Amazon steals Netflix mojo

[peteypete]

With the recent earnings announcements, it looks like it was a good bet for Tivo to go with Amazon Unbox vs. Netflix. for their downloadable movie source.

I really wish someone would drum up some rumors as to what's the backroom dramas are.

Tivo and Netfix used to be oh so close, with Ramsay on the board of Netflix. But now it looks like Amazon has gotten the mojo.

Any developments on Amazon web services and Tivo? Is DSwallow's app going to get more closely integrated?

When will Tivo roll out their own?

Stay tuned!!

[Justin Thyme]

Today, a USPS truck with hundreds of 4 gigabyte disks has more bandwidth than broadband cable.

I think Netflix simply decided that expanding the number of distribution centers neded in order to achieve near 1 day turnaround times delivered more bang for the buck. At this point, USPS can deliver bandwidth quickly, more cheaply, and to a much broader potential audience of compatible devices.

[ccooperev]

Today, a USPS truck with hundreds of 4 gigabyte disks has more bandwidth than broadband cable.

I think Netflix simply decided that expanding the number of distribution centers neded in order to achieve near 1 day turnaround times delivered more bang for the buck. At this point, USPS can deliver bandwidth quickly, more cheaply, and to a much broader potential audience of compatible devices.

Interesting analysis but you have to admit that there will be an endpoint to this. When very high data rates become commonplace e.g. 100mb/sec+ transfer speeds, then it becomes movies on demand instead of the whole mail and wait routine.

[HDTiVo]

The world is going streaming (http://hdtivo.wordpress.com/2007/04/26/more-internet-video-coming/) and Sling Media is the one to watch.

Buying TV episodes for $1.99 is going to remain a tiny niche.

Netflix is offering streamed movies.

You'll look back and see Sling and Netflix as big winners. Amazon will do fine, but TiVo will fade.

[rainwater]

The world is going streaming (http://hdtivo.wordpress.com/2007/04/26/more-internet-video-coming/) and Sling Media is the one to watch.

Buying TV episodes for $1.99 is going to remain a tiny niche.

Netflix is offering streamed movies.

You'll look back and see Sling and Netflix as big winners. Amazon will do fine, but TiVo will fade.

If streaming is the future, I won't to go back to the past. If Netflix can only deliver crappy streaming video to a PC, how is that going to work in the living room? Crappy content and crappy quality is not the future. Netflix is no closer to streaming high quality HD content than Amazon is.

[Stu_Bee]

If streaming is the future, I won't to go back to the past. If Netflix can only deliver crappy streaming video to a PC, how is that going to work in the living room? Crappy content and crappy quality is not the future. Netflix is no closer to streaming high quality HD content than Amazon is.

the Future is not what you see today.

[rainwater]

the Future is not what you see today.

You mean its in the future?

[MikeMar]

You mean its in the future?

you just blew my mind :eek:

-that and its vs it's :D

[wmcbrine]

Today, a USPS truck with hundreds of 4 gigabyte disks has more bandwidth than broadband cable.But oh, the latency!

[Justin Thyme]

Interesting analysis but you have to admit that there will be an endpoint to this. When very high data rates become commonplace e.g. 100mb/sec+ transfer speeds, then it becomes movies on demand instead of the whole mail and wait routine.
I suppose some NetFlix addicts will want me to shut up about this, but one of the nice things many folks like about getting a dvd is that they have noticed that without too much effort they can rip a Netflix DVD to disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:DVD_backup_software) and keep it for later viewing. This avoids the low resolution problem that Amazon Unbox videos currently have, and they can build up an immense movie library for practically nothing.

If content providers are behind Amazon's decision not to offer DVD quality downloads, then they should reconsider. Here's why.

Consumers can be counted on to take the path of least resistance. If they have a demand for a particular feature, that demand will be answered one way or another. If content owners answer that demand (eg allow Amazon to download DVD quality), then they are working in an environment where they retain control. If content owners choose to stonewall, then they squander their opportunity for control- and those ripped DVDs will find their way onto anonymous P2P and torrent networks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_P2P).

