The Verge has a great piece on the potential for Intel to succeed in their latest digital home initiative…
The fact that Intel doesn’t by and large work in media could be a handicap, but if you stop to reconsider, it potentially gives Intel a huge advantage. Think about it: how was Google ever going to make a deal with Viacom when Viacom was suing Google? How were companies like Google or Yahoo built on selling advertising ever going to meaningfully share data and revenue with other companies built on advertising like TV networks? How were Sony or Samsung ever going to create a smart TV platform large enough to compete with cable when their businesses depended on selling giant multithousand-dollar screens that were only updated every few years? How would Apple, or Microsoft, or Amazon, or Netflix create new deals for live TV with networks when they already had huge businesses in selling digital video in completely different formats? Intel has no conflicts of interest with television; it has no strategy taxes. All it has are years of R&D into hardware for the connected home, a solid history of developing hardware standards and prototypes, and many, many chips built for graphics-intensive, generally stationary devices that badly need somewhere to go.
This has long been an area of interest for me and I hope they succeed here because the industry needs a good kick in the ass.
More power to Aereo … I’ve played with a demo account and it works quite well. Tempting even.
Ad Age: So broadcasters shouldn’t have dual revenue streams, like cable channels?
Mr. Kanojia: I don’t know their business at all. All I know is the current paradigm is this: They have [broadcast] spectrum. They are required to program in the public interest and to offer it widely for free. You are allowed to have an antenna. There is no prohibition on where you have it; it can be on your roof, your window or 50 feet away; in my computer or in the cloud. Tell me what the dispute is? Because you didn’t see it coming? That is really what it is.
Ad Age: But since fees are so important to broadcast now, why shouldn’t they fight it?
Mr. Kanojia: Technology catches up. When the VCR came out there was the same hyperbole: It’s going to kill television. They made billions. It spawned a whole industry of home video. These technologies [Aereo] are single-cast, they know where you are. I think they are just ignoring that technologies like these are immensely helpful in attracting younger audiences and are helpful in creating new ad models.
via Advertising Age
We can’t possibly get 100Mbps at home soon enough! Video seems like the obvious service in what we use today, but just imagine if everyone had such a fast connection! There’s sure to be new applications …
Cable executives have given several reasons for why many cable systems in the United States are going very slowly in upgrading to Docsis 3. Thereâ€™s little competition in areas not served by Verizonâ€™s FiOS system, which soon will offer 50 Mbps service. And some argue there isnâ€™t that much demand for super-high speed.
Mr. Fries added another: Fear. Other cable operators, he said, are concerned that not only will prices fall, but that the super-fast service will encourage customers to watch video on the Web and drop their cable service.
The industry is worried that by offering 100 Mbps, they are opening Pandoraâ€™s box, he said. Everyone will be able to get video on the Internet, and then competition will bring the price for the broadband down from $80 to $60 to $40.
via Worldâ€™s Fastest Broadband at $20 per Home – Bits Blog – NYTimes.com.
When Cablevision rolls out 50Mbps later this year, I will be very tempted though the cost will be double what I currently pay for 30Mbps. Seems like a steep upgrade tax to speed up the recoup on investment.