There is an interesting research article by JupiterResearch, "IPTV: Simple Benefits, Not New Technology, Most Effectively Compete Against Cable" that cites consumer interest is mainly focused first, on price and next, on their ability to cherry pick channels as the most important factors in the adoption of IPTV. As regards choice, it is not too surprising that a la carte programming is an important consideration since cable has forced consumers to take bloated packages in order to get a few specific channels.

"While Internet Protocol TV proponents get caught up in the futuristic possibilities of the technology, consumers remain much more levelheaded about what they look for in a TV service," said Joseph Laszlo, Research Director at JupiterResearch and author of the report. "Competitors looking to deploy IPTV should avoid overwhelming the consumer with Jetsons-like 'TV of the future' and focus, instead, on delivering real value in terms of TV of the present," added Laszlo.

I would add value with accessibility and extensibility. IPTV providers, I think, need to leverage the three W's; what, when and where.

- Specifically, what content the users want.
- Content when they want, either live or on-demand, i.e. DVR, SlingBox, Podcast, etc.
- Viewing content where the consumer wants, at home or mobile, and this in addition to being platform agnostic. This may seem as given, but there are plenty of examples of technology being out in front of user needs and preferences.

"Although a la carte channel selection is highly feasible over an IPTV infrastructure, the business case remains uncertain, and media companies are likely to resist such service plans," said David Schatsky, Senior VP of Research at JupiterResearch. "To address a la carte's popularity, IPTV services should focus on giving consumers greater choice and control over their television experience, if not true a la carte," added Schatsky.

As regards cable operators, I do not see them moving into the IPTV in the short term. From a Cap-Ex perspective, they are out of capacity since they are serving three different video standards on one network, namely:
- Analog video subs
- Digital video subs
- HD video subs
It may be several years, perhaps 2008 until they have reclaimed the analog space with a set-top in every home.
-More to come...

Two interesting stories emerged yesterday about DVR's, the Internet and how Neilson plans to track viewing habits especially in light of DVR's, SlingBox, PSP, Video ipod, WinCE, Cell phone and other wired and wireless devices.

In a Reuters article almost 80% of national advertisers found television placements less effective. In addition, as DVR's reach the tipping point in US homes, they will reduce their placements by as much as 25%.

Last month at the TV Week Media Planning Conference there was a panel focused on DVR's and their impact on Ad rates, participants suggested from a planning perspective it would become more difficult to measure usage patterns and how that would effect Ad rates.

It was suggested that the challenge for Neilson would be in collecting meaningful data across the country. While the current sample size for DVR's is very small about 7% nationally. (VCR's are still in 90% of US homes). The impact today is not that significant however; in the next few years, it is going to be very significant. Therefore, when talking about point of engagement, tracking the viewer across these platforms is going to be the challenge for the Ad planning community with all of these new technologies. Based on the Neilson article they seem to believe they have the tools to effectively measure usage.

Perhaps in response to concerns over DVR and mobile device usage, Nelson announced they would focus their data collection efforts over the next several years on the relationship between television and the Internet. There was some mention out-of-home viewing which could mean any mobile device, it will be interesting to see how they will effectively measure users of video ipods.

Perhaps, but consider the following scenario. Walking through Bryant Park, located in Manhattan, a free Wi-Fi enabled park, the Windows Mobile™ PDA you carry is altered to someone in your proximity that also uses Jambo™, wireless social networking software. Your IM avatar, which at this point now supports video clips about the user or other content, tells her you are an Indie Film Producer and her clip informs you she is a location scout for Indie and Feature projects, so you decide to contact each other via IM. Since you are working on a film short, it could not have been a more timely connection. I have had serendipitous encounters similar to this, less the technology, have you?

If social networking is valuable in business, then using wireless technology is just another form of connecting with people. Okay, so how is this complimentary technology to the growth of IPTV?