[mick66]

If streaming is the future, I won't to go back to the past. If Netflix can only deliver crappy streaming video to a PC, how is that going to work in the living room? Crappy content and crappy quality is not the future. Netflix is no closer to streaming high quality HD content than Amazon is.

I've watched several streamed netflix videos from the comfort of my living room chair thru my laptop without having to watch it on the laptops little lcd display. Many display items (monitors TVs projectors) can display both regular TV and computer content.

As for crappy content - 100% agreed. right now netflix has very crappy content for their 'watch now' feature.
As for crappy quality, everything starts somewhere and gets better.

[nhaigh]

Amazon will do fine, but TiVo will fade.

Why would you say that? Just because TiVo doesn't capture streaming Video from the Internet today doesn't mean it won't come. Sling Media haven't got their capture device to market yet either.

TiVo are well positioned already, broadband connected, TV connected and they can record from cable and TV as well. Adding streaming video to the TV set is not a big step for them and not inconsistent with their current direction.

[rainwater]

I've watched several streamed netflix videos from the comfort of my living room chair thru my laptop without having to watch it on the laptops little lcd display. Many display items (monitors TVs projectors) can display both regular TV and computer content.

As for crappy content - 100% agreed. right now netflix has very crappy content for their 'watch now' feature.
As for crappy quality, everything starts somewhere and gets better.

The problem is there's no way in the US to stream HD quality content to thousands or much less millions of users over the internet so they can watch in real-time. Besides the fact that it will be years before the US can handle that type of bandwidth over the internet, most users don't even have home routers able to transfer streaming data efficiently. I would agree that in-home streaming is the wave of the future (where you can stream a single source to multiple devices). But streaming directly from the internet is only one type of means users will get content. There is room for all types of delivery methods.

[TiVo Steve]

that Comcast doesn't cut you off for "excessive bandwidth usage"! :mad:

[Justin Thyme]

There is a disincentive for Cable to increase bandwidth to the door, but they obstruct at their peril.

An easy interim bypass would be to go to an internet cafe connected to their own T1 line, drop off an external drive, and pick up a month's worth of video that way.

Such tactics will only make it easier for Verizon Fios to encroach on Cable's turf.

[HDTiVo]

Such tactics will only make it easier for Verizon Fios to encroach on Cable's turf.

without too much effort they can rip a Netflix DVD to disk

When are you just going to buy one of these new Sun setups (http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6179355.html)?

it would take about 10 24-terabyte Thumper systems--few enough to fit into a single 6-foot rack--to hold Netflix's current 60,000-title library, Bechtolsheim said.

...

"In general, bandwidth does not seem to be a problem," he said. "The goal of these systems seems to be to deliver content within a 'walled garden' much like (Verizon's) Fios or (AT&T's) U-verse.

[HDTiVo]

I don't want to overemphasize streaming. Certainly, for example, Amazon has download rentals and Vongo has long term download rentals for a monthly subscription. Microsoft has HD downloads now. There will be plenty to download, but right now the action seems to be more in the streaming area.

Content owners seem to be getting comfortable quickly with the stream idea, and they are noticing their viewership is additive.

[rainwater]

I don't want to overemphasize streaming. Certainly, for example, Amazon has download rentals and Vongo has long term download rentals for a monthly subscription. Microsoft has HD downloads now. There will be plenty to download, but right now the action seems to be more in the streaming area.

Content owners seem to be getting comfortable quickly with the stream idea, and they are noticing their viewership is additive.

I think streaming is a huge market. However, I think the biggest advances will be streaming from inside your home to different devices (see Samsung's wireless displays that are coming later this year). That seems to be the biggest market. Streaming HD movies from over the internet to a single device in the home doesn't seem to have much of a market in the near future.

[mattack]

I suppose some NetFlix addicts will want me to shut up about this, but one of the nice things many folks like about getting a dvd is that they have noticed that without too much effort they can rip a Netflix DVD to disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:DVD_backup_software) and keep it for later viewing.

...and committing copyright infringement.

[mattack]

With the recent earnings announcements, it looks like it was a good bet for Tivo to go with Amazon Unbox vs. Netflix. for their downloadable movie source.

