HDTV Almanac - Who Gives You Your News?

“Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one.” A.J. Liebling

The Pew Research Center has released its “State of the News Media 2012? annual report on American journalism. It provides some fascinating information and analysis, and is bound to make you go “hmmm” more than once.

The part that had me scratching my head and pondering the future was their finding that in 2011, “five technology companies accounted for 68% of all online ad revenue.” This is in the context of the observation that companies such as Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple are working hard to gain control over a vertically-integrated mesh of hardware, software, and content, as well as the related revenue streams. The report looks in particular at how these large companies are beginning to get involed with mainstream news media:

As a part of YouTube’s plans to become a producer of original television content, a direction it took strongly last year, it is funding Reuters to produce original news shows.  Yahoo recently signed a content partnership with ABC News for the network to be its near sole provider of news video. AOL, after seeing less than stellar success with its attempts to produce its own original content, purchased The Huffington Post. With the launch of its Social Reader, Facebook has created partnerships with The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Guardian and others. In March 2012 Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes purchased the 98-year-old New Republic magazine.

We’ve encountered media barons before; Rupert Murdoch’s empire ranks right up there among the most influential. But it appears that we could be watching the development of something that reaches further into our lives than ever before. The same company that sells you the device on which you read or watch the news also could create the operating system, own the transmission channel, and even fund the news gathering itself. The opportunity for continued shrinkage in the number of active reporters is real, and we could find fewer sources providing more limited views of current events. They don’t even have to block access to distribution to clobber their competitors; they just run them out of business through financial integration of their own operations.

I’m not ready to say that the news media sky is falling. While I also don’t believe that “citizen journalism” is the answer to all of these ills, it does present a useful counterforce and that genie will be difficult to put back in the bottle. Still, massive power does present the opportunity for abuse. Those who believe in the rights of a free press and need for a free exchange of ideas and information will do well to keep a vigilant eye on these developments. Fortunately, we have the Pew Research Center providing valuable data points along the way.

Posted by Alfred Poor, March 20, 2012 6:00 AM

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

HDTV Almanac - Online Streaming Grows

As reported by Jim O’Neil in Fierce Online Video, the Roku CEO Anthony Wood gave a keynote address at the OTTCon in San Jose, California, last week. Wood is quoted as making several noteworthy remarks (and I recommend that you read the whole article), but the part that jumped out at me was this:

As the number of channels grow–there are almost 500 on Roku now and a new one is being launched almost every day–viewing has [to] grow. Roku has seen its viewing time increase from six hours a week to 12. And I think it’s going to continue growing until it reaches 35 hours, the average that viewers watch today.

Let me repeat that with emphasis: 500 channels on Roku. Tell me again what you’re missing if you cancel your cable subscription? Actually, I know the answer; major channels such as ESPN and some of the premium channels offer programming that cannot (yet) be matched online. But when people are watching as many hours of over-the-top streaming video as they currently watch of the linear broadcast content, don’t you think that the ESPNs and HBOs of the traditional media might take notice? Clearly, they already are aware and are deep into their own experiments into Internet streaming for their content.

Oh, and HBO Go is indeed one of those 500 channels on Roku already. If I were running a cable or satellite television service, I’d be trying hard to figure out what I’m going to do when my current business falls apart.

Posted by Alfred Poor, March 26, 2012 6:00 AM

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

HDTV Almanac - Bed-Sized 3DTV in China

How much is too much? If it’s possible to go too far with a television set’s specfications, this could be it. China Star Optoelectronics Technology Co Ltd is a subsidiary of the electronics giant, TCL Corporation, and earlier this month, the company announced a monster of a 3DTV.

(Credit: TCL Corporation)

This behemoth measures 110? diagonal. It also has 4K by 2K resolution, or 4,096 by 2,160 pixels. That’s the same as if you had glued four 55? 1080p screens together. And it is an active 3DTV display, using shutter glasses for the stereoscopic view. And if that’s not enough, it also has multi-touch touchscreen input.

The company’s press release is silent on plans to make this a commercial product, but does indicate that two units were donated to the Great Hall of the People in Beijing for public display. This points to what is likely the true motivation for the technology demonstration. It shows that China is able to hold its own in terms of innovation in the display industry. TCL quotes an expert from Fudan University; “China will replace Japan and South Korea as the world leader in TV display screens in terms of manufacturing and R&D in three to five years, and will provide a higher level of quality and more cost-effective products to the global community.”

Clearly, this is a very large stake to drive in the ground, but China is marking its territory. Given the current state of the flat panel industry, however, China could end up like the dog who chases a cat, and then has to figure out what it wants to do with it once it catches it. There could be a lot of corporate blood and fur strewn about before this is all over.

Posted by Alfred Poor, March 19, 2012 6:00 AM

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

HDTV Almanac - Competition Does Not Lower Cable Fees

The Federal Communications Commission released a report this month with the descriptive yet cumbersome title of “Report On Average Rates for Cable Programming Service And Equipment.” The results come from a study of cable television service fees in different markets. The data was divided into two groups: communities where there was no meaningful competition (aside from satellite) and those where there was a competitor (either cable or phone company). The data is a snapshot taken in January 2010, so it’s not exactly current, but the results were a bit surprising all the same.

