VOD : The future for linear TV channels

[denphone]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I do think that many people don't appreciate how advances in technology subtly change our habits and lives over time.

But you have stated time after time that linear TV is dead which of course is sheer nonsense as it will be here long after all of us are gone and why don't you accept that old boy.


---------- Post added at 16:45 ---------- Previous post was at 16:44 ----------

Originally Posted by theone2k10

Well that's wrong technically as you can stream iplayer, netflix, nowtv etc on a mobile phone these days, so technically mobile phones and streaming have quite a lot in common nowadays.

l think you both know what l am talking about.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by denphone

But you have stated time after time that linear TV is dead which of course is sheer nonsense as it will be here long after all of us are gone and why don't you accept that old boy.


---------- Post added at 16:45 ---------- Previous post was at 16:44 ----------



l think you both know what l am talking about.

Well, quite obviously, linear broadcasting is not yet dead, Denphone, and in the short term it may even grow. I have never said otherwise.

However, fast forward a couple of decades and the landscape will be completely changed.

I have given my reasons for believing this, but you have not articulated your reasons for thinking otherwise. How do you think commercial channels in their existing form can survive when audiences reduce substantially, as they will?

You may or may not eventually change the way you watch TV, but the majority will in due course. When the tipping point comes, your traditional TV stations will start going off-air.

I guess time alone will eventually convince you that things are set to change.

[spiderplant]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I don't disagree with the Ofcom report, but that only tells us what people are doing now. It does not project forward to forecast how viewers will be watching TV in decades to come.

Agreed, but in the absence of time-travel, we can either look at existing facts to provide a guide to the future, or make random guesses based on no evidence whatsoever. Your choice....

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I respect your view that streaming will soon reach saturation, but I do not understand your reasoning behind that.

Because streaming is already widely available. If people wanted to do it, nothing is stopping them.

This reminds me of discussions on this forum a few years ago about HDTV, with some people predicting the demise of SD. It didn't happen of course. Those who want to watch HD can do. Meanwhile most people are perfectly happy with SD and stick with it.

[denphone]

Spot on SP.

[theone2k10]

Originally Posted by denphone

But you have stated time after time that linear TV is dead which of course is sheer nonsense as it will be here long after all of us are gone and why don't you accept that old boy.


---------- Post added at 16:45 ---------- Previous post was at 16:44 ----------



l think you both know what l am talking about.

I'm just ribbing you buddy all the best for the new year

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by spiderplant

Because streaming is already widely available. If people wanted to do it, nothing is stopping them.

Actually, I think people are still coming to it gradually, particularly the older generation. For many of that generation, all they've known for the last 50 years, is broadcast TV. Then they need a new TV, which these days is most often a smart one, son or daughter hooks it up to the internet for them and they're watching Youtube and iplayer via the TV. For some, that will be the extent of their streaming, others will gradually take it further. Others, like myself, have embraced it full heatedly from the get-go.

[Mad Max]

his reminds me of discussions on this forum a few years ago about HDTV, with some people predicting the demise of SD. It didn't happen of course. Those who want to watch HD can do. Meanwhile most people are perfectly happy with SD and stick with it.

You sure about that? I don't know anyone who now has the ability to watch shows in either SD or the much better HD, actually watch SD anymore, especially sport!

[denphone]

Originally Posted by theone2k10

I'm just ribbing you buddy all the best for the new year

l know.

---------- Post added at 08:31 ---------- Previous post was at 08:26 ----------

Originally Posted by Mad Max

You sure about that? I don't know anyone who now has the ability to watch shows in either SD or the much better HD, actually watch SD anymore, especially sport!

There are still 15 to 20 million at least who still only have SD and there are still a lot of channels that are only in SD only so that's a fair amount and ITV in their great wisdom have put their HD channels behind the paywall so the many people who have freeview cannot even get them in HD.