Heck no... Netflix is an "all you can eat" plan. If the Tivo/Unbox thing were that, then yeah I'd agree.

(I don't yet have my series 3 on the network. I did sign up for Unbox though.. Will my free $15 in downloads stay around?? I don't actually see a balance listed anywhere.)

[peteypete]

I think Tivo will eventually go with more than one movie provider.

Maybe another will provide some sort of subscription service, although I believe that Amazon is considering that.

About streaming.... I think that's in the future, but further off than you think. Quality is still not there. I also think that Tivo will benefit from streaming if they make the right decisions. I have a slingbox but i hardly use it. Cool technology, but kinda secondary at this point.

[rainwater]

Heck no... Netflix is an "all you can eat" plan. If the Tivo/Unbox thing were that, then yeah I'd agree.

Except there is nothing on the table to eat with their downloadable/streaming content. If TiVo went with them, it would be a waste since there is little the main TiVo audience would find to watch. Amazon offered to most content and a workable distribution system. Netflix has neither (their focus is on streaming so their distribution system wouldn't work with Tivos).

[peteypete]

Except there is nothing on the table to eat with their downloadable/streaming content. If TiVo went with them, it would be a waste since there is little the main TiVo audience would find to watch. Amazon offered to most content and a workable distribution system. Netflix has neither (their focus is on streaming so their distribution system wouldn't work with Tivos).

I'm not familiar with the Netflix streaming catalog. So is it fair to say that Netflix is still having difficulty securing rights from the studios for downloading/streaming?

[Justin Thyme]

...and committing copyright infringement.

Exactly my point. And folks making bathtub gin during prohibition were comitting felonies.

The point is that prohibition of legitimate download of dvd quality video does not prevent illegal copies of dvd quality video getting into the hands of people. In fact it does exactly the opposite.

It promotes it.

I'd like content owners to take the initiative against their self consuming fears and allow DVD quality copies of first rate films to be downloaded on Amazon Unbox.

[ZeoTiVo]

This is all simple really (though the business deals are way complex to put together= different story)

I have Netflix and can easily rip a DVD but have done that maybe 4 times in the past 18 months. Netflix lets me keep the DVD as long as I want on a subscription - no need to RIP :) Now if they said each DVD had to be back within a week - I would be ripping them like crazy

The content owners like streaming as they feel the content is safer that way plus right now streaming is a lower quality and has a low incentive to try and rip it off somehow. I use Netflix streaming to do things like play live concerts in my home office for background music. I watch some British TV shows (Invasion:earth) etc.. I like it because I can start a stream and know if I stop then I can pick it back up next week or whenever - no harm no foul all on a now with streaming added great deal of a subscription plan

the download options like MovieLink, Xbox and UNBOX have the ability to deliver better quality but the terms are so much like VOD or PPV as to not be worth it to me. The price per each transaction is too high and the time restrictions can not be circumvented and are truly cumbersome for me.
Having UNBOX on my TiVo and thus my TV is truly easy. For me, just like MP3s, I can ignore the quality issue on most of the media. It is the content owners restrictions such as only 24 hours to finish watching a rental once you start. It is the lack of a subscription plan that stops me from using it much. Susbsciptions can be done even on downloads like say 10 hours of download a month for 15$ or maybe for 30$ a month you can download unlimited but only have 6 hours of content on the device at any given time and have to delete something before the next download.

Quality will come with time and of course the content owners will be more possessive of better quality files. But what is really doing these download and streaming services in is the restrictions by content owners. If everyone just wanted VOD then Comcast would be nationwide ;).
Create a download service that mimics Netflix in terms of quality options and terms and your problems will be getting enough infrastructure as you will no longer have the problem of getting enough customers.

for now there is no other service out there that has taken the mojo from Netflix for me.

[Justin Thyme]

..for now there is no other service out there that has taken the mojo from Netflix for me.
I recieved 65GB of First rate HD video from netflix on a free trial yesterday. Deliver was in 36 hours from the time I clicked my selections. XBox's HD selection is not even B grade content.

I really don't see why I want B grade HD films that are few and far between off cable or satellite when I can use Netflix. Even if the cableco could match or surpass the selection and immediacy of choice of Netflix, their low bitrate HD is really pathetic compared to HD off of disk at full bitrates.