As people have become more mobile with their technology they want to connect to their information and content whenever and wherever they are; the video ipod is but the latest example. While it may be a novelty to spend hours transferring your existing video or downloading an encore television episode for the short term, I think there exists a larger opportunity to make the experience more interactive and useful for individuals and groups. Yahoo! FinanceVision™ was, as I wrote in an earlier post, the best example in its day of a customizable video and text platform albeit only to a desktop. If you intersect video, music, email or text content ubiquitously to mobile devices, the progression follows that you would want the ability to connect with others in real time for shared experiences or to collaborate using your content to expand your story.

Jambo.net is an interesting technology and company, which I came to learn about at a college reunion at Cornell University last summer. Started by Charles Ribaudo and Jim Young, Jambo enables serendipitous connection via their wireless platform, which works on a Wi-Fi or adhoc connection basis. As with most connection portals people outline those areas of interest they wish to share to attract other people. Information is stored in a numeric string, a digital signature to ensure no personal information traverses the net or local connection. When someone is in proximity to you (this can be approximately 300 feet or more depending on the connection), you are alerted to their presence. At this point it is up to the users to determine if they want to make a connection, share contact information, chat via IM or even share files. Since you can set your level of transparency, you are assured not to be bothered when working.

Since IPTV allows for varied content and applications running within a UI, using mobile devices running Jambo might foster connections and collaborations on the fly with media as the common denominator. While this has applications in business, it will transcend that usage into other areas of life.

Perhaps using a program like Jambo, which operates within an IPTV platform to augment real-time interactions, might become the next wave of reality TV?

©Monty Python and the Holy Grail

Dead body: I'm not dead.
Body collector: What?
Man with Dead Body: Nothing. There's your nine pence.
Dead body: I'm not dead.
Body collector: 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
Man with Dead Body: Yes he is.
Dead body: I'm not.
Body collector: He isn't.
Man with Dead Body: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
Dead body: I'm getting better.
Man with Dead Body: No, you're not; you'll be stone dead in a moment.
Body collector: Well, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations.
Dead body: I don't want to go on the cart.
Man with Dead Body: Oh, don't be such a baby.

LOL. Is the talk about the impending demise of television close at hand, or are people trying to club it to death?

Dan Mitchell wrote in the New York Times on March 11th that television may be on its last legs. Certainly the illustration of a television set with a cane and drooping aerial does not bode well for the health of that medium, however, Over the Air (OTA) and Cable while they may have a cold, are far from needing life support.

Mr. Mitchell quoted from the Chartreuse (BETA) blog in which its author, Mr. Campbell writes, "Broadcast television is dead." He also went on to say that "Still, despite the bluster, Mr. Campbell's underlying point is true enough."

Clearly, broadcasters had better get hip and quickly to the subtle but steady shift in the perception of people who see ITV/IPTV as a serious contender to OTA and Cable. Early adopters have embraced devices like the video ipod, DVR's, SlingBox, PSP and these users are leading the way. Once people can cherry pick what programming they want, whenever they want it and mobile platforms are zapping content to users via 3G or Wi-Max networks, a tipping point will occur just as when the masses realized Broadband had significant value over dial-up. That said however, OTA and Cable are not going away for some time for many reasons, just a few of which are listed.

- Huge installed base in hardware. It's not likely your new DLP has a NIC card.
Does that mean people are going to toss their 2k set for a Windows® XP
Media Center pc?
- There is some good content OTA and on cable; people do watch "The News Hour" on PBS, "Frontline", "House", "Sopranos", "Big Love", "Real Sports" and "The Daily Show". Well, at least I do.
- Form factor; plenty of people do not want to view content at 320x280 or even 640x480 pixels. Some do not want to view on a pc, and there is still a ways to go before the two devices merge.
- It is going to take more than what might be a one-time ad placement on Rocketboom for agencies to shift their clients over to what is still a nascent and fragmented delivery platform.

I am a firm believer in ITV/IPTV and want it to succeed for many reasons however, I am not willing to go out on a limb and yell that TV is dead yet. That reminds me of another "Monty Python's Flying Circus" skit in which sheep try to fly.

