that I get sports game scores of interest to ME, MY horoscope, my weather for my area, movie listing near MY home. My watch is also a medium. On my computer if something does not work, the computer suggests that I contact “your network administrator.”
Digital technology permits me to personalize and customize nearly everything in my immediate media/personal communication environment. And if I cannot customize and personalize the content or features on digital devices or in digital services, I am beginning to think they are out of date and/or are not relevant to me.
And there are an equally large number of examples where the old media tend to hang on to things long past their usefulness, but it is hard to change. Some examples:
Why is it that many daily newspapers (if not most daily newspapers) print ALL of the stock quotations from yesterday’s closing market? No one is interested in all stock quotes and hardly anyone is interested in old stock quotes since yesterday’s closing prices are easily accessed or pushed to me on my phone, my watch, my personalized Yahoo page or several other alternatives. Why waste the newsprint to print all of these outdated stock quotes each day? Every now and then the Washington Post makes attempts at reducing these stock listings, but I guess they get complaints from some readers who are loyal readers of these quotes. Or, they need to justify the size of the paper in pages to make sure that advertising in the Post is still attractive. And why do nearly all daily newspapers do this?…print nearly exactly the same stock quotation information? Seems weird to me…but there are other equally weird things to me in the media world.
Why does the cable industry continue to fight against a la carte pricing? Well, I’m not so stupid as to not be aware of why a la carte pricing is an anathema to a subscription based service. BUT, it seems to me that this is largely a vestige of the past…the past technical model of cable that was built on the broadcast model (send all channels down a pipe and let the end user select what they want to watch even if they don’t watch all channels), or a vestige of the cable programming model (“well, if you want cable channel X on your system you will have to take cable channels A, B and C”)…the bundling of the content has been important to the cable industry. The cable industry argues quite effectively that if they move away from the basic subscription fee or tiered fees, then many struggling cable services will wither and die before they get started. Yes, that’s true…sort of what’s called the “marketplace.” But, the Internet world is the ultimate a la carte system…I can get most of what I want when I want it…not always legally, but I can get it and my expectation for the future is that I will, indeed, be able to get everything that I want when I want it. And does anyone in the cable industry think that they will jump backwards in time when these packages of programming will make more sense on a subscription basis than a la carte pricing? The consumer is king here…I only want my content…not all of this other stuff that I don’t watch.
This seems to me to be a big attraction for the future of telecom-provided video services and IPTV. But the telecom companies had better move quickly to get to a la carte pricing on their IPTV networks…and this might be difficult to do given the stranglehold that the cable industry has on the best programming and programming “bundles.”
If the next version of Internet Protocol (IPv6) really takes off and broadband continues to grow at the pace that it has been growing for the past five years, then the cable (and satellite) subscription model (as it historically has been applied) has to be in jeopardy. And the consumer will force a move to a la carte pricing and telecom companies could be in the vanguard of this movement through their IPTV deployments.
Digital Technology Has Killed Real Time Another way in which digital technology (and digital media devices) has moved us to be more self-centered is that the devices have moved us to expect more in non-real time. In fact, perhaps this has been the biggest impact of computer-based technology…it has helped to destroy time as an important element. I do not need to be present for an appointment at 9:00 p.m. on Monday night to catch this week’s ER or Desperate Housewives. In today’s non-real time world, I know that these programs are available from a variety of digital sources…DVRs, online, on network web sites, etc. And there is really almost nothing on television that requires real time viewing except for live sporting events and maybe some live news shows. It really does not matter if I see Lost on Sunday night or Wednesday night or at 3:00 a.m. on Tuesday morning. There is not much digital content at all that requires real time…I just need the content to be available from a variety of digital sources. Access is more important than is the time of the access.
The cheapening of the time element spills over to other parts of our lives. We rarely have real time phone conversations…so, voice, email, faxing, the web, computers, intelligent devices all can let us escape time. We’re all busy, but time does not matter much anymore…that’s one reason why no meetings ever start on time and rarely do they end on time unless you are fortunate to have a “meeting dictator” in charge. People walk in and out of meetings…when they are in meetings they are doing the “Blackberry Prayer” and checking their non-real time email and listening to voicemail messages. My sense is that people do not really like to conform to “meeting time”…they’d much rather work on their own time. I think digital technology and non-real time devices (like computers) have led us here. I like it, but it makes me wonder if devices like TV sets, which are largely dumb terminals with no memory or intelligence have much of a future. They certainly have no future unless other devices or networks can store the content and have the intelligence in them to make television bearable and viewable on my terms.
Again, I think intelligence in the network is a huge opportunity for telecom companies. And another point from my ramblings above…no telecom company can go wrong by enabling the consumer or user to customize and personalize the services and content that ride on these networks. Choice, control, customization, personalization…these are the mantras of this century. This perspective, I think, has huge implications for the future of the telecom industry.
Yet the vestiges of the “old” networks continue to prevail. For me, one of the great benefits of VoIP service is that I have considerable control over the features and benefits that I can get and I can provision nearly all of those features and benefits on the web. I do not have to deal with a customer service representative that really knows very little about MY use of the services. The attraction of VoIP is not the pricing…it is the ability to provision and change my personal settings and “customize” the service to my needs.