It seems to me the only way that Cable and satellite can compete for "real HD" delivery is to use DVRs to download them at non real time speeds at non peaktime hours.

Something they could easily get if they did a deal with Tivo, but heck. Then they would have to compete with Unbox on price.

Competition! Egads!

[rdrrepair]

I recieved 65GB of First rate HD video from netflix on a free trial yesterday. Deliver was in 36 hours from the time I clicked my selections.How did you get that deal? Do you sign-up on their site? What is the offer and how long does the free trial last?

[jckatz]

I've watched several streamed netflix videos from the comfort of my living room chair thru my laptop without having to watch it on the laptops little lcd display. Many display items (monitors TVs projectors) can display both regular TV and computer content.

As for crappy content - 100% agreed. right now netflix has very crappy content for their 'watch now' feature.
As for crappy quality, everything starts somewhere and gets better.

I disagree, people seem to get used to "CRAP" and then except it. Cell phones can download TV shows at 300 Kps yet, voice is transmitted at only 3-6 Kps (that is why you sound like crap even with 4 bars). Yet in America we have accepted that "quality" as standard and don't want or aren't willing to pay for higher quality audio.

Same with MP3, the audio quality of an MP3 is crap and so is AA3 from iTunes yet people are willing to download or pay for the instant gratification or the single song I want and are willing to give up on quality.

Its is not like higher quality don't exist in digital, lossless compression has been around for decades, but only real geeks use it or care about it.

[mick66]

I disagree, people seem to get used to "CRAP" and then except it.

The fact that people will get used to crap and accept it. Has nothing to do with what I said.
Which was:
As for crappy quality, everything starts somewhere and gets better.

[Justin Thyme]

How did you get that deal? Do you sign-up on their site? What is the offer and how long does the free trial last?Yeah- I think they emailed me the deal and I signed up on site as a new customer- 14 day trial free. Doesn't matter if you sign up for 1 disk or 4 disks out. It appeared as if I could sign up for more by switching plans after sign up, but 4 was plenty.

I think the terms are that address has to be the billing address on the card. Offer no good if you were a previous or current customer. They won't charge you if you bail out before the 14 days are over.

Doesn't matter if you are checking out HD DVD's, bluray or regular dvds- so even if I were paying, it is a heckuva lot cheaper than the $6 rentals off xbox for unknown flicks.

Rummaging around in the literature they sent- it appears this promotion is good until 12/2007 by entering the promo code "Friend23".

[jabez_reynolds]

We loaded one movie from Amazon using part of the $15 credit that TiVo gave us. It was the next day before we had the movie on our box and once you start the movie you only have 24 hours to watch it before it leaves the box. Yes, you have "30 days" to watch it but once you start it, you only have 24 hours.

Bottom line, to slow, not time friendly. Would not recommend the service.

[jckatz]

The fact that people will get used to crap and accept it. Has nothing to do with what I said.
Which was:

My point was it might not get better unless people require it to get better. More often people settle for lesser quality, removing the need for improvements.

[rainwater]

My point was it might not get better unless people require it to get better. More often people settle for lesser quality, removing the need for improvements.

I can't imagine people paying thousands of dollars for HDTVs, accepting less than DVD quality when the DVD is already available. That is the reason people who have the S3 do not like the Amazon service (it doesn't yet offer HD content).

[mikeyts]

I can't imagine people paying thousands of dollars for HDTVs, accepting less than DVD quality when the DVD is already available. That is the reason people who have the S3 do not like the Amazon service (it doesn't yet offer HD content).Judging from the response in threads in the S3 forum, a surprising number of people do like it. Personally, I'm not very interested until they have HD content, but a number of people find it adequate and like the convenience.

