20 replies to this topic

[mello yello]

What does the future hold for the way we will be watching TV in say 10, 20 years time ?

What role will a high speed internet play in all this ? if any at all or will there always be FTA in some form or another ?

Smart TVs that connect to the internet directly eliminating all reception issues virtually overnight, and the possibilty of, dare I say it, job losses for antenna installers and an industry reliant on selling the hardware. Theres an entire infrastructure and industry built around antennas and reception, will TV over the internet be that much more a desirable way to receive programs ( from a menu and at call ) than the current wait till its broadcast method ? Supply and demand will determine that but as an installer what safeguards are there to keep up to date with potential changes and to move with the times if that was required ?

Or will it never get off the ground due to bandwidth issues, such as , if every household was streaming a Grand Final, will the NBN be able to cope with such traffic demands anyway? or legislation designed to protect an existing industry for lack of viable alternatives ? Will they really give a rats if there is more money to be made through subscription TV than relying on adverstising ? Will we still get ads ? of course we will

Pretty sure if it all does move that way we can not only drop the F from FTA but the TA bit as well

Any thoughts if this model becomes the norm for the Big 3 ( 7, 9 AND 10 ). Will SBS and ABC still offer FTA ?

Edited by mello yello, 14 April 2013 - 11:02 PM.

[Chicken Man]

I think the NBN will play a big part in the distribution of FTA TV. I don't think bandwidth issues will be a problem at 100Mblips/sec, but less than that there may possibly have an issue if a BD movie download is coincidentally being downloaded off the NBN for that household.

  All on-line data can be cached from a local server if need be, and could be pre-loaded for the next day's veiwing along with the latest blurays -on- demand etc etc. Even 4K movies could be cached too. Local downloads could be much cheaper than a typical network download, simply because the buffering distribution node would service surrounding street nodes in a district without having to draw upon the state network.

That is why 'Fibre Node to Home' is an important feature of the NBN, it allows greater flexibility in use and availability. Its immunity to extreme weather and corrosion and even E.M.Pulse (heaven forbid) is a no brainer for digital services. By its very nature the NBN is a fixed service delivery system and caters for services that require a fixed location for delivery, though I might add the 'data' can be then re-transmitted to a mobile reciever of some make. The NBN essentially overcomes the tyranny of distance for many communicable services and will simply reorganize how we do things in those deliveries.

FTA as we know it today will be gone in 15 years or less, all that bandwidth would be better used for mobile services and radio.

C.M

Edited by Chicken Man, 15 April 2013 - 03:39 PM.

[DigitalObserver]

Interesting article here on US experience where court has ruled that an ISP service aggregating FTA services is not infringing copyright. http://www.wired.com...utters-rejoice/

A quick look around shows that 4K is moving and will move ever quicker. Huge second gen drops in display costs, Sony introducing new content players, distribution channels. Our media Barons are ....ing themselves that they will have to spend or change. NBN co is their enemy, Malcolm is their friend.

[pgdownload]

DigitalObserver, on 15 April 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Interesting article here on US experience where court has ruled that an ISP service aggregating FTA services is not infringing copyright.

It is interesting. Here in Oz we've reached the exact opposite conclusion I believe. With Optus recording FTA TV (at users requests) and then sending the recording to the users phone, thus bypassing the millions Telstra had paid for exclusive mobile broadcast rights. Our courts found that was not on.

Regards

Peter Gillespie

[Chicken Man]

Mello, I think the ABC will always be a government funded organization and as such be a free transmission over the NBN.
As for the commercial stations ....well we've always paid for them by ad -breaks and I don't think that will change at all.

Subscription always brings about complaint of one manner or another and FaceBook is a vehicle of complaint for the masses, better to charge for advertising .....to a world connected ...... and not just for local consumption...... than to demand subscription for TV services.

Subscription limits one's audiance and if programs are not up to scratch .....even more so, it is only a matter of time before it all falls in a heap.

Also consider the energy savings from all those transmission towers now made redundant, that must be a pretty penny.

C.M

[mello yello]

DigitalObserver, on 15 April 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Interesting article here on US experience where court has ruled that an ISP service aggregating FTA services is not infringing copyright. http://www.wired.com...utters-rejoice/

Thats one of the things I was wondering, will it produce Americas Cup style law suits, and it looks like the yanks have got the jump on that one. Doesnt sound like it will be an easy transition, one that will be fought tooth and nail.

