If you also live in a area where you cant get broadband or only sat broadband it wouldnt work out for you and you would need a service like dish to get tv
We May Be Seeing the Beginning of the End of the TV Business
- Thread starter eacalhoun
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 50
- Views 6K
Many propose the demise of things like satellite TV because of Internet functions forget there are large portions of this country without the kind of broadband Internet connectivity necessary. They speak with the wisdom of their immediate world which is obviously limited.
Wait a minute! There are still a lot of us folks that don't have access to "broadband" internet. If not for satellite, I would have only a dial-up service and it sucks. The cable and telco companies are not expanding as they were charged to do by the government (FCC,Congress). Every effort and resources seem to be directed toward "wireless" and unless you are in a large market area this is also not being addressed. So lets not turn off or abandon anything until all of us can participate.
Beyond raw speed there is also the issue of reliability. My 4Mb internet sometimes streams video with no problems but sometimes it hangs and stutters part way through. I suspect demand and the number of people viewing that particular video play a role. I don't see this ever being practical for viewing live events like sports.
Personally I would like a system where the cable or satellite works with the internet to deliver the content I want to my recording gizmo. This should happen in the background so I can view my programs at my leisure when I have the time. Using cable or satellite to mainly deliver time sensitive (live) programming (sports, news, live concerts and other events) will help reduce strain on the internet delivered content which can be used for non-time sensitive material. Who cares if it takes four hours to download a 2 hour movie, as long as it gets there eventually and looks great when I view it. An ideal system would be designed to eliminate conflicts where several things I want to watch all air at the same time while there are hours and hours with nothing of interest or infomercials running. I should be able to select a show by name and it should be available within 24 hours. I wouldn't care how it got to my recorder.
At this point we seem to be very close to that, but not quite there yet.
Personally I would like a system where the cable or satellite works with the internet to deliver the content I want to my recording gizmo. This should happen in the background so I can view my programs at my leisure when I have the time. Using cable or satellite to mainly deliver time sensitive (live) programming (sports, news, live concerts and other events) will help reduce strain on the internet delivered content which can be used for non-time sensitive material. Who cares if it takes four hours to download a 2 hour movie, as long as it gets there eventually and looks great when I view it. An ideal system would be designed to eliminate conflicts where several things I want to watch all air at the same time while there are hours and hours with nothing of interest or infomercials running. I should be able to select a show by name and it should be available within 24 hours. I wouldn't care how it got to my recorder.
At this point we seem to be very close to that, but not quite there yet.
Live TV over satellite or cable is still the norm and will be for many years to come I am sure. It is true that broadband internet has not reached the kind of saturation point necessary that we can shift completely to IPTV. That doesn't mean the revolution isn't coming eventually, and probably within my lifetime. It will take a far larger number of people changing their current viewing habits to drive down live TV ratings enough to shift the industry to the new model. We aren't there yet, but that's where we are going IMHO.
From the special census taken in 2010:
As of 2010
68% of homes in USA have access to high speed internet:
Breaking it down further:
57% Rural
70% Urban
Satellite TV will always have a niche in less densely populated areas where high speed internet and CATV aren't as readily available.
The question is how many of the current 35+ million US satellite TV subscribers will still be subscribers in 2022?
CATV will lose video customers, but MSOs with their more diverse lines of business (video, internet, telephone, programming including sports, broadcast TV ) they probably can survive even if they lose half their video customers. They will make their money providing internet pipelines and selling programming to both other operators and individuals.
As of 2010
68% of homes in USA have access to high speed internet:
Breaking it down further:
57% Rural
70% Urban
Satellite TV will always have a niche in less densely populated areas where high speed internet and CATV aren't as readily available.
The question is how many of the current 35+ million US satellite TV subscribers will still be subscribers in 2022?
CATV will lose video customers, but MSOs with their more diverse lines of business (video, internet, telephone, programming including sports, broadcast TV ) they probably can survive even if they lose half their video customers. They will make their money providing internet pipelines and selling programming to both other operators and individuals.
Agreed. Our broandband speeds arnt as fast as other parts of the world. Wiredband and fios like speeds would be needed. 15 meg speed is good untill your streaming video on device video chatting on a second and gaming on a third. You would need the fios like speed at least. But most areas dont have the 50mbs speeds. My area can only go to 15mbs. And thats just the start.
While the claim of 'high speed internet' being in 68% of homes, that speed starts at 1Mbit. Hardly much use for IPTV streaming at that speed.
U.S. Investigates Cable Companies for Limits on Online Video - WSJ.com
Data caps on home internet connections only are around because most people do not hit them. Now that consumers are starting to hit them, the government is getting involved. Data caps on land based internet are very hard to justify, and I suspect that the government will keep pressure on driving the caps higher and higher. Big cable may be paying lots of lobbying fees, but when enough angry voters line up no amount of lobbying money will protect the caps.
These companies are using public right of ways for all their wires/cables/fiber/etc... That opens them up to lots of regulation once the consumers get mad.