[mikeyts]

I recieved 65GB of First rate HD video from netflix on a free trial yesterday. Deliver was in 36 hours from the time I clicked my selections. XBox's HD selection is not even B grade content.I'd beg to differ with that assessment. There are a number of major releases on XBL Video Marketplace in HD: Babel, Blood Diamond, The Blair Witch Project, Braveheart, The Core, Crank, The Departed, The Descent, Employee of the Month, The Fugitive, The Hunt for Red October, Lady in the Water, Orange County, The Perfect Storm, Rest Stop, Saw III, A Scanner Darkly, Space Cowboys, South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut, Superman Returns, Swordfish, Unforgiven, The Way of the Gun, The Wicker Man, World Trade Center and Zoolander. That's more than 2/3rds of all of their HD offerings. It should be noted that, AFAIK, Microsoft is the only company to convince major studios to offer HD content for download, period.

I have two problems with XBLVM: the scarcity of all motion picture rentals (a total of 151 films right now, SD or HD) and the lack of subtitles.

Now, I have a few problems with Netflix (also much praise; I joined in the first few months of their existence). Primary among these is the fact that some of the many films that they offer are simply not available from them for weeks and months after the release. I've had the Blu-ray of Casino Royale on my queue since it appeared on Netflix (a few weeks before its release) and its still marked "Very Long Wait"; "Night at the Museum" is the same. I used to keep a long queue there and for that reason I now limit myself to the 7 or 8 films that I most want to watch. Anything on the dowload services is available now to everyone, watchable within a few of hours of purchase or rental.

[Justin Thyme]

OK Mike, the list I saw did not have those on it- but you have to admit there are very few block busters on your list. It's a toe in the water approach, but the studios have to decide whether they are going to get out in front of the parade and have some input controling its direction, or simply be dragged along screaming and complaining.

For all I have written in the past opposing DRM schemes, as far as I'm concerned I really don't care about DRM if all it did was prevent stuff getting out of the home for people that want to get a copy without paying. But if the studio's preferred DRM schemes get in the way of a purchased show flowing around the home fluidly from device to device, they are just pissing people off and then the idiotic schemes will just get bypassed. Once you turn consumers into outlaws, then studios have dramatically less influence on their behavior.

I don't mean to sound like a broken record, but I just don't see the studios making much attempt at finding a common ground on DRM and getting aggressive about getting out on the crest of this technology wave driven by broadband and cheap hard disks. As in surfing, they should be paddling hard now, or they will find themselves spending 10 times more energy paddling uphill on the trailing edge of the wave. It's just dumb management of technology, but sadly typical of the reaction of entrenched industries facing disruptive technologies.

Nuff said on that subject.

[Justin Thyme]

The distributors of physical media like blu ray and HD DVDs have no disincentive to deliver the highest quality HDTV. Cable, Satellite and Internet streaming schemes do. That's because they have a finite amount of pipe width which competes for other sales of other content. Their response is to squeeze the HD into as tight a wad they can so fit as many shows into the pipe as possible.

Sure, they are delivering 1080 dots across the screen, but the more they squeeze it into such a tight wad, the shabbier the picture looks. It is pretty obvious in side by side comparisons of HD VOD and HD DVDs. To give you an idea, HD DVDs are considered lower resolution than bluray, but the bitrate they can deliver for an action scene is 36Mbps and the average rate is 20mbps. The Sat and cablecos are delivering just 8-10, and even less. It's just ludicrous to consider what the Cablecos are delivering as HDTV. Take a look at what their own aggregators are saying:

“Right now, HDTV at 6 mbps is marginally better than SD DVD. Six mbps is very aggressive, which is why the majority of providers we see are holding to 8-10 mbps for HDTV.”* source (http://www.screenplaysmag.com/Editor/Article/tabid/96/ArticleType/ArticleView/ArticleID/366/Default.aspx)
So I think we are going to continue the swing into the non real time viewing model that we have seen pioneered on Tivo. Sure, maybe the most common is Netflix's mailed flavor in the near term, and more to Xbox live and Unbox internet deliver later.

*Kumar Shah, CEO of the parent company of ViewNow, a leading aggregator of motion pictures for VOD content

[mikeyts]

Yeah--realtime high-def streaming with DVR-like trick-play is very difficult for cable providers.

[HDTiVo]

Broad availability of service capable of streaming HD Video (http://hdtivo.wordpress.com/2007/05/10/docsis-30-cometh/) within a service provider's network at reasonable price is not far off...