Wireless is from the Old World Probably a bigger vestige of the old world is that at least in the U.S. the wireless carriers control the devices. Gosh this sounds very much like the old AT&T before Carterphone in the late 1960s. “You can’t just put any device on our network…” Where would we be today if all phones, fax machines, modems, and all of the other devices that we hang onto the network were provided by one company? We know one thing for certain, they’d all be black. There are many legitimate historical reasons for the wireless carrier control of the devices, but these reasons are getting thinner and thinner as the consumer/user becomes more sophisticated. The customer wants more. The phones available to us in the U.S. tend to be among the most outdated in the world. It’s embarrassing if you’re in the telecom field to go to Europe or Asia and use your device in the presence of local telecom professionals. Europeans tend to have services, features and wireless devices that are cutting edge long before we have them here in the U.S.
Here’s my prediction on this last point… The current situation will change and it might change much more than wireless carriers ever imagined. The venture capital community is once again getting very interested in wireless. Technology companies in Silicon Valley are working on all kinds of new ideas with respect to video and broadband wireless applications. Many more people today are talking about the Carterphone decision and whether it applies to wireless. If a device is built to a specification, why can’t that device be placed into service on the wireless network? That’s the argument and I’ve heard it from my Silicon Valley friends at least three times in the past month.
Digital to Analog Converters – A Post Script In last week’s Abelisms I mentioned the digital to analog converter boxes that will be available through a government subsidy program to assist in the turning off of analog television. Well, yesterday’s New York Times (the June 7 edition) had an article on this topic called “Converters Signal a New Era for TVs.” You might want to check it out.
It’s time to end this email but stay tuned for more of my musing coming to your inbox in a few days. I encourage you to send me your thoughts on NAB2007.
Don’t forget to check out the PowerPoint™ presentations from the Telecom@NAB2007 Technology Papers.
And before I forget, view our complimentary archived webinars Scaling Your IPTV Service Delivery sponsored by Kasenna and first webinar, sponsored by IneoQuest.
My Wireless World, Part 1 Wireless – I’m a big fan of wireless devices of all kinds…so much so that I cannot put all of it in one edition of Abelism…so, I’m starting a series on wireless services and devices and I’m kicking off on wireless mobile video as a service. Just as a teaser, I have four or five (depending upon how you count them) wireless phone and data devices that I carry…more on these devices and the services and how I improved the mobile phone reception in my home in future editions…
In an earlier edition of Abelism, I mentioned that I was an early-on subscriber to Verizon’s original V cast™ service. But, I quickly found out that I do not use it very much and it is extremely painful for the videos to load on my phone. I do watch some video on my phone, but it tends to be the video that I’ve shot or some video that someone has sent to me.
I’m very skeptical of mobile video as a business. Perhaps I’m in the wrong demographic to really get the attraction of mobile video, but mobile video is not very pleasant to me. First, you really can’t watch it outside because there is too much glare. Second, it’s a small screen. Third, if it’s on my phone screen, and my phone screen is messy... Fourth, you can’t really watch mobile video in public places (like a restaurant) because you then need a wired or wireless headset. Fifth, and perhaps most importantly, mobile video on the phone chews up the battery life. When I was using the V cast™ service I was constantly thinking that if I use the V cast™ service much more my battery will be dead and I can’t use the phone for what I really wanted to use it for…VOICE and DATA. So, maybe I download a movie to my wireless device and then watch it on the plane? I don’t think so because when I get to my destination, the phone is out of battery life.
Now, if the service provider gave me live sporting events…like live broadcasts of the Redskins games, then I’d use it when I have to run errands on Sunday afternoon and I’d probably pay something for that service. But, to watch clips of Redskins games on a phone????...I’d rather watch them online with a computer.
I’d like to hear the numbers on what Fox or Disney generate each month in revenue from mobile videos…you know what I mean…the videos for which I pay extra of about $1.50 or $1.99 each. My sense is that the revenue here is very small…maybe I’m wrong, but that’s what I think.
Video on the phone? Again, maybe I’m in the wrong demographic, but it is my view that young people will love video on the phone, BUT it will be the video that they shoot or their friends shoot and send to them, not the slick stuff from large content providers like Disney, Time Warner, etc. The slick video needs to be consumed on a larger screen…at least that’s the way that I see it.
But, there’s lots of hype about the iPhone and it looks now like the iPhone will be a financial success, but don’t count me among one of the users. I won’t be getting one of these for obvious reasons: (a) it’s $600, (b) it’s only available on Cingular/AT&T and I don’t receive that signal in my home (I’ll go into this detail more in a future Abelism), (c) there is NO removable battery, (d) there is no keyboard (only an onscreen version), (e) there is no direct access to an Exchange Server, (f) it’s from Apple and Apple will take over my life. You are either in the Apple “lifestyle” completely or you are not. I have an iPOD and like it but it’s all proprietary to Apple…including all of the Apple DRM and file protocols. I keep thinking that I should junk the iPOD and go back to generic MP3s to get to a simpler life. The iPhone is probably not likely to be a device to use in the enterprise…so, here’s my prediction: the iPhone launch will be financially successful and some unknowing business executives will get this device and then find out that there is no push email service available from an Exchange Server and only THEN will Apple introduce the $1,000 business version of the iPOD.