In the “competitive” communities, the price of “basic” cable service was about the same as with the “non-competitive” markets. But when it comes to “expanded basic” service, the price was actually slighty higher in the “competitive” markets. This result gets even more interesting when you calculate the “cost per channel” for the different companies; those in “competitive” markets had a lower cost per channel.

What this means is that the cable companies in competitive markets lard their offerings with more channels, so you get more for your higher fee. I’m not too sure that it’s a bargain. It reminds me of the story about two little old ladies on a week-long cruise. They share a table at dinner, and about halfway through the trip, one looks at the other and remarks, “The food on this ship isn’t very good, is it?” To which the other replies, “No, I suppose not. But they do give such nice large portions!”

I suspect that large portions will not be enough to satisfy subscription television customers much longer.

Posted by Alfred Poor, March 23, 2012 6:00 AM

Re: HDTV Almanac - Competition Does Not Lower Cable Fees

paulk2 • Mar 24, 4:31am
In Palm Harbor FL we have brighthouse, verizon FIOS and Knology available and the prices are definitely lower than nearby single-provider communities. Often the single-provider is brighthouse and even though it's the same system, the prices are far higher.
It also helps to play one against the other for even better savings.
Even with 3 providers, I still use Directv thanks to NFL Sunday Ticket. FIOS is the best for internet. Poor Knology is just hanging on....

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

HDTV Almanac - Hulu Redesigns Viewing Screen

Yesterday, Hulu announced that it has upgraded its viewing screen. The biggest news is that the viewing window is now 55% larger, and it’s displayed with a drop shadow against a nice, neutral gray background. (Apparently that is called a “video matte” in the trade; who knew?) Video details appear below the viewing window, and the interface is been tidied up in general.

I think it’s great that Hulu cares and is putting the effort into this upgrade. And I agree that this looks better. But it really does not have much impact on how I use or enjoy Hulu content. As soon as I start watching a program, I immediately switch to full-screen mode. After a brief pause, the playback controls and everything else fades away and I’m left with just the program content. So while it’s nice that Hulu has freshened up the screen, I might not have noticed if they had not pointed it out.

Tell me, am I crazy? Am I the only one out there who would rather watch streaming content in full-screen without the rest of the clutter? Let me know at alfred@hdtvprofessor.com.

Posted by Alfred Poor, March 16, 2012 6:00 AM

Alfred Poor is a well-known display industry expert, who writes the daily HDTV Almanac. He wrote for PC Magazine for more than 20 years, and now is focusing on the home entertainment and home networking markets.

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

HDTV Almanac - What is Apple up to with Its TV Plans?

Who is Henry Blodget? According to the “Business Insider” website, he is “co-founder, CEO and Editor-In Chief of Business Insider, a former top-ranked Wall Street analyst, [and] the host of Yahoo Daily  Ticker, a Yahoo Finance video show viewed by several million people a  month.  He is often a guest on CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and other networks.” Clearly, here is someone who spends much of his time learning and thinking about major companies and finance. And I wish that I could reprint one of his latest columns here in its entirety.

Instead, I strongly recommend that you click here to read “APPLE’S TV DREAM REVEALED: Embarrass Hardware Makers, Stiff Content Providers,  Destroy Cable Companies.” I’ll also point out that he gives credit to Wall Street analyst Gene  Munster and Claire Atkinson of the New York Post for their research on the topic. Blodget does not pull any punches, as you might have guess from the article’s title.

The highlights are that Apple wants to build the coolest TV ever (which is not a surprising goal), charge a lot for it (in order to maintain that incredible Apple product profit margin), and obtain top-shelf content for almost nothing that Apple will control and provide to the consumers. In short, the company wants to replicate its success with the iPod and iTunes in the music industry, except this time do it with movies and television shows.

Blodget paints a credible future in which Apple uses its installed base of iPhones and iPads to be the camel’s nose under the tent, convincing the other parties that there’s some extra money to be made by joining in on Apple’s Grand Experiment. And Apple will become indispensible and eventually “destroy the economics and power of today’s TV industry, both on the content side  and the distribution side.”

I don’t think it will happen. I don’t think it can happen. I see two problems with Blodget’s conclusions. First, the television and movie content producers have shown much more reluctance to get in bed with online distribution than the music industry was. For example, as Netflix gets bigger and more influential, some of its content contracts are not getting renewed. The producers don’t want the Netflix money, for fear that it devalues their product. (Whether they are right or wrong in this analysis is beside the point.) So Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, and others are apparently preparing to become their own studios and produce original content without the help of the established providers. I don’t see how Apple can convince the content producers to accept a pennies-on-the-dollar deal for their content.

And the second point is that I can’t see a television that costs twice as much as the competition being a run-away success, no matter how cool it might be. When the iPod came out, there weren’t that many MP3 players in use, and the ones that were available were all very different. The same was the case when the first iPhone and the first iPad appeared. Trying to sell a new television today is tough enough, even without pricing yourself out of the market. This is a mature market with many large brand names and little significant product differentiation. Apple is likely to chip a tooth or two trying to take a bite out of this pie.

All the same, I recommend that you read Blodget’s article for yourself and make up your own mind. It’s too soon to say, but if he’s right about Apple’s strategy, I expect this to be a massive failure in the making.

