multicast (was Re: Readiness for IPV6)

Tue Jul 9 18:45:24 UTC 2002

Thus spake "Jeff Aitken" <jaitken at aitken.com>
> On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 11:49:11AM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> > Even worse, multicast is truly only suitable for live applications;
> > on-demand content can't be realistically mcasted, and users will not
> > settle for "the movie starts every 15 minutes"
>
> Just for the sake of argument I'll point out that this is exactly
> how DirecTV offers PPV movies... each of the 30-odd movies available
> for viewing in a given month are listed on one or more channels
> with defined start times.

Yes, that's the PPV model.  AT&T Broadband calls it "InDemand" since it's
probably fraud to call it "on demand".

Most hotels have VOD now, and that tells me consumer acceptance is better for
VOD but the technology just doesn't scale yet.

> Obviously this may not translate to on-demand movie streaming over
> the internet, but since DirecTV seems to be at least a little bit
> successful with this approach you may not want to be so quick to rule
> it out.

They're certainly successful with big events like the Tyson/Lewis fight, but how
much money does a PPV movie really bring in?  Obviously they wouldn't do it if
it were a total loser, but the cost to carry is near zero and $4.95/viewing is a
huge disadvantage vs. rentals.

> Whether people will pay money to watch movies streamed over the
> Internet (as opposed to traditional media such as cable or satellite)
> is an entirely different question, of course.

The question, of course, is whether the cost people are willing to pay will
cover the cost of providing the service.  Today, it's nowhere close.

S