DigitalObserver, on 15 April 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

A quick look around shows that 4K is moving and will move ever quicker. Huge second gen drops in display costs, Sony introducing new content players, distribution channels. Our media Barons are ....ing themselves that they will have to spend or change. NBN co is their enemy, Malcolm is their friend.

Thats the other thing I was wondering, the potential for them to accomodate the party which will look after their interests the most and the amount of disinformation that will go with that, not to mention any backroom brown paper bag transactions You could say the FTTN campaign is already just that, coupled with projections of watered down versions of NBN its almost like they are going to resist progress as much as they can.

Of course its a lot more complex than my head can get around, but Im always suspicious of anyone who resists progress. Fossil burning alternatives come to mind and the millions paid out to bury patents

[mello yello]

Chicken Man, on 15 April 2013 - 04:14 PM, said:

Mello, I think the ABC will always be a government funded organization and as such be a free transmission over the NBN.
As for the commercial stations ....well we've always paid for them by ad -breaks and I don't think that will change at all.

Subscription always brings about complaint of one manner or another and FaceBook is a vehicle of complaint for the masses, better to charge for advertising .....to a world connected ...... and not just for local consumption...... than to demand subscription for TV services.

Subscription limits one's audiance and if programs are not up to scratch .....even more so, it is only a matter of time before it all falls in a heap.

Also consider the energy savings from all those transmission towers now made redundant, that must be a pretty penny.

C.M

Thats the conclusion I came to as well CM, as long as there are taxpayers there will always be a taxpayer funded version, and as long as quality programs are offered there will always be an audience.

Subscription only has to rely on sporting rights for survival, as long as they can keep buying out entire football codes and exclusive rights to events, they will get more than enough buyers.

Will there always be a 12inch BnW 4:3 television in a corner of a graveyard shift nurses station I wonder, probably not and probably also spell the end of the TV antenna. Where will the cockies go to squakk I wonder ? lol

The obvious advantage to all this is no more reception issues, no more digital cliffs, and being able to select from a menu of programs rather than being told what you are going to watch. I guess that will never happen, on second thought, as it, as with everything we dont get, ...would be too easy

Edited by mello yello, 15 April 2013 - 08:10 PM.

[mello yello]

pgdownload, on 15 April 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

It is interesting. Here in Oz we've reached the exact opposite conclusion I believe. With Optus recording FTA TV (at users requests) and then sending the recording to the users phone, thus bypassing the millions Telstra had paid for exclusive mobile broadcast rights. Our courts found that was not on.

Regards

Peter Gillespie

of course, theres another application I didnt think of and and added advantage, you can carry your subscription with you and just dial in from anywhere, using a password, from any internet enabled device. However wireless and 4G etc will be prone to weather issues wouldnt it, but, it means you dont have to be home to watch a pay per view event,

thanks Pete

Edited by mello yello, 15 April 2013 - 08:15 PM.

[mello yello]

The Music Industry had to dragged kicking and screaming into the digital download age, they almost perished altogether until iTunes came along. I think the major networks should take a lesson from that and get on the ship before it leaves port, cos watching FTA TV in its current form is painful with all the ads. Pay TV is not that much different either,

Edited by mello yello, 15 April 2013 - 08:21 PM.

[beeblebrox]

Don't worry about 10-20 years we're there now.. just need the network to catchup.... we run a couple of raspberry pi's as xbmc units... we watch more streamed content than fta on our adsl2 link now...  yes we have issues now and then but have run 2 hd streams concurrently to 2 tv's .... who wants to watch crap local fta when you can watch crap american/british/russian/italian etc etc etc..

Seriously though 100Mbit will make that sooo much better.... no Mr Turnball 25Mbit won't cut it I've already got nearly 20mbit on my adsl2....   I want 1st world not third world internet speeds!!

[mello yello]

absolutely beeblebrox, but will we all get it ? Turnbull is the key and if he wont outlay it now, we will never get it. A case of too much at stake for his buddies?. It's a shame we going to get screwed under and just be offered faster YouTube. Hopefully not, but Im not holding my breath.

if thats the reality, 10-20yrs  could be wishful thinking

[digitalj]

bandwidth won't be an issue for FTA over NBN. Every 32 properties share 2.5Gbps so If we assume the same amount of bandwidth as we currently get over the air for a typical area, i.e. 115Mbps, than that still leaves 2.385Gbps for internet data. The FTA packets would be broadcast to the 32 properties so that they are not duplicated. Assuming all properties have subscribed to a 100Mbps plan, then everyone would get 215Mbps with the FTA packets not counting towards the subscribers 100Mbps plan. 2.385Gbps is still enough to allow 23 of the 32 properties to be downloading at 100Mbps simultaneously, which is somewhat unlikely to happen, so subscribers most likely will think they are the only ones on.

