Slashdot Mirror


Free Net TV Threatens Telecoms

An anonymous reader writes "C|Net's running an article about the threat free television on the internet poses to traditional telecoms and cable companies." From the article: "No one is expecting Internet television to cannibalize traditional TV models overnight. Despite advancements in streaming technology, video delivered on the Web can still be choppy, with frequent interruptions as data packets buffer and reload on the screen. In fact many viewers who watched the NCAA tournament aired by CBS on the Internet last month complained about the network being overloaded."

11 of 116 comments (clear)

  1. Same Old FUD by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Media barons come to power over the decades since that particular media's inception into society.

    A new technology comes along that threatens their iron grip on said media's distribution.

    The archaic dinosaurs do not know what to do so they spread FUD everywhere and turn to the law and lobbying for protection of their source of infinite wealth. They refuse to change to their environment and instead force the environment to change to them--a fatalistic attitude that hinders innovation and growth among other things.

    After all the dust settles, the end consumer (99.9% of the populace) is the one that misses out on what might have been.

    This story could be applied all the way back to printed text that was held from the commoners and slaves to hinder knowledge and understanding.

    It happened with music. It happened with videos. It's happening with television. And it will happen with everything because the people running the industries refuse to lose their power or adapt their production methods.
    "The times, they are a changing." - Bob Dylan
    How about we wake up and change the headline from
    Free Net TV Threatens Telecoms
    to
    Free Net TV to Replace Telecoms
    or
    Community Welcomes New Distribution Method of Telecoms
    We're eating out of the hands of a few select companies and with television over the internet, the fact is that we might not have to.
    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Same Old FUD by dsginter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A new technology comes along that threatens their iron grip on said media's distribution.

      I'm pretty sure that most of them realize that DRM is the Dark Horse in this situation. With DRM, then can add IP distribution to their cable boxes and DVD players in order to distribute their content in high-quality *before* it is slated to be viewed. That is, they can buffer the content while you sleep and work. It will be ready for you to watch when *they* want you to watch it - all on their terms.

      IMHO, DRM is going to be bitter sweet for the OSS community. Nobody seems to want it, yet, without it, there is no incentive for "the little guy" to make any real content. Sure, a few Honest Joes will pony up the cash for their content, but, in my experience, the rest of them will simply steal it.

      If OSS would consider DRM, then we could come up with a grass roots effort to displace Big Media (e.g. - pay the Little Guy for good content). The thing is, the sheer size of the viewership would make content *nearly* free (e.g. - 30 million viewers pay you 10 cents per episode and you are rich).

      The knife cuts both ways but we need to be pragmatic.

      OSS+DRM+cheap hardware & grassroots distribution and support = end of Big Business

      --
      More
    2. Re:Same Old FUD by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or more simply,

      "New technology threatens now-obsolete business models."

      This has been happening since the Industrial Revolution. The big difference is that now the old dinosaurs have enough sway in Congress that they can throw a wrench in the machine of the free market in order to sustain their existence without having to adapt to the new realities of the market.

      Companies whose existence rely on a 19th century means of distribution, which include all the media companies (books, newspapers, magazines, music, movies, even software), are being made obsolete. This will soon transform the music industry in a hugely positive way by allowing a more democratic method of distribution ("Down with Clear Channel!") which I think will revitalize a stale and non-innovate industry. Other media will follow.

      Right now you and your buddies playing music in a garage can, with a small investment of a few hundred dollars or so, record, master and produce music for sale. What happens when the same will be true for video... on-demand video... the blogosphere revolution hits television(?) This is asteroid hurtling towards the prehistoric-Earth of the media dinosaurs and they are scared stiff, because for the first time in decades, they will be forced to compete, innovate and adapt.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  2. Progress by mcai8rw2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As telecoms develops, any and all 'archaeic technologies' will eventually be replaced. This includes T.V. in its current form.

    This will not happen for a long time though, not until the connection speeds and data compression/quality manage to provide an equal to what is currently available.

    We can see slight shifts of emphasis now [in the U.K.] with legislation going about switching OFF analogue signals [soon-ish]. This leave just the digital environment. And as more and more of our entertainment goods goes to digital, we will find that the distinction between 'Telly' and 'computer' and 'phone' and 'dvd player'will dissolve till we have the grail of home medai management.

    --
    >>>Scanning for I.D.I.O.T.S. >>>
    >>>I.D.I.O.T.S. FOUND! >>>
  3. Us geeks already know the future .. by Entropy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    so why can't it get here already??

    ONE pipe to each home. Pure fiber. Multi gigabit standard.