... and over the Global Internet? Maybe 2-5 years?

[ZeoTiVo]

Broad availability of service capable of streaming HD Video (http://hdtivo.wordpress.com/2007/05/10/docsis-30-cometh/) within a service provider's network at reasonable price is not far off...

... and over the Global Internet? Maybe 2-5 years?
Nice tip HDTIVO. :up: While they are looking at Cable boxesand cable modems right off the bat obviously and 40 meg internet access alone has a HIGH UMF - any word on how this might tie into future cable card standards

[Justin Thyme]

Broad availability of service capable of streaming HD Video (http://hdtivo.wordpress.com/2007/05/10/docsis-30-cometh/) within a service provider's network at reasonable price is not far off...

... and over the Global Internet? Maybe 2-5 years?
Reality check- What you are saying is that cable is going to spend a lot of money to create a very high speed network that will largely benefit competitors of their lucrative video content distribution business.

I have absolutely no doubt they will avail themselves of known technologies to increase performance dramatically over twisted pair. The technology guarantees a huge amount of bandwidth which can then be used for something else. The technology does not guarantee what the something else is.

Be the cable exec. Your choices:

Use the saved bandwidth for premium fee video programming
Keep the saved bandwidth dedicated to data, benefiting the consumer with lower cost broadband, and alternative sources of video content.

[wmcbrine]

Be the cable exec. Your choices:

Use the saved bandwidth for premium fee video programming
Keep the saved bandwidth dedicated to data, benefiting the consumer with lower cost broadband, and alternative sources of video content.
Two. Because one is the buggy-whip business, and the era of horseless carriages is coming, fast.

[ZeoTiVo]

Two. Because one is the buggy-whip business, and the era of horseless carriages is coming, fast.
Plus the first cable company that can offer reasonably priced 40 meg internet speed is going to get customers lined up and perhaps even switching from Sat companies and DSL internet.

[HDTiVo]

3. Add more bandwidth to data when necessary because that's how you keep your monthly fee up at ~$40 instead of dropping to a commodity ~$20 level.

See, Mr. Cable SVP of What the Heck Do We Do Next, you are getting paid to carry all that video from outside your network.

[HDTiVo]

http://www.nbc11.com/money/13301374/detail.html

Networks such as NBC now argue that the Web increases television viewing by getting new audiences interested in shows they otherwise may not have watched.

Then you have the above phenomenon which enhances the value of cable TV service.

If fears about audiences going all IP on Demand actually came true, the cable co is still the owner of a toll bridge that gets you where you want to go. You have to pay a toll to them or someone else in your neighborhood. So cable better make the bridge wide enough and strong enough so they can get you to cross theirs.

Or cable can go the way AOL Prodigy went after the Internet became generally available.

[Justin Thyme]

http://www.nbc11.com/money/13301374/detail.html
Then you have the above phenomenon which enhances the value of cable TV service.You get that with 2Mbps. Do you get 20 times more of that phenomenon with 40Mbps, or do you get competition from IPTV?

In nearly all markets they are faster and cheaper than DSL or anyone else except FIOS. They have a strong economic disincentive to offer greater bandwidth for IP instead of other services. Unless they see a market where subs are slipping away to FIOS, there is little incentive to plow the bandwidth savings back into data.

[Justin Thyme]

Two. Because one is the buggy-whip business, and the era of horseless carriages is coming, fast.
I would like #2 to be chosen by Cable Execs. I just don't see why they would be motivated to do it. Cable has a pretty sophisticated network that is capable of delivering the Quality of Service guaranteed bandwidth necessary for voice services, switched Video, and Video on Demand. IP networks aren't there yet. Multicasting has some serious problems, if bandwidth dries up, you get drop outs in your streaming video or VOIP, consumers must be on guard against vandals, etc etc.

To reword the two options, Cable execs have the option of using the bandwidth savings for their network from which they can profit, or they can devote it to the non proprietary IP network from which their IPTV and VOIP competitors profit.

Tell me why #2 maximizes their profit. I just don't see it.

