death of the net predicted by deloitte -- film at 11

Mon Feb 12 03:21:22 UTC 2007

On Feb 11, 2007, at 4:22 PM, Geo. wrote:

>
>
>> do what google is presumably doing (lots of fiber), or would they put
>> some capital and preorder into IDMR?
>
> IDMR is great if you're a broadcaster or a backbone, but how does  
> it help the last 2 miles, the phoneco ATM network or the ISP  
> network where you have 10k different users watching 10k different  
> channels? I'm not sure if it would help with a multinode  
> replication network like what google is probably up to either  
> (which explains why they want dedicated bandwidth, internode  
> replication solves the backup problems as well).

I terms of available HD content, you're far more likely to face  
10,000 customers whatching 1,000 different channels, and,
there will likely be some clustering.  In that case, IDMR will help a  
lot with the exception of the last 2 miles, where, the
amount of bandwidth available to the home will probably remain the  
limiting factor for some time in the US.

I places where MAE is a common household network delivery mechanism,  
this is less of a factor.  I think it will
probably take the US a decade or so to get to where much of Europe  
and Japan is today.

>
> Also forgetting that bandwidth issue for a moment, where is the  
> draw that makes IPTV better than cable or satellite?  I mean come  
> on guys, if the world had started out with IPTV live broadcasts  
> over the internet and then someone developed cable, satellite, or  
> over the air broadcasting, any of those would have been considered  
> an improvement. IPTV needs something the others don't have and a  
> simple advantage is that of an archive instead of broadcast medium.  
> The model has to be different from the broadcast model or it's  
> never going to fly.
>
IPTV today isn't an improvement, much as VOIP 5 years ago had nothing  
to offer over POTS.
Today, VOIP is rapidly gaining popularity even though the  
differentiators for it are small because
it does provide some cost savings in some cases.

As IPTV and especially HD IPTV starts to mature, and, as users begin  
to reclaim fair use and
space/time/device shifting rights that are theirs under the copyright  
act and take back what
the MPAA and RIAA continue to try to block, the rapid and convenient  
sharing of content,
the reduced cost of delivery to the content providers, and, other  
factors will eventually cause
IPTV to present an improvement over today's existing unidirectional  
services.

Today IPTV is in its infancy and is strictly a novelty for early  
adopters.  As the technology
matures and as the market develops an understanding of the  
possibilities creating pressure
on manufacturers and content providers to offer better, it will  
gradually become compelling.

> TIVO type setup with a massive archive of every show so you can not  
> only watch this weeks episode but you can tivo download any show  
> from the last 6 years worth of your favorite series is one heck of  
> a draw over cable or satellite and might be enough to motivate the  
> public to move to a different service. A better tivo than tivo. As  
> for making money, just stick a commercial on the front of every  
> download. How many movies are claimed downloaded on the fileshare  
> networks every week?
>
There are lots of ways to make money.  Personally, I think the long- 
term winning model
will be something similar to Netflix with IP replacing the USPO at  
layers 1-4.  Other
models will certainly be tested and probably some of them will  
succeed, too.  However,
Netflix without the postal delays or logistics could be compelling,  
even if it were
1.5-2x the current Netflix pricing.  Realistically, we should get to  
a point in the technology
relatively soon where a movie can be shipped across the net for about  
the same
cost as postage today.

Owen