    All data to and from the home, be it voice, audio, video, text, &c &c &c flow through that pipe.

    Airwaves free to use for mobile applications.

    GUH! Why can't the future just be here?
    [/rant]

    --
    The sea changes color, but the sea does not change.
    1. Re:Us geeks already know the future .. by dada21 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'll get blasted for this and called a troll, but my real opinion is that the distribution cartels (phone companies, cable companies and TV companies) don't want it to happen. They've controlled the system for too long, and they're fearful (rightfully so) of losing out to the smaller direct-caster. Broadcast (ie, not a la carte) is dying.

      The best way to let things progress is to stop holding to the old norms (regulations). Look at all the bandwidth set aside fo television and radio at 50,000 watts per frequency range. All that lovely bandwidth could be better prioritized with lower transmission power and WiFi or something similar. Even cell phone companies hold way too much bandwidth for the type of transmission used, it is crazy that EDGE/3G/whatever isn't even faster than it is today.

      I truly believe we'd see much more technology growth if we didn't hold to standards created 20, 30, 50 years ago. UHF and VHF should be dead, and HDTV along with it. If people want HD broadcasts, they could be better suited to a faster more localized version of the torrent protocol -- maybe set up by a few re-distro companies, maybe by amateurs, let competition bring it about.

      As for paying for it, I believe 5 second spots work just as well as 30 and 60 second spots. The rare times I watch public programming, I actually hear "brought to you by the McDonalds corporation" better than I hear a 30 or 60 second McD's spot.

  4. Satelite radio will die first by Danathar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Watch what happens to satelite radio...it will be a pre-cursor to what happens with video.

    I can already take my phone/PDA, load a streaming media player and stream virgin atlantic classic radio through my cell companies unlimited data services at 160Kbs. Take the audio mini-jack out of my PDA, add a power adapter so it does not drain the juice and I can plug that directly into my car stereo system. Presto! The collection of radio stations at broadband speeds are available via my car. On top of that, with 768Kb/s upstream from my cable modem I'm able to access via teh web my ENTIRE music collection at home and have it streamed to my car.

    I predict within 3 years (probably MUCH sooner) you will be able to buy a head unit for your car with either A) cell phone electronics on it or B) a cradle for your phone so the head unit can receive streaming audio from the internet.

  5. stream ripping by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Unless they limit the stream rate server side, it's trivial to rip any stream out of it's wrapper and download it at full speed.

    I always wondered why most sites don't take that basic precaution when they're providing non-downloadable streaming video. It really isn't a problem unless I'm forced to download the thing in real time... that's a bit painful, though not a showstopper.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  6. Its not really a threat... by zappepcs · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Its not really a threat, well unless you consider watching the profits go from big name studios to triple and quadruple play carriers a threat.

    Did we forget that tiered internet thingy? Yep. as soon as media shifts to all digital, we have a new set of pipers to pay. Instead of the old cable companies and commercials, it will be digital network providers and commercials PLUS the overhead of tiered network costs if you want to watch that with fewer commercials and in real time streaming.

    All of this posturing and lobbying is about capturing market, ensuring that investors will be happy in the future.

    Digital content is simply a different medium, and the big players, even the new ones, are not going to let it go for free. If they can't get advertising dollars for it, they will try to charge premium costs for access to it.

    One thing is for certain, you can bet that Hollywood, television networks, and other media content providers will be vying to pick consumer's pockets for a very long time indeed.

  7. Choppy Display by tansey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not like having a choppy picture is anything new. Back before cable was very popular, and 95% of consumers used only antennaes, static was everywhere. Reception was horrible at times, and yet still people used the technology. One of the major issues was that watching national stations was free while cable was very expensive. It's a trade off that people make between quality and cost, and they know that.

    Where that tradeoff comes in now is in time and attention. People like watching tv on the internet because it's the only thing they have to do, and the few sites that actually try commercials probably don't get as much viewer attention as a tv. People just minimize it and go do something else until the commercials are over. This is different than walking away from a TV, namely because there is no walking involved. People are lazy, yes, but they aren't lazy enough to not minimize a window.

    So in general, I would agree that free internet video will likely bring down the major broadcasters. It will take time of course, and things like poor bandwidth or resolution are definitely a hinderance right now, it's nothing we haven't seen before.

  8. Somebody's in denial... by TheNoxx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sounds kinda like, "These 'video disks' will never overtake our VHS format. Look at how big and expensive they are!"

    Ignoring the ground during the fall, eh TV execs?

    --
    Ex nihilo nihil fit.