[mikeyts]

It depends upon how much direct competition that they get from the telecos with Fiber-To-The-Home. Right now, we're paying $44/month for broadband cable modem service (7 Mbps with 12 available for half again as much). If I can eventually get significantly more bandwidth for a similar price from SBC or Verizon, I'm dumping my cable modem and probably picking up FTTH TV service while I'm at it.

[Justin Thyme]

Precisely. With airfares, prices from the major airlines will magically come down to meet those of an upstart airline competing for their routes. All the routes that aren't in contention get no savings.

What happens when it is not feasible for a competitor to offer an alternative- for example in rural areas or cities too small for Fios to bother with?

Electricity companies are regulated monopolies- they cannot raise rates without justifying them to local authorities.

Not so with Cable or Telcos that have a local monopoly on broadband internet. The difference is that though cableco's are legally recognized as monopolies, their is little about their activities that is effectively regulated.

[HDTiVo]

...DOCSIS 3.0 specification based product to the market, featuring download speeds of 160 Mbps in the low-cost residential configuration and 320 Mbps in business services configuration...

"DOCSIS 3.0 will be extremely important to our industry in the coming
years as our high-speed broadband customers' appetite for advanced
performance and features continues to grow," said Comcast Chief Technology
Officer Tony Werner. "We appreciate TI's ongoing commitment to the
industry, enabling their customers to deliver on the promise of DOCSIS 3.0
this year with compelling new products."

For cable operators, migrating to a DOCSIS 3.0 network will not require
a complete network rebuild. Delivering the benefits of a DOCSIS 3.0 network
will only require upgrades to the cable modem termination system (CMTS) and
customer premise equipment (CPE),

"TI anticipates that by 2009 cable operators will stop deploying
earlier generations of DOCSIS specification-based products and only offer
their subscribers DOCSIS 3.0 technology, as it offers them additional
opportunities for revenue with new features and services while providing
their subscribers a better technology,"

Texas Instruments Introduces Industry's First DOCSIS(R) 3.0-Based Solution, Enabling Quick Market Deployment for Cable Operators (http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/05-07-2007/0004582081&EDATE=) (5/7/07)


TI's Puma 5 cable modem chip pounces on Docsis 3.0 transition (http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199204284)

"Many MSOs realize that PON architectures like Verizon's FiOS represent a real threat, but Docsis 3.0 is not just a defensive play against FiOS," Percosan said. "Bonding four channels downstream into a service group allows complex mixes of services. And the really smart MSOs are mixing their Docsis 3.0 plans with switched digital video plans. The only limitation to that is that the video guys at an MSO don't always plan in concert with the high-speed-data guys."

[Justin Thyme]

Regulators specify that monopolists may not gouge on basic cable video.

Similarly, there must be a line drawn for basic cable broadband.

Since there is Hidef over the air, then it seems reasonable that basic cable broadband should have enough mbps for streaming ATSC MPEG2 Hidef. That is, guaranteed QOS throughput of 20mbps. This would allow a household enough bandwidth for one TV recieving an HDTV signal from a source unaffiliated with the cableco.

[HDTiVo]

Regulators specify that monopolists may not gouge on basic cable video.

Similarly, there must be a line drawn for basic cable broadband.

Since there is Hidef over the air, then it seems reasonable that basic cable broadband should have enough mbps for streaming ATSC MPEG2 Hidef. That is, guaranteed QOS throughput of 20mbps. This would allow a household enough bandwidth for one TV recieving an HDTV signal from a source unaffiliated with the cableco.
I am sure the intention is for far more than that anyway.

I am working on a piece about this - see if you can read the draft here without password challenge:

http://hdtivo.wordpress.com/?p=119&preview=true

[mikeyts]

Regulators specify that monopolists may not gouge on basic cable video.

Similarly, there must be a line drawn for basic cable broadband.

Since there is Hidef over the air, then it seems reasonable that basic cable broadband should have enough mbps for streaming ATSC MPEG2 Hidef. That is, guaranteed QOS throughput of 20mbps. This would allow a household enough bandwidth for one TV recieving an HDTV signal from a source unaffiliated with the cableco.Supplying a private 20 Mbps to every broadband data subscriber is a far cry from giving simultaneous access to the bandwidth required to rebroadcast an over-the-air channel to video subscribers. No matter how many people are watching an HD program on any given television channel, no more bandwidth is required than for one. One hundred people watching the same on-demand streamed video will use 100 times as much bandwidth as one person watching that video.

