Link This | Email this | Blog This | Comments (0)

It all comes down to TV
June 9, 2006

After spending a day at GlobalComm, I became convinced that the telecom industry is betting the store on delivering video content to subscribers. They need to if they're to compete with cable companies, who now provide Internet and phone serivice. The transport protcol the telcos are adopting is called TV over Internet Protocol (IPTV). On June 7, the New Millenium Research Council published a report "The State of IPTV 2006: The Advent of Personalized Programming." I read the report and have several problems with it.

A press release announcing the report appeared in my inbox on June 5. The press release stated

INTERNET PROTOCOL TELEVISION: NEW REPORT ON

PROSPECTS FOR IPTV ASKS: "(REAL) DEAL OR NO DEAL?"

But, the report didn't live up to its own hype because the "no deal" part was, in my opinion, missing. The report basically says that IPTV will succeed, while skipping perhaps the most important issue: video quality. From reading the report, you might conclude that as long as you have enough bandwidth, you'll get IPTV. But, as I reported in "IPTV: Video's latest test frontier," it takes more than bandwidth to receive acceptable video quality. Errors caused by packet jitter, latency, and other technical terms can degrade picture quality. The report makes no mention of that.

The report defines "IPTV is not simply offering traditional television programming through another device or connection," but that's exactly how I define IPTV. According the report's interpretation, I already get IPTV because I can view a video clip on my computer whenever I plug in my DSL modem. I don't consider that IPTV. I have cable for TV and IP for Web browsing.

The report also contains a technical error. It erroneously sites "Delivering Optimal Quality of Experience (QoE) for IPTV Success" a white paper from Spirent Communications regarding bandwidth. The report states "delivery of newer video signals requires transmission speeds of 2 megabytes per second for standard definition video and 9 Mbps for high definition." The Spirent paper correctly states 2 megabits per second.

I don't care if video comes into my home as MPEG packets encapsulated in IP packets or as analog video modulated on an RF carrier. If I can't find anything worth watching, I'll do something else. I do that most evenings. In fact, my preferred way of relaxing at home doesn't need packets, modulation, or even electricity. It's playing my acoustic guitar.

Posted by Martin Rowe on June 9, 2006 | Comments (0)