Microsoft Sees Future in IPTV 246
linumax writes "It took 12 years and more than $10 billion, but one of Microsoft's biggest dreams may finally be coming true: The company is close to becoming a major player in the television business. This is not about PCs that play video -- the company has done that for years -- but rather a whole new platform for delivering television over the Internet, through software that's mostly invisible to consumers." From the article: "Consumers will see cool new features -- imagine four live pictures on a screen at once -- instant channel changes and more options for on-demand video rentals, including high-definition content. Microsoft TV also merges phone services, so incoming messages, e-mail and caller ID can be displayed on users' television screens. Microsoft hopes its Internet protocol television system (IPTV) will also be used in India, China and other developing countries, where it could provide education and government services as well as entertainment via the television."
Hmm, I wonder... (Score:3, Interesting)
I know that my money is staying in my pocket until someone introduces commercial-free subscription TV.
The real annoyance. (Score:3, Interesting)
Wait A Minute.... (Score:2, Interesting)
1. New MS technology to revolutionize some industry MS doesn't dominate.
2. Feature list that makes you say "wow."
3. Feature list, like most MS products is 99.9% over-promised.
4. Does anyone really want a TV that downloads spam?
5. Does anyone want a TV that can interrupt them?
6. How about a TV that controls what you watch?
I seem to remember some TV viewing software in Windows 95 that made similar promises.
Re:The MSterious Future (Score:3, Interesting)
I doubt it. MS has been pushing IPv6 for years, and where is it?
Then again that would level the IPTV playing field somewhat, which is not the MSFT way.
Exactly. The MS IPTV business model does not involve sending anything over the Internet; all the video stays within each ISP's network. Thus no changes to the Internet backbone are needed.
Couldn't give a damn (Score:3, Interesting)
The Internet is a wonderful tool that has allowed me to do my job (IT support and consultancy), keep in touch with old friends, see what's on in the local cinemas, check out local live music, order books, CDs and DVDs online and contribute to technical discussions etc. and gadgets such as a SmartPhone and PDA mean I can check email and perform remote diagnostics and configs wherever I am.
Sad techie? - not really, the portability of my support tools means I do not have to be tied to the office all day - I can be 'on the road' meeting people, working from home or even taking 'time out' to do what I want to do until something needs my attention. Far from nailing me down in front of a 'media wall' of plasma/LCD TVs, the Internet and technology has got me 'out and about', socialising and spending more time in the real world.
The prospect of more sophisticated media delivery via the Internet is 'logical' from an evolutionary perspective but right now I'd give up my TV if it wasn't for my 5 year old Son and his Children's programs, my wife's love for all things 'soap' and the fact that I watch the news every now and then.
Deliver my 'regular' TV via IP if you wish but do it because it makes it cheaper or happens to be 'the way to go', but not because you think I am crying out for wall-to-wall soaps, drama, comedy etc. 4-up on the display!
Information and learning via IP TV - well Digital analogue, digital terrestrial and satellite can do that already. but I suppose you gain interactivity 'built in'. Alert me when a phone call comes in? - er, my basic phone does that by making a noise. Well I suppose with the new system, when a call comes in it will start to record the current programme in case I miss something - well, if the program was *that* watchable I'd keep watching unless ther was some kind of emergency - but the number of times that has happened in my life so far? - er - zero; and if I miss the news it will be round again in half an hour.
The target markets are interesting - India, China and 'developing' countries - hmm, sounds like a good idea to lock every one into your 'all-in-one' system whereas right now I have the freedom to buy a TV, radio, computer (email), landline telephone service and rent DVDs from anyone I want and mix and match service providers to suit me - oh, and then what happens when there's a local distribution point failure - I lose all my comms and media services in one go?? - brilliant!!
Re:Hmm, I wonder... (Score:3, Interesting)
It makes sense for Radio to have commercials - it is free and they need a way to support (and make a profit) themselves.
However, both Cable and Sat. television are NOT free (and are actually quite expensive depending on the provider) but they still have commercials. Now, I understand that television programs (or Video, rather) is much more costly to make. With shows like LOST/24/Alias/etc having larger and larger budgets (and sometimes the quality of the show reflects that *cough*24*cough*), I get that it costs more. But still, the revenue generated by commercials is stupendous! Add in what us consumers pay for the privilege (Ha!) to receive Cable/Sat. - and it seems like the providers are really double-dipping.
I'm not calling for 100% free television, but something has to give. Either cut the commericals way back or bring the prices back down to sane levels. Sadly, neither is likely.
Re:The MSterious Future (Score:1, Interesting)
It is very disappointing that you can't use IP multicast now in normal applications running over the public Internet. With multicast over the public Internet it would be possible to do IPTV without requiring explicit support at the ISP level. You could choose an IPTV provider separate from your ISP, competition would flourish, you could even run your own TV station from your home connection if you wanted. And I'll bet BitTorrent could be made much more efficient. Why is it that you can't do all this today? And will IPv6 fix all this with its required multicast support?
2nd choice - at best (Score:3, Interesting)
After a careful and very extensive evaluation taking almost a year, the microsoft solution was rejected by both technical and administrative decision makers, because it falls short of competitors.
As you can see from this, M$ IPTV has been on the market for over a year already.
I'm certain others will find the same results. So I wonder how much of this is just artificially created hype to create more sales, because for all I know they are barely worth mentioning so far.
12 years and more than $10 billion. (Score:3, Interesting)
And they still dont have a workable product.
I worked at (and designed the software for) Kingston Interactive Television [broadcastpapers.com] where we developed an iDTV, VOD and Internet system in less than 2 years. The whole project cost less than 30m and that includes the MAN & DSLAM's for 30k installations and the actual installation in 10,000 home. We where the first to launch this anywhere in the world, it actually worked and not a MS-box in sight. It was all bases on ARM STB's, Sun Application Servers, NCube Video servers, Linux for Internet and Tanberg MPEG Transcoders.