Posted by Alfred Poor, March 13, 2012 6:00 AM

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

HDTV Almanac - Dont Look Now; Here Comes Amazon

Netflix. YouTube. Hulu. Anyone who streams video content from the Internet probably is aware of these big three sources of television shows and movies. But a lot of people don’t think of Amazon quite as quickly. The company has steadily been beefing up its streaming capabilities and building its content library. And yesterday, Amazon made a big announcement. The company has announced a deal with Discovery to add many of their hit shows to Amazon’s Prime Instant Video catalog. Here’s a quote from Amazon’s home page:

Today we’re announcing our biggest addition yet, bringing nearly 3,000 more titles to Prime Instant Video. We’ve struck a deal with Discovery Networks to bring some of the highest quality, non-fiction, informative and entertaining content about the world to our Amazon Prime customers. Rolling out over the next few weeks are TV shows from Discovery, TLC, Animal Planet, and Science. Prime members, at no additional cost, can now stream more than 17,000 titles. The new titles include hits such as Deadliest Catch, Mythbusters, Man vs. Wild, Dirty Jobs, Gold Rush: Alaska, and Shark Week, TLC series like Say Yes to the Dress and Cake Boss, as well as content like How It’s Made from Science, and The Jeff Corwin Experience from Animal Planet.

This means that these shows can be viewed at no extra cost by subscribers to Amazon’s Prime program. And they can watch them on a wide range of devices including computers, smartphones, and of course, the Amazon Kindle Fire.

Now, Amazon’s total of 17,000 titles is still pretty small, but this announcement shows that they have the resolve to pay for brand-name content that appeals to a broad range of audiences. And it shows that they’re ready to expand the catalog in big chunks. And as more people find out about Prime Instant Video and what it has to offer for $79 a year, they may look twice at what they’re spending each month for Hulu Plus or even Netflix. Especially when they also get free two-day shipping on many Amazon purchases.

Posted by Alfred Poor, March 15, 2012 6:00 AM

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

HDTV Almanac - March Madness Online: No More Free Ride!

The NCAA Division 1 men’s basketball tournement launches on Wednesday, and like last year, you can watch all 67 games online. But you can’t watch them for free this time.

The March Madness streaming video has grown to be an enormous success over the past few years, and this year you’re asking to pay for it. What’s the price of a ticket to the Big Show? $3.99. Seriously folks, that’s it. That won’t even buy you a beer in some sports bars, and with this you get to watch all 67 games. Not only that, but you can watch on your computer, your iPad, or many iPhone and Android smartphones, and you only have to pay once.

What me? Watching March Madness? Not me, boss!

And when you’re watching the games on your computer, the website still throws up a Boss Screen at the click of a button. Ah, just when the economic recovery is starting in earnest, this comes along to blow our nation’s productivity to bits. Oh well, we can get back to work when April gets here.

Posted by Alfred Poor, March 12, 2012 6:00 AM

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

HDTV Almanac - Oh Boy! A New iPad!

Receive instant notification of new columns: Register Now to receive notification of new HDTV Magazine Columns via email as soon as they are published.

HDTV Almanac - Oh Boy! A New iPad! by Alfred Poor on March 9, 2012 Categories: HTPCs & Laptops, Mobile HDTV 7 Comments

You may have noticed that there has not been a lot of coverage of the new iPad 3 here over the preceding six months. While many members of the new era media were working themselves into a speculative frenzy over what the unannounced and unspecified product would be, I was content to wait for the facts. And I have to admit that at least from the display perspective, the new iPad 3 finally lives up to its predecessor’s hype.

If you want to learn more about its display, I recommend an excellent column by DisplaySearch analyst Richard Shim: “iPad 3: Clarifying Display Issues”. He points out that the LCD panel (sorry, it is not the widely-rumored OLED display) has an impressive 2,048 by 1,536 pixel resolution, which works out to 264 pixels per inch (ppi). Apple also chooses to call this a “Retina Display” even though the pixel density is much less than the 326 ppi found on the iPhone 4. I expect that the explanation is that you are going to hold the iPhone much closer to your eye than the iPad, so the pixels need to be smaller. Whatever.

The news for me is that the iPad finally can display full high-definition images without scaling. Granted, the panel still uses the same old 4:3 aspect ratio as your grandfather’s television set, but at least it now has enough pixels to show 1,920 by 1,080 without scaling (though with plenty space left over for letterboxing). If you make the image scale to fit the width of the panel, however, things could get ugly as you stretch each pixel by 1.06 and two-thirds. (No, I haven’t seen an iPad 3 in person yet, but I sure hope that Apple has included a provision for watching movies that does not involve such scaling.)

Richard also points out that these smaller pixels mean less room for light to be transmitted (smaller aperture ratio) which translates to the need for a brighter backlight which in turn impacts battery life. He expresses his suspicion that the device has a larger battery to respond to this extra power draw, along with the additional power required for the new processor.

There appears to be some interesting innovation in this new tablet, which may help accelerate the spread of video entertainment to devices other than the tradtional television set.

Posted by Alfred Poor, March 9, 2012 5:00 AM

Re: HDTV Almanac - Oh Boy! A New iPad!

videograbber • Mar 9, 9:59am
> things could get ugly as you stretch each pixel by 1.06 and two-thirds.

I don't have time to respond to the entire article ATM, but two-thirds? ??? Where did that come from?