[telegramsam]

I watch a mix of `live tv`,on demand and recorded but must admit I`m rather old fashioned and like to see a program as it is being transmitted whenever I can. Not often possible though as I watch alot of football and have to record or catch regular programs either on demand or record them. I tend to record as much as possible because virgin seemso slow at putting some program on demand/catch up.
Incidently nobody has commented on the BBC i player being unavailable yesterday(or was it the day before? I had `one or two` last night!) due to a `cyber attack. Thankfully it didn`t effect the BBC tv stations!

[toady]

Originally Posted by Mad Max

You sure about that? I don't know anyone who now has the ability to watch shows in either SD or the much better HD, actually watch SD anymore, especially sport!

You need to meet my friends and family, even when HD is available they still watch the SD channel by default both on VM and Sky, no matter how much I mention a HD option being available, they stick with SD

[OLD BOY]

I don't think that HD or 3D for that matter are the correct analogies. HD was simply about picture quality and 3D was a fad which was always going to appeal only to a minority.

Whereas video streaming without advertisements interrupting programmes has very distinct advantages when everyone leads such busy lives. Yet many people still cling to their old ways despite time being at a premium.

It makes me laugh that people complain because they experience a delay of a few seconds when changing channels on the TIVO but they are quite happy to waste whole chunks of time waiting for a scheduled programme to start or lose 15 minutes per hour due to commercials. The Christmas edition of Downton Abbey would have lasted only 90 minutes instead of 2 hours without those infernal commercial breaks.

This nonsense will eventually be recognised and that is when a fairly rapid sea change in viewing habits will begin.

I notice that those with a different point of view have not been coming forward with their reasons for so thinking and any reasons that are obvious from the comments they make revolve around their own viewing habits.

I suspect that VM would wish to play down the changes that I foresee because these changes will cause problems for them. However, it seems to me that Sky have already grasped the nettle and are now embracing the changes to come. VM really do need to get on board this train before it leaves without them.

[telegramsam]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I don't think that HD or 3D for that matter are the correct analogies. HD was simply about picture quality and 3D was a fad which was always going to appeal only to a minority.

Whereas video streaming without advertisements interrupting programmes has very distinct advantages when everyone leads such busy lives. Yet many people still cling to their old ways despite time being at a premium.

It makes me laugh that people complain because they experience a delay of a few seconds when changing channels on the TIVO but they are quite happy to waste whole chunks of time waiting for a scheduled programme to start or lose 15 minutes per hour due to commercials. The Christmas edition of Downton Abbey would have lasted only 90 minutes instead of 2 hours without those infernal commercial breaks.

This nonsense will eventually be recognised and that is when a fairly rapid sea change in viewing habits will begin.

I notice that those with a different point of view have not been coming forward with their reasons for so thinking and any reasons that are obvious from the comments they make revolve around their own viewing habits.

I suspect that VM would wish to play down the changes that I foresee because these changes will cause problems for them. However, it seems to me that Sky have already grasped the nettle and are now embracing the changes to come. VM really do need to get on board this train before it leaves without them.

On demand already has adverts before and between some programs so how long before it becomes the norm? And then they`l start increasing the number of ad breaks just like ITV did some years ago. Most people like me use the ad break on linear tv to make a cuppa or nip to the toilet.

[spiderplant]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I suspect that VM would wish to play down the changes that I foresee because these changes will cause problems for them. However, it seems to me that Sky have already grasped the nettle and are now embracing the changes to come. VM really do need to get on board this train before it leaves without them.

Eh? What do you think TiVo does? VM saw this coming long ago.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by spiderplant

Eh? What do you think TiVo does? VM saw this coming long ago.

The Tivo was really good when it came out originally. But now it is slow and clunky, and the On Demand service is no longer what it once was.

We do have Netflix and Curzon Cinema (and soon, Vevo) streaming services on there, and of course we have Virgin Movies and Sky on demand. But it isn't enough. Many of us want more and not at the expense of how long it takes to get the box to respond.

It may be that the new box has it all and surprises us, but my suspicion is that Sky are pulling ahead now.

[denphone]

By heck we seem to have quite a few pessimists on the opening day of the year.