[opendtv] Re: Spectrum is too valuable

  • From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 07:10:46 -0500

On Nov 20, 2015, at 8:06 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


Natively? Do smart TVs have DOCSIS inputs, or IP/Ethernet?

I was assuming that a DOCSIS modem would be required to get IP into the home.
The modem provides an Ethernet output. Most smart TVs and boxes like Apple TV
and Roku have an Ethernet port; some devices like Chromecast only support WiFi.

I ran Ethernet all over my house back in the old days before WiFi. Now the
modem plugs directly into an Airport Time Capsule that provides WiFi, a
Terabyte drive to back up our Macs, and a four port Ethernet switch - only one
port is used to connect to another WiFi router in the garage.

The larger problem would be developing an App that would provide a cable
company program guide to connect to their servers.

I assumed Ethernet. So you need a DOCSIS modem. And it's only the cable
companies that created this problem of their installed base of STBs. Just
like ISPs did hesitate to introduce H.264 back when. Why? Because it was the
consumer's responsibility to buy the receiving equipment, not the ISPs'.

DOCSIS did not exist when cable went digital with MPEG-2. There was discussion
about adding "cable ready" support to new TVs, but several different systems
were deployed, and as we saw, the industry "resisted" the mandate to open up
the security component, eventually agreeing to cable card.

I don't think the cable industry thought then, or thinks today that their
proprietary STBs are a problem. They have made a ton of money with them. They
are just a "sea anchor" that is slowing the transition to an all IP
infrastructure.

And technically, ISPs know nothing about what's in the IP packets, thus they
did not "introduce" h.264. It was companies offering download/streaming video
services like Apple's iTunes that introduced h.264. And the receiving equipment
initially was a PC.

Obviously, almost all mobile devices, smart TVs and digital media players
support h.264 today. Most DBS STBs support h.264, and as I noted previously,
some cable STBs are now supporting it, including transcoding to h.264 to
support tablets in the home.

And again, the switch to all IP could be a lot faster if the cable system's
broadcast spectrum was reclaimed. We have the numbers, right? In an existing
900 MHz cable plant, one which now supports legacy broadcast TV streams and a
1 Gb/s GPON, like the article mentioned, you can fully quintuple the
broadband capacity of each PON by eliminating broadcast. That would go a long
way to help support IP streams in that PON, and it can be done very quickly.
DOCSIS 3.0 can use any channel. Let the customers buy their own DOCSIS
modems, and begin the transition any time you please. A few channels at a
time.

While this is technically possible, the numbers still don't add up. I don't
want to open that can of worms again, because we just went through the numbers.
The reality is that the digital TV tier still is the most efficient way to
deliver the TV bits. That could change with DOCSIS 3.1, but it is likely the
number of homes per PON would still need to be reduced to provide an equivalent
service.

As I stated before, it is far more likely that the transition will take place
in several waves: first eliminating the analog tier; then reclaiming channels
from the digital tier; then switching to an all IP infrastructure.

Fortunately, there is no requirement to lease modems from the ISPs, although
they do offer them. I bought our modem and we use it for OTT streaming. All we
need now is for someone to introduce an OTT service with the content we want
and we will cut the cable TV cord.

It is fair to say the transition HAS begun. The relatively small number of cord
cutters are either living with FOTA TV, or they have broadband and use
streaming services today. If the content owners decide to support truly
competitive Virtual MVPD services, then we may see a statistically significant
number of cord cutters. Then again, the legacy MVPDs may decide to drop prices
to retain customers.

"The bundle" is old stuff that was possible when people had no other option.
Now the incumbent services would be better off adapting to 21st century
technologies, rather than hanging on for dear life to legacy, and compete
nationwide, with competitive offerings. Rather than all duplicating the
others' "the bundle."

We've been down this path before too. There are some real legal issues with
your nationwide competition approach. They are not insurmountable barriers, but
will require new contracts and will likely meet with strong resistance from the
government entities now feasting on taxes and other fees on MVPD services.

If the content congloms DO choose to allow Apple, or others to offer a
competitive Virtual MVPD service, the precedent will be set to allow the legacy
MVPD services to operate outside their current footprints. I believe we will
see how this will play out next year.

Nothing new here. The blacksmith that morphed into auto mechanic survived and
thrived. The one who stayed put did not. I think it's shortsighted to ignore
history.

Blacksmiths make good money these days (pleasure horses still need shoes).
There just are not as many of them as there once were.


It is short sighted to ignore the role that crony capitalism is playing in
protecting industries from competition.

Regards
Craig

----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. opendtv
  3. Archive
  4. 11-2015