- Tim...

Re: HDTV Almanac - Oh Boy! A New iPad!

alfredpoor • Mar 9, 10:58am
Tim, 2,048 divided by 1,920 equals 1.066666666666667. That is the same as "1.06 and two thirds" though it would have been more precise to say "two-thirds of one hundredth". The risk of artifacts when making such a small scaling change is pretty large.

Alfred Poor
HDTV Almanac...

Re: HDTV Almanac - Oh Boy! A New iPad!

videograbber • Mar 9, 4:57pm
Ah, thanks for the explanation, Alfred. I've never heard such a thing described that way. I'm pretty sure I would never have figured that one out on my own.

As for scaling the image up by 6.66...% just to be able to say you filled all the pixels, that seems a bit silly. Not just due to artifacts. If you use a resampling filter, they won't be that bad (even the poorest ones scale pretty well). Though if you use simple resizing, it will definitely get noticably crusty-looking. I just tried scaling some video stills up, using the poorest-quality and fastest (Hermite) filter. With 2M pixels, artifacts aren't even noticable on my 25" screen. On a 10" screen, you'd never be able to see them at all. But because the extra GPU overhead (and battery consumption) isn't justified, to fill that ~half inch (128 pixels = 2048-1920).

I'd suspect (hope) they'd simply run it 1:1. But if they didn't, the main downside would likely be battery life impact, not artifacts, unless their ...

Re: HDTV Almanac - Oh Boy! A New iPad!

videograbber • Mar 9, 5:17pm
Alfred,

> The news for me is that the iPad finally can display full high-definition images without scaling. Granted, the panel still uses the same old 4:3 aspect ratio as your grandfather’s television set, <

Urg. Are we still on that old kick? The screens on tablets should be 16x9, because some of our content is 16x9? And a 4x3 panel is some-how "old-fashioned"? If the purpose of tablets was exclusively for video display of HD aspect-ratios, there might be some merit to that. However, they are also used extensively for reading materials (and other purposes). And based on all the PDFs I have, a 4x3 AR fits them vastly better in Portrait mode than 16x9. I know that because I have other tablets with narrower ARs (1280x800, e.g.), and the result is that when reading such content, there are huge wasted bands on top and bottom, which reduces the size of the (already sm...

Re: HDTV Almanac - Oh Boy! A New iPad!

alfredpoor • Mar 10, 7:11am
Tim, I don't mean to imply that tablet screens should be 16:9; I'm only saying that if you do watch HD content on it (and I expect many people would want to), you're going to have 436 blank lines or about a third of the screen. That's going to bother a lot of people. (Be honest with me; how many homes have you been to where the image has been stretched vertically to eliminate letterboxing or pillaring? More than one is too many, and I've seen WAY more than too many.) And I'm not trying to pick on Apple; they were the ones that promoted the iPad2 as the ultimate movie viewing experience.

As for Apple defying the laws of physics, you and I know that they can't, but that doesn't seem to stop them from implying that they can.

Alfred...

Re: HDTV Almanac - Oh Boy! A New iPad!

videograbber • Mar 10, 9:04am
Alfred,

> I don't mean to imply that tablet screens should be 16:9; <

Thanks for the clarification. From your remark about "same old" and "like your grandfather" that was the implication I drew. From day one, Apple made a conscious decision that a 4x3 ratio was best for handling the entire range of activities such a portable device could be used for. Not simply be optimized for one specific use-case. There's not much point in harping on that, because it's obviously never going to change. And I think it was the right choice, though I realize not everyone will agree. (BTW, I don't own one, if that's the impression anyone is getting, though I do own many other tablets, from 5-12 inches. Perhaps the better screen will finally convince me to make the leap.)

OTOH, Apple now has the first and only device with so much resolution that it could function well as a two-page landscape display. (Though the upcomin...

Re: HDTV Almanac - Oh Boy! A New iPad!

videograbber • Mar 10, 9:30am
Oh, and while I'm no Apple fanboy, I don't think they're getting the credit they deserve in the media for what they have accomplished in one area. Assuming you believe that a 2048x1526 display is an achievement in itself, and of some value, which I do. As you pointed out, to provide that resulted in a 70% greater power usage than previous models. That's a lot. And they managed to provide that extra 70% power capacity without changing the size, the weight, or the price! That's a pretty amazing feat in and of itself, in my book.

Yet many in the media are writing it off as "pretty much the same old thing, except for a higher-rez screen". That overlooks the magnitude of what they did manage to pull off (essentially a 17-hour iPad2), which was really quite impressive (though not necessarily immediately obvious to all).

- Tim...

About Alfred Poor

Alfred Poor is a well-known display industry expert, who writes the daily HDTV Almanac. He wrote for PC Magazine for more than 20 years, and now is focusing on the home entertainment and home networking markets.

advertisement

advertisement

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

HDTV Almanac - More Bad News for Sears

Times have been tough for Sears Holdings, the company that owns Sears and Kmart retail stores. In the fourth quarter of 2011, which is the season that retailers hope to post most of their profits for the year, Sears reported a loss of $2.4 billion. As a result, the company is looking to raise money by shedding some of its assets. According to the company’s announcement, it plans to sell an additional 11 stores in 2012. In addition, it will spin off the Hometown and Outlet stores. The company also plans to reduce inventory and implement other cost-savings measures.