[Justin Thyme]

Does that make you against the principle of a definition for basic cable broadband, or are you only against the specifics of my suggestion?

If the latter, what alternative definition would you suggest.

Note that Cable offers on demand video. 100 people watching the same on demand video require 100 streams, since none of them will likely start at exactly the same time.

[mikeyts]

I guess that it's more the specifics of guaranteed 20 Mbps service over hybrid fiber/coax networks. Maybe it is possible, but I'd also like to think that 20 Mbps service will not be the end.

It's true that 100 people watching the same on-demand program require many times the bandwidth of one person watching it, but the source of on-demand can be distributed to edge servers in subscriber neighborhoods; when you ask to view a popular program its probable that a copy of it is available on a server located in your local segment, and no bandwidth burden is added to the system backbone.

[HDTiVo]

So now it seems Forrester believes paid download is a dead end (http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070514005166&newsLang=en) and free streaming is the future...

“The paid video download market in its current evolutionary state will soon become extinct, despite the fast growth and the millions being spent today,” said Forrester Research Principal Analyst James McQuivey. “Television and cable networks will shift the bulk of paid downloading to ad-supported streams where they have control of ads and effective audience measurement. The movie studios, whose content only makes up a fraction of today’s paid downloads, will put their weight behind subscription models that imitate premium cable channel services.”

[ZeoTiVo]

So now it seems Forrester believes paid download is a dead end (http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070514005166&newsLang=en) and free streaming is the future...
Actually I kind of read that as the "pay per each download" model is going away and replaced by some subscription type model. Be it streaming or download will only matter in what kind of control the service/content providers feel they have over the content. In other words streaming to a PC is fairly comporable to download on a TiVo in terms of control I would think.

[mikeyts]

Streaming of ad-supported TV shows eclipses DVR use by the end of 2008. Advertisers will cheer because this shift thwarts ad-skipping; consumers will applaud this breakthrough because it’s cheaper than a DVR and is more flexible.Man, those Forrester people are smokin' some good stuff! I can't see people ever being particularly interested in ad-supported streaming. I watch episodes of television programs in low-quality streaming with unavoidable ads as a last resort, because I didn't manage to get a recording. Sometimes three things that I want to watch overlap, like Lost, CSI: NY and Medium--I end up watching Medium online cause it gains the least from high quality video. I have to admit that if it were HD quality with fluid trick-play (other than across ads), I might reconsider.

Subscription streaming, on the other hand, has great potential. Netflix's "Watch Now" is cool--hardly HD quality, but about as good as SD premium digital cable, with widescreen (but no surround sound yet) and noticeably higher-quality than Unbox on TiVo. You get to watch 1 hour of it for every dollar you pay in your Netflix plan ($18/month 3-discs-out-at-a-time plan, 18 hours of "Watch Now" viewing). They apparently have 2000 titles available already--if it were a bit more diverse, with more current television titles, I'd use this a lot and would be willing to pay extra for it. (My laptop is connected via DVI-A to my 46" 1080p LCD panel, so it's just as easy for me to watch that stuff as it is to watch my S3 :)).

[Justin Thyme]

I guess that it's more the specifics of guaranteed 20 Mbps service over hybrid fiber/coax networks. Maybe it is possible, but I'd also like to think that 20 Mbps service will not be the end.
I was exploring a possible solution to the net neutrality issue. You still get the investment due to folks paying more for premium bandwidth (satisfying the Cisco arguments against net neutrality), but you get sufficiency of bandwidth for low barriers to entry for small businesses exploiting huge bandwidth capacities. I'm not sure that satisfies the Yahoo/Google side of the argument in favor of net neutrality, but it is one proposal that may solve a portion of the issue.

Anyway, the concept of basic cable as applied to broadband services.

Sure, it could be a sliding scale of capacity. EG- as a percentage of the total capacity in the last mile at a particular locality.