1 / 18

Digital TV Technology Trends and Internet Convergence Farncombe Consulting Group Barry Flynn, Principal Consultant June

Digital TV Technology Trends and Internet Convergence Farncombe Consulting Group Barry Flynn, Principal Consultant June 2009 – Digimedia 2009, Prague. DIGITAL TV TECHNOLOGY TRENDS. Combination of different enablers and drivers is changing traditional DTV landscape. Increased performance.

fawn
Download Presentation

Digital TV Technology Trends and Internet Convergence Farncombe Consulting Group Barry Flynn, Principal Consultant June

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Digital TV Technology Trends andInternet Convergence Farncombe Consulting Group Barry Flynn, Principal Consultant June 2009 – Digimedia 2009, Prague

  2. DIGITAL TV TECHNOLOGY TRENDS Combination of different enablers and drivers is changing traditional DTV landscape Increased performance • More powerful chipsets as processing-power becomes cheaper • More memory as RAM etc becomes cheaper Increased storage • More permanent storage as hard drives become cheaper • More semi-permanent storage as Flash memory becomes cheaper IP everywhere • Video encapsulated in IP because more efficient Broadband return-path • Increased broadband penetration driving hybridisation with traditional DVB-T, DVB-S • Increased penetration of IPTV • Increased penetration of DOCSIS on digital cable SDTV→ HDTV • Enabled by increased performance, migration from MPEG-2 to MPEG-4, DVB-S to DVB-S2 • Driven by consumer take-up of HD-Ready flat-screens • (Driven by DVD/games console quality versus over-compressed SD??)

  3. IN PARALLEL, CHANGING CONSUMER TASTES Consumers expect more flexibility in content consumption in general and video in particular Video on the Internet • As broadband penetration increases, consumers increasingly accustomed to consuming video on the ‘open’ Internet, and via new CE devices with Internet connectivity Linear → Non-linear consumption • In part because of Internet, but also because of increased penetration of PVRs, consumers increasingly understand/accustomed to/expect non-linear video consumption Portability/mobility of devices • Mobile phones, MP3 players/iPods, portable games consoles – all encourage requirement for new devices able to deliver portable/mobile video content (although this may be a weaker trend than many have assumed) Portability/mobility of content • STB no longer a dummy device used to