This is not good news for the company and its shareholders, but it could mean that you’ll want to keep a close eye on sales at your local Sears stores. It’s possible that they may have to move some of there electronics inventory at aggressive discounts in order to raise some cash, and you might be able to snag some attractive bargains.

Posted by Alfred Poor, February 24, 2012 5:00 AM

Alfred Poor is a well-known display industry expert, who writes the daily HDTV Almanac. He wrote for PC Magazine for more than 20 years, and now is focusing on the home entertainment and home networking markets.

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

HDTV Almanac - Retransmission Saga Continues

One step forward, maybe two steps back.

One major retransmission dispute is now resolved. After nearly two months, the Madison Square Garden (MSG) channels have been turned back on for Time Warner Cable (TWC) customers. This did not happen until the New York governor and state attorney general weighed in to put public pressure on both parties to settle. One reason that make the negotiations particularly sticky is that MSG is controlled by the family of the CEO of Cablevision, which is TWC’s major competitor.

So now we can look to Rhode Island and Pensacola, Florida, where LIN TV is threatening to pull the plug on its stations from Cox in those markets unless they can come to terms. What makes this dispute particularly interesting is that LIN TV has two franchises in each of those markets. They own a Fox and a CBS affiliate in Rhode Island, and a Fox and a CW affiliate in Pensacola. Relaxed FCC rules made it possible for a company to own more than one station in a market, which gives LIN TV increased leverage in its negotiations. According to an article in FierceCable, LIN TV has seen a severe drop in ad revenues, and so appears to be turning to retransmission fees as its main source of income.

The pay-TV services are not bottomless buckets of money, as many of their subscribers are all too happy to tell you. Milking these services (and their subscribers) for ever-larger retransmission fees is a dangerous game that is likely to hasten the inevitable review of the FCC’s rules, and who knows what changes that might bring.

Posted by Alfred Poor, February 23, 2012 5:00 AM

Re: HDTV Almanac - Retransmission Saga Continues

eliwhitney • Feb 23, 8:57am
TO: alfredpoor

Good morning , Sir - -

Here, all of this week, our gas stations might just as well "stationed" a guy permanently w/ that long-handeled Pole & suction cup "thingie" to keep updating the gas prices!!! ...wicked, with LOTS MORE to come as soon as "they" dare!

That, in addition to $12.99 for a large can of generic coffee, $2.29 / pound for most varieties of apples, almost $4 / gallon now for milk etc., etc.. - - - without ANY "fear" of disagreements from others herein - - - the DAYS of simply accepting & accepting ever-greater local Cable Billings for LESS content are quickly coming to an end!

I see many "disconnects" on my Horizon as there are better / or, mandatory bills-needing-to-be-paid!

OR, at least, in my opinion!

eli...

HDTV Almanac - HBO Arrives on Samsung Smart TVs

Nearly a year ago, Samsung and HBO announced a partnership that would let consumers stream HBO content to Samsung TVs. You would have to be an HBO subscriber to access the service, which meant that you had to be signed up with a pay-TV service.

Since then, you could get this HBO Go content on your computer, iPad, iPhone, Android smart phone, or even a Roku box. But not a Samsung TV. Until now.

Samsung has just announced that the service is available on certain models of their Smart TVs, with one additional restriction; not all pay-TV services are eligible. While Verizon FiOS, Charter, Cox, DISH Network, and DirecTV are supported on the Samsung screens, Comcast and Time Warner Cable are among the most conspicuously absent (though they do support the smart phone and iPad apps).

I continue to find it fascinating that the content providers such as HBO are being so timid about opening up streaming access to their content. The HBO Go service is free, but available only to HBO subscribers, perhaps so that HBO doesn’t anger the pay-TV services that provide the bulk of its revenues. On the other hand, this may simply be the company’s way of limiting demand for the streaming service, giving them time to test it out before rolling out in a big way.

It might well be that HBO is planning a streaming-only offering down the line with it’s own monthly fee. The same pay-TV service that currently gets subscriber dollars for the HBO channels would almost certainly be the same company that provides the broadband connection used to access the streaming service, so while this could mean less money for the pay-TV service, it’s not as though HBO would be cutting them off completely with the new service. There is no doubt that the cable, satellite, and telco services are going to have to be nimble and responsive over the next few years if they are going to survive the rapidly-changing video entertainment landscape.

Posted by Alfred Poor, February 22, 2012 5:00 AM

HDTV Almanac - More TV for Wii

There are almost 40 million Wii video game consoles installed in U.S. households. And now a partnership between Nintendo and Hulu has brought Hulu Plus to the Wii. For $7.99 a month, viewers can add the service that provides access to many television shows and movies, and unlike the free Hulu service (which apparently still is not available on the Wii), you are not limited to the last five episodes of many current shows.

This offers a low-cost way for viewers to experiment with making their current television a “Smart TV” and access streaming video content from the Internet. You’ll need a broadband connection, but the vast majority of American households already have this either through cable or telco service, so this should not be a limitation for most people. If the offerings on Hulu Plus are not enough, you access use your Netflix streaming subscription on the Wii as well.

Posted by Alfred Poor, February 21, 2012 5:00 AM

Alfred Poor is a well-known display industry expert, who writes the daily HDTV Almanac. He wrote for PC Magazine for more than 20 years, and now is focusing on the home entertainment and home networking markets.