Tourist: Uh...those ARE sheep aren't they?
Shepherd: Yeh.
Tourist: Hmm, thought they were. Only, what are they doing up in the trees?
Shepherd: A fair question, and one that in recent weeks 'as been much on my mind. It's my considered opinion that they're nesting'.
Tourist: Nesting?
Sheppard: Aye.
Tourist: Like birds?
Sheppard: Exactly. It's my belief that these sheep are laboring under the misappre'ension that they're birds. Observe their behavior. Take for a start the sheep's tendency to 'op about the field on their 'ind legs. Now witness their attempts to fly from tree to tree. Notice that they do not so much fly as...plummet.

(Baaa baaa... flap flap flap ... whoosh ... thud.)

Following up on my post about Brandies University and their IPTV trials, I spoke with Tim O'Neil, manager of media and technology for the project. Tim shared the following information about their system. In addition, I spoke with Richard Abott who wrote the original article. He indicated he was not aware of many people currently using the system, though he did not elaborate as to reasons cited.

Tim, how is the IPTV network configured at Brandies? "At this time, IPTV multicast is only available on our wired, campus network. This limited pilot is testing to see if there is positive acceptance of network-based delivery of cable, local and university related programming. Unicast (on demand) servers are available both on and off campus (wired network access only), as long as you have received the link through one of our web-based course programs. These servers exist purely for the dispensation of required, course related video files at the instructor's request.

"Particularly with this pilot, our program consists of its own fully, self-contained servers and applications from VideoFurnace. All necessary agreements with
content providers are in place. As for other infrastructure, we just needed to insure
ample bandwidth and proper switch compatibility on the campus network."

I asked him why they were using a less common delivery platform than WM, Real or Flash? "This IPTV solution is one of a few being offered, most notable of which may be the VBrick solution, the native and self-contained video player allows the app
to better maintain security over its offered programs, but more importantly, it eliminates the need for the end user to install another player on his or her system for watching VF related material. WM or REAL or QT, etc. need to be installed on the end user's system."

Of course, an applet is still downloaded on an end user's machine and all pc's come with WM player as do Mac's with QuickTime, so there really isn't much of a difference. Of course, a Helix server is very expensive to implement, so perhaps the cost to deploy the VBrick is more cost effective than other platforms.

Their site has more information about the project and lists benefits such as not needing a TV set in the users dorm room, though I would suspect the trend amongst that age group of having several media sources running simultaneously, would be more prevalent than a single source.

http://lts.brandeis.edu/techresources/telecom/tv/iptv.html

The announcement from Lloyd Braun that Yahoo! is scaling back on creating originally produced content is unfortunate, however, not that surprising given its history when they walked away from Finance Vision™, the killer IPTV platform of its day. Granted there were differences between then and now (on the technology, content and user side of the equation). Certainly, the costs associated with ramping up a production unit can be huge, perhaps also there were concerns Hollywood might feel threatened.

Mr. Braun went on to say, "I didn't fully appreciate what success in this medium is really going to look like". He said, "This is not about creating one-off hits like in my old business. That is not going to create a sustainable competitive advantage over the long term."

Rocketboom is an interesting example of how original programming can grab market share with a claim of 100,000 views a day. Yahoo! has had some success with their "Kevin Sites in the Hot Zone", a well-produced news site of international hot spots. Yahoo! could create Mow's (perhaps not every week), Mini-Documentaries, or team with established Producers to co-create programming for their different audience segments.

This would also have achieved a short-term objective taking the high ground in IPTV as the first company to stake out the Internet to offer fresh content on a scheduled basis and allow users to be in control of original and customized content delivery, it is hard to be first.

Mr. Braun also said, "Original content is the salt and pepper on the meal. It is certainly not the engine driving this." I guess it is then up to people like MTV, ABC, AOL and Indie producers to cook the meal themselves.

"The Internet is such a niche content environment that the broadcast model does not really work". Mr. Braun said. If this is true, then it will be interesting to see what the established networks see as the future of IPTV and how they create content for it.

Stay Tuned.