

Think the Internet Will Replace Cable ? Read this first - jsm386
http://blogmaverick.com/2010/01/13/think-the-internet-will-replace-cable-read-this-first/

======
jasonlbaptiste
i'll write a post about this that's more in depth, but the fact of the matter
is: content is no longer linear when it comes to the internet. If 2 million
people are going to watch heroes it certainly won't be at the same time. it
will be at their leisure, so the whole technical capabilities argument doesn't
hold up.

the stuff that is livestreamed is a different breed of content. think more
along the lines of interactive sessions on ustream and jtv. they haven't hit a
2mil simultaneous stream. the engagement for each person is much higher on
those sites anyway.

~~~
jeromec
Way to be contrary to the maverick, @jason. ;) I totally agree with you,
though; people will totally craft their own viewing experience. I was catching
up on a Simpsons episode recently and when the 30 sec ad started, without even
thinking, I clicked to another tab and did something else for the duration,
and clicked back when I heard cartoon voices. Then it hit me that hulu
probably had a point with their charge-for-content threat. It's not so easy to
leave the room for commercials, but it's all too easy to click to another tab.

~~~
vgurgov
doing same thing on my tv all the time. i simply change channel while keeping
ad in a small window in the corner. love that feature. panasonic, ideas for
life.)) i think its just a question of time when all tvs will have this
feature

------
dasil003
All it will take stream massively-watched video at orders of magnitude less
cost than either airwave or cable broadcast is TCP multicast. Granted there
are some barriers there, but it's fundamentally more efficient than any other
broadcast method. It just hasn't been worth it yet because for those few
events we've already had long-existing broadcast TV networks.

Hell, you could even do it purely at the application level with BitTorrent.

Cable is cheaper now because of sunk costs, but cable companies are much too
fat to innovate at this point. They will do whatever they can to keep prices
high and cling to their cash cow, while Internet bandwidth inevitably becomes
cheaper fueled by thousands of disparate interests. Cartels may drag out the
endgame, but eventually content producers will have no choice but to go where
the eyeballs are.

~~~
wmf
U-Verse is based on multicast, but ISPs still don't allow it over the Internet
and I doubt they ever will due to the routing table bloat.

------
thinkbohemian
He didn't really throw down any hard $$$ numbers in terms of costs. And didn't
take into account the worlds demand for more bandwidth in general. As servers
become more powerful and cheaper, and fiber becomes more plentiful what he
said makes sense today, but will it tomorrow?

~~~
dkasper
Someone is still going to control all that infrastructure no matter how cheap
it gets. The content will be controlled by the users more than it is now
(premium content/celebrities will still draw the most eyeballs), but the
backends will still be in the hands of a few companies, and in this sense
everyone is still at their mercy.

------
ippisl
counter points: 1\. most content isn't live-streamed. 2\. content that is
live-streamed fits very well to p2p , which is very cheap , and might even
become embedded in flash. 3\. the buffering issue holds some of the
characteristics of disruptive technology:worse in viewing quality , but better
in other dimensions - viewing options /price / experience. and as any
disruptive tech , it's always improving. 4\. regarding 3 internet video
service providers : given a lot less customer lockup then cable companies ,
the competition between those 3 are better . 5, Alot depends on which
advertising model(web vs cable) , will be able to offer better results.

------
nailer
" He asks the simple question of “how is it the Youtube , with all of google’s
resources,. cant solve their buffering problem ? ” ....Now maybe Youtube will
fix their buffering problem someday, along with the other issues that Dan
addresses, but it wont be easy and it wont be quick."

Begging the question. There's no evidence of widespread YouTube 'buffering
problems' in the article or the link.

------
teye
Suggesting renting a time slot from cable/satellite providers as a solution
ignores the shift in watching habits from being pushed content to pulling it.