I’ve had other problems with Apple. For example, Apple is supposed to be great at customer service. But, here’s been my experience. I downloaded and paid for a music video to put on my iPOD. I did it and it worked for several months UNTIL Apple asked me to upgrade the iTunes on my machine and on the iPOD. When I made these “upgrades” the music video became corrupted and I can hear the music but the picture is corrupted. I contacted Apple and they had me unload and reload on the “dedicated” iTunes machine…and the video is still corrupted. And Apple stopped helping me even though I’ve submitted new requests for assistance.
Call me a curmudgeon. Others seem to be waiting and panting for the iPhone…so we’re doing an audio conference on this with Cynthia Brumfield of Emerging Media Dynamics. This event will take place on July 10 at 2 p.m. EDT. This event is not just about the iPhone and is called “Mobile Video in the iPhone Era: Let the Boom Begin.” We have secured some great speakers, including Ryan Hughes, VP of Digital Media Content for Verizon Wireless and Bob Shallow, VP of the Mobile Entertainment Group for Gemstar-TV Guide. Here’s the link to see more about this audio conference and to REGISTER http://www.ipmediamonitor.com/conferences.htm?id=7. Cynthia is determined to have me eat crow over the iPhone (how could I have four phone/data devices and no iPhone???). So, you agree with me that Mobile Video is a bust? If so, tune into this audio conference and we’ll be proven wrong. Disagree with me that Mobile Video is a bust? Then tune into this audio conference to see how right you really are.
NAB Show in 2008 and the DTV Coupon Program NAB Show in 2008 -- Several of you have asked about what’s happening at the NAB Show in 2008 on telecom and whether Lightbulb is doing the same telecom program that we did at NAB 2007. The answer is: yes, we are doing telecom conference content at NAB 2008. For now, we’re cleverly calling it “Telecom@NAB2008,” but the name will probably change. The focus will be on video, broadband video, IPTV, and mobile video provided by telecom carriers. We will issue a call for papers in September or October for the telecom technology papers conference and we plan an even bigger focus on IPTV and broadband video. Reserve these dates on your calendar for the NAB Show in 2008: April 14 through 17, 2008 in Las Vegas.
DTV Coupon Program -- In a previous Abelism I talked about the government DTV coupon subsidy program for the digital to analog converter boxes that will be required (if you have an old analog TV set) as of February 2009. Well, there’s an additional TEMPORARY job in this for someone since NTIA (part of the Department of Commerce) has announced another position to administer the coupon program. Check it out.
My Wireless World…Part II.
I love wireless devices and wireless phones. As of today, I have four or five…depending how you count them…and that’s just for me, I’m not including devices for other members of my family. Pardon me if I sound self-centered on these wireless devices…that’s not my intent. I’m hoping that if I share my experience with a few devices it might help you and others who are interested in wireless. Currently, I carry the following:
Mobile 5 seems to work better on the Q than it does on the PPC6700. I suspect this is due to the different and more current processor in the Q. In general, the Q is much faster than the PPC6700 and I find it easier to use.
The Wing has Mobile 6 and the Q and the PPC have Mobile 5. There is not much difference as far as I can tell between Mobile 6 and Mobile 5, but Mobile 6 on the Wing is definitely faster than Mobile 5 on the Q and on the PPC6700. Mobile 5 has frozen several times on the PPC6700 (the device requires a soft reset about once per day). The Q requires a reset about once per month. The Wing has not required a reset yet, but I’ve only had it for about two weeks.
The push of the email on the Wing is far superior to what is on the PPC6700 and maybe just slightly better than it is on the Q.
The Service/Coverage: Verizon vs. Sprint vs. T-Mobile vs. AT&T In general, in my view, the Verizon wireless service and coverage is better than any others but the biggest reason that I say this is that the Verizon signal in my home is stronger than is the signal from Sprint or AT&T/Cingular. And no matter where I travel in the U.S. on business, I almost always have acceptable to outstanding Verizon Wireless service. I am not a big fan of Cingular/AT&T. When I had two phones on Cingular about 4 years ago I had more dropped calls than on any other service. And I just do not get a decent Cingular/AT&T wireless signal in my home…in fact, the Cingular/AT&T signal is practically non-existent. Now, the AT&T network may have improved in recent years but at least that was my experience 4 years ago. I also do not get a very strong Sprint signal in my home. The T-Mobile signal level in my home is at least as good as what I get from Verizon.
EV-DO is much faster than is EDGE and GPRS but EDGE works fine for email. I don’t know if I have EV-DO (REV A) available to me or not, but the EV-DO service has been great since I first signed up for it maybe 4 years ago and it has only gotten better over the years.
Personally, I rarely use these devices to access the Internet; I prefer to use a computer when accessing the Internet. Again, perhaps I’m in the wrong demographic, but accessing the Internet on such a small device that is not connected to high speed broadband is too painful.
Improving Mobile Signal Reception in My Home (800MHz and 1900MHz) |