[mello yello]

thanks dig,

what would happen if there was a high rating event though ?, like the NRL Grand Final (between Roosters and the Dragons) this year. Hows your maths ? ;-)

ok so TV over NBN is achievable, all we need is an NBN plan that will make it a reality

[meck01]

 mello yello, on 17 April 2013 - 03:59 PM, said:

thanks dig,

ok so TV over NBN is achievable, all we need is an NBN plan that will make it a reality

If we get FTTH then it should be achievable, if we get FTTN - depending on your copper quality - maybe.

Node lotto is fun

['ct']

Well, most of the networks will over time start to distribute their transmission streams to their captial city terrestrial transmitters via Telstra DVN2 which is starting to come on line. DVN2 will provide most broadcasters with upto 10GB/sec connectivity, mostly for internal contribution. Telstra is even planning to have 4K capability on DVN2 as well which will mainly cater for high end production usage. Makes the 100M/sec NBN look like a 56k modem by crude equivalent comparision, even if FTTH. Can't see FTA DTB RF transmission dissappearing for at least another 20 years at least. And as such, no doubt, in the future, 4G and 5G wireless providers may well end up carrying the networks streams anyway for mobile devices, which would be a roundabout way of reusing some of the vacated analogue frequencies to carry television again, albeit in digital mode. And as to radio, for reasons of natural and national emergencies, can't ever see RF transmission being done away with there at all, even if analogue AM/FM get switched off eventually.

[alanh]

Why would the huge number of viewers who have installed antenna systems for DTV want to pay to watch the same programs on the internet?

The Telcos have just purchased just under $2 billion for half of the new 700 MHz band. It will have to be paid by users. Why are the manufacturers of handheld equipment make them sense LANs so that they are used inpreference to he WAN. Its because they cannot handle the extra traffic not only from an equipment point of view, but also from a bandwidth point of view.

The reality is that most people are not computer geeks and there is already a new digital TV transmission system using over the air. There are many other high bandwidth applications other than entertainment for the NBN.

Within the 20 years DVB-T2 will spread from the few countries already using it. This doubles the data bandwidth of the TV transmission channel. This upgrade is cheap compared to the change from analog to digital.

AlanH

[GoForMoe]

Refer to the previous posts about IP Multicast and don't make another argument about bandwidth and traffic until you understand it.

[Malich]

Or at least understand the terminology enough to bullshit it half-decently!

alanh, on 21 May 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

Why are the manufacturers of handheld equipment make them sense LANs so that they are used inpreference to he WAN.

... makes no sense until you realise Alan doesn't understand what 'LAN' and 'WAN' stand for.

[GoForMoe]

Malich, on 21 May 2013 - 07:39 PM, said:

.. makes no sense until you realise Alan doesn't understand what 'LAN' and 'WAN' stand for.

I assume he meant that mobile phones choose to use a WiFi connection over a cellular one - as clearly a fixed network is more reliable and able to cope with larger amounts of data than a wireless one. I don't know where that fits in his argument, if anything its the obvious point against - television over the air is a wasteful use of spectrum that could otherwise go to building out higher bandwidth and more flexible mobile data networks.

[Malich]

I assume that too - but then, what does he mean by 'WAN' in that context?*

It makes no sense unless Alan is making up his own secret definitions rather than using the existing commonly-accepted technical ones.

(* I'd prefer it if this question remained rhetorical and unanswered, at least until Alan decides to answer it. No point in handing the old fool a plausible excuse for his display of technical ignorance, is there?)

Edited by Malich, Today, 02:43 AM.

['ct']

I think you will find over time, the economics and attractiveness to Govt that it will mandate that the NBN distribute FTA transmission as a must carry on the NBN as a free community service obligation service for everyone with the networks paying for it. As the RF spectrum currently being used for FTA  will be far far more valuable as wireless spectrum for 4G/future 5G than its current broadcast usage. As the Govt keeps discounting annual licence fees to the networks, the current value of the current RF spectrum is becoming more worthless year by year. This will only happen after the NBN is fully rolled out. Over the NBN, there is nothing to stop the networks to at last bring back the main channels as HD again, and all their multichannels as well, plus eventually offer 4K when that starts.

Edited by 'ct', Today, 07:56 AM.