HDTV Almanac - The Power of Aggregated Data

What do people really watch when they watch the SuperBowl? Thanks to the new world of connected entertainment systems, TiVo has a very good idea. By monitoring an anonymous sample of 41,666 households equipped with TiVo DVRs, the company can compile a map of “live and same-day” viewing of content that was watched at “play” speed on the systems. And guess what? People really do like the SuperBowl commercials.

According to the TiVo results, the Dorito’s “Man’s Best Friend” showed the greatest increase compared with the viewing numbers for the adjacent 15 minutes. Even this was well below the numbers for Madonna’s halftime show, and the highest viewership number for the entire program was the desperation “hail mary” pass that ended the game.

The big take-away from this, however, is not about the SuperBowl. It simply demonstrates how granular our data can be now about who watches what. These “temperature” graphs showing what viewers find most interesting is going to help content producers attract sponsors both for in-line commercials and for embedded product placements in the content itself. This data is likely to become the foundation for new funding models that will make it possible to reach specific markets more effectively, which means that individual sponsors can spend more per viewer in a smaller audience, because they will know what that audience is watching and what holds their interest.

For me, the main point is that the future does not belong to the companies that can deliver the stars and blockbuster content. Instead, the winners will be those best equipped to handle Big Data and be able to match viewers with content and sponsors in a tightly-integrated system. The world of video entertainment is indeed changing.

Posted by Alfred Poor, February 20, 2012 5:00 AM

HDTV Almanac - FCC to Revisit Must Carry Rules

I’ve already written a bunch about the problems with retransmission fees and how pay-television subscribers get caught in the squeeze between their services and the content providers. Many people don’t realize that there is a fascinating flip-side to this problem, which is known as “must carry”. It works like this.

Every three years, local television broadcasters have to make a choice. They can either make their content available to local pay-TV services (cable, satellite, and telco) in return for a retransmission fee, or they can choose to forego the fee and just require the pay-TV service to carry their signal on the subscriber system. It’s a tricky proposition. If you’re sure that consumers will want your programming (note that the pay-TV service is not allowed to go to some adjacent market to replace yours if it’s from the same network), then you go for the gold. If you’re not sure that anyone would miss it if your programming gets left off, then you may want to invoke the “must carry” rule so that you can reach a bigger audience and get more money from your advertisers.

This whole system got more complicated with the digital transition. Cable companies started as community antennas, distributing the over-the-air signals through cables on the ground so that all homes in the area could get good reception. Originally, all cable systems were analog, and they just pumped the signals from the antennas through the wires. Then they got premium channels which they encrypted, which led to set top boxes to decrypt them. And then we got digital systems that offer improved image quality (and more secure encryption). The digital systems also made it possible to deliver high-definition images.

So now we have digital transmissions from almost all television broadcasters, but many cable companies still maintain analog distribution networks. This means that the digital signals have to be converted back to analog in order to be sent to analog subscribers. Cable companies would like to convert over to all-digital systems, but this requires capital investment and converter boxes for any subscribers who still don’t have a television set with a digital tuner.

Cable companies would like to free up some of their capacity by dropping local stations that don’t have much of an audience. Smaller broadcasters want to keep the “must carry” rule so that they don’t lose a major part of their audience (since so few people rely on over-the-air signals these days).

This issue has come to a head because cable services were given a three-year waiver from the requirement to not degrade the rebroadcast signal. This was required because the standard definition analog systems cannot display the high definition content of some digital broadcasts without scaling it down significantly. That waiver expires in June, and the FCC needs to decide whether or not to renew it. If it does not renew the waiver, then local cable companies may be forced to switch to digital networks unless the FCC makes other changes to the “must carry” rule as well. In preparation for these deliberations, the FCC has called for comments on the issue.

Posted by Alfred Poor, February 17, 2012 5:00 AM

HDTV Almanac - The Big Three Networks

Everything seems to come in threes. We had the Big Three Automakers in Detroit. There were those little pigs. And then there were the major television networks: Netflix, Amazon, and Google.

Wait a minute; what happened to ABC, CBS, and NBC?

From where I sit, that is ancient history. The traditional networks are dead men walking, and just don’t know it. They are trying to stick with the old models of providing the conduit for video entertainment, and they are failing. Streaming content over the Internet bypasses the traditional network, making it an unnecessary intermediary in the system between content producer and consumer. And it may also squeeze out the traditional role of “advertiser” at the same time. If we have learned one thing from the Internet, it is death to the middleman; Amazon Kindle, Square, and Zappos are just a few examples.

Most of the content shown on online systems such as Netflix and Amazon are reruns. The traditional networks and Hollywood movie studios try to wring out some additional value from these leftovers so they license the content for streaming. And in the process, they have sowed the seeds of their own demise. They have provided the fuel for the fire that is the consumer demand to watch what they want, when they want, where they want. And that is a fire that can’t be put out at this point.

But can the networks be replaced? Netflix has launched its original content with the series “Lilyhammer” and will follow up with “House of Cards” with Kevin Spacey and a revival of the popular “Arrested Development” next year. Google’s YouTube is investing in original content as well, and is providing full-length programming of all sorts.

And here comes GigaOM with a breaking story that Amazon has posted job openings for creative positions with the goal of creating its own content. The service is a bit of a sleeper in the streaming video arena at this point, but its Amazon Prime members get to watch all sorts of content for free (along with many other useful bonuses) in return for a Netflix-like monthly fee. Many consumers may find that they can get a better combined value from Amazon, and if the company starts producing compelling content, it could be a major force.

The new world of video entertainment is going to require a new world of ways to pay for the content’s creation. Who do you think is in a better position to deliver a new model: ABC, CBS, and NBC, or Google, Netflix, and Amazon?

I rest my case.

Posted by Alfred Poor, February 15, 2012 5:00 AM

Re: HDTV Almanac - The Big Three Networks

videograbber • Feb 15, 7:51am
> And then there were the major television networks: Netflix, Amazon, and Google. Wait a minute; what happened to ABC, CBS, and NBC? From where I sit, that is ancient history. The traditional networks are dead men walking, and just don’t know it.

Wow. That's quite a leap. Usually I can't find too much to fault in your commentaries, Alfred, but you're way off base with this one, IMO. Why do I say that? Because content is king. And your new, so called "big 3" haven't got any. How much content do I watch each week from the "dead men walking"? About 30 hours. How much from your trio? Zero.

Why do you think the big whoop-de-do launch of Google TV fell flat on it's face? And the hardware products got withdrawn or flushed at fire-sale prices? No content. Sure, I can see that your trio is making the very first tentative steps in that direction (developing their own content). ...

HDTV Almanac - Why TV Subscribers Change

A new report from Centris indicates that more than one out of five pay-TV subscribers intend to change providers, change their level of service, or cancel entirely in the next three months. About half of these will change the program package that they have, which means that the other half will switch to a new service entirely or get rid of pay-TV altogether.

For those in this second group who are not moving, the main reason for making the change is simple: money. More than a third of them indicate that the price of the subscription is the reason for their decision. And I can’t say that I’m surprised.

Satellite and cable fees continue to rise (driven at least in part by more expensive retransmission licensing fees), and consumers feel that they are paying more for nothing. The pundits forecast continued subscriber losses; in an Associated Press story, Citigroup analyst Jason Bazinet predicts that Comcast will announce a net loss of another 125,000 basic cable subscribers for the fourth quarter of last year.

As I’ve said before, the pay-TV services are getting squeezed and I expect that we’ll see some significant changes in the business before this year is over.

Posted by Alfred Poor, February 14, 2012 5:00 AM

Alfred Poor is a well-known display industry expert, who writes the daily HDTV Almanac. He wrote for PC Magazine for more than 20 years, and now is focusing on the home entertainment and home networking markets.

HDTV Almanac - Retransmission Fees: Who Is Winning?

As I have mentioned recently, one of the big topics for 2012 will be the dispute over retransmission fees. Cable and satellite service providers complain that the content producers are holding their customers hostage in order to extort larger fees for the rights to rebroadcast their copyrighted programming. The result has been blackouts of channels — sometimes for extended periods of time — when the previous retransmission contracts expire.

On the content producer side, they are seeing their revenues dwindle from other sources, so they see retransmission fees as a way to recoup their losses. The subscription television services are the ones who draw angry reactions from consumers, however, as their television service bills keep rising year after year. The increased fees are forcing cable and satellite to consider unpalatable options such as lower-priced channel bundles. They could even be forced to offer a la carte pricing.

While the situation is not clearcut, the recent earning news from News Corporation indicates that the retransmission wars may be providing a big windfall for the content providers. The company reported that it experienced “a greater than 100% increase in retransmission consent revenues.”

With the economy the way it is, it seems strange that the rules let a company double its revenues just for providing the same content as before. It appears that part of the problem is that there is no competition permitted in the current rules, and there may be too much leverage given to the content providers.

With numbers like these from News Corp and continuing problems with extended blackouts, it looks like something is broken in the system and this may be the year that it’s bad enough that the FCC or Congress will decide to fix it.

Posted by Alfred Poor, February 13, 2012 5:00 AM

Make Differences


Charities


Articles


Asbestos Deaths


Mesothelioma


Mesothelium


Deaths from Asbestos


Mesothelioma Advice


Mesothelioma Resources


Exposure to Asbestos


Auto Donation California


Car Donation Centers


Car Donation San Francisco


Vehicle Donation California

HDTV Almanac - Shed Some Light on Sports Blackouts

Last Thanksgiving weekend, the NFL Cleveland Browns travelled in-state to play the Cincinnati Bengals. The game was not a sell-out, and under FCC rules, the Bengals exercised their option to blackout the over-the-air broadcast of the game on local television stations in Cincinnati, Dayton, and Lexington. This decision raised the ire of thousands of Bengal fans, which in turn prompted Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown to ask the FCC to revisit its blackout rules.

Personally, I find that this is an interesting issue. I certainly understand that consumers want to be able to watch their local sports teams for “free” on their home televisions. And I also understand that many of those communities have provide all sorts of tax breaks and other financial incentives to build local stadiums for those teams. (The Bengals’ stadium reportedly cost the taxpayers more than $450 million.)

On the other hand, those same teams generate a lot of money in terms of wages, taxes, and tourism which often repays the taxpayer investment many times over. And I’m a bit puzzled that consumers somehow feel entitled to view an event for which admission is charged. I view it as a generous gift to the community that the teams give the broadcast to hometown viewers, and it makes sense that they only do this when the game has sold out. To force them to give away the coverage when they have not sold enough tickets is much like exacting a tax on the teams because the broadcasts make it even less likely that fans will buy tickets. We don’t expect concert promoters to provide free covereage of all concerts that are put on in that same taxpayer-subsidized stadium; why should football be treated differently?

And if the local community thinks that free local coverage is important, then there is no reason why a “no-blackout” clause could not be included in the contract with the team the next time they want taxpayer money to help build a stadium. Again, the choice to black-out local coverage is an option, and the decision to do so lies with the team.

But as fascinating as my view might be, it doesn’t matter what I think. The FCC is asking for consumer feedback on the issue. The bad news is that few people have taken advantage of this opportunity, and the deadline for input is next Monday, February 13.

So here’s your chance to weigh in on the discussion. You can file a comment online at the FCC website at http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Let your voice be heard in D.C. about whether the sport blackout rules should be changed.

Posted by Alfred Poor, February 10, 2012 5:00 AM

HDTV Almanac - Redbox Rising

The physical DVD is dead; long live streaming!

That’s the conventional wisdom, but I’ve got a dollar that says rumors of the DVD’s death are premature. Why a dollar? Because that’s what it costs to rent a DVD from one of those big red vending machines that you see everywhere from Walmart to McDonalds (not to mention the two just beyond the cash registers at our local grocery store).

Yes, I’m talking about Redbox, which is the other jaw of the vice that — along with Netflix on the other side — squeezed Blockbuster out of existence. Not only is the company succeeding with $1 DVD rentals, it also now offers Blu-ray discs overnight for just $1.50. Is the strategy working? Consider two breaking news items, and you be the judge.

The most recent announcement is that Redbox will be acquiring the assets from NCR’s entertainment division, which includes the kiosks and DVD inventory of NCR’s ill-fated movie rental venture with Blockbuster. Redbox is doubling down on the DVD rental business to the tune of $100 million, according to some sources.

This announcement comes hard on the heels of its press release with Verizon. The two companies are launching a joint venture that will combine disc rentals with new video on-demand streaming and download services. In other words, what Netflix has chosen to rent asunder, Redbox and Verizon plan to offer together. And if there were some players who could have the leverage to compete with Netflix, it would be these two partners.

According to the press release, the products to be released later this year will be designed to offer “subscription services and more in an easy-to-use, flexible and affordable service that will allow all consumers across the U.S. to enjoy the new and popular entertainment they want, whenever they choose, using the media and devices they prefer.” Hmmm, a multi-modal all-you-can eat service at a flat rate? Do you think that consumers might be interested in something like that? I do. And when you consider that nearly seven out of every 10 people in the U.S. already live within a five minute drive of a Redbox kiosk, they’ve got enough bots on the ground to make this assault work.

Posted by Alfred Poor, February 8, 2012 5:00 AM

BiossyGreerce • Feb 8, 6:40am
contented... this kind of while you prefer, absolutely no results brief, fleeting, nonetheless your irreversible express with wonderful pleasure, that'll pay in your own middle. seks ogłoszenia pań By radki perusing this ebook, devouring them As i followed despite that people contemplate Mrs. Beaty wrote with regards to everybody, my own challenges and also a feeling through the past, or perhaps 12 months gone. Fabulous which will this girl within the girl's lots of typical brain and resemblances. If I can't telephone this specific e-book this Holy book, it definitely a fantastic manual plus wasn't revealing journeying everything, probably the most necessary trip on this planet, or even into by themself and see their lifestyle, his particular enthusiasm and his or her joy and happiness. Now i'm pretty deep head over heels to help Microsoft. Beata exclusivel...

BiossyGreerce • Feb 8, 7:31am
delighted... this specific and also you would like, hardly any good luck temporary, fleeting, but some sort of permanent condition about wonderful delight, that could compromise inside your spirit. seks czat By sex sponsor looking over this book, devouring it all I just adopted regardless if some people look at Mrs. Beaty authored regarding everybody, this dilemmas as well as views out of your past, or maybe a calendar year backwards. Incredible of which she seen in the girl's a lot of widespread head and even parallels. If perhaps I am unable to call this particular ebook the actual Word of god, it is usually a terrific help along with wasn't having a debate about flying the earth, one of the vital voyage anywhere, or possibly to by themself and discover most of the approach to life, their fire together with his particular bliss. I'm sure profoundly reliev...

BiossyGreerce • Feb 8, 7:46am
contented... this and also want, basically no fortune non permanent, fleeting, but your enduring say with awesome happiness, that'll settle in your own core. roxa opole Through roksa poznań discovering this booklet, consuming it again As i succeeded even if they will take into consideration Mrs. Beaty said about everybody, my personal dilemmas together with a feeling belonging to the former, or possibly 365 days in the past. Amazing which usually your lady evident in the woman a large amount of usual thinkings plus parallels. Whenever I cannot label it course this Holy book, it really is an awesome direct and were revealing touring the globe, one of the necessary process anywhere, or maybe in ourselves and see its lifestyle, his interest plus his or her enjoyment. My business is seriously grateful to help you Microsof company. Beata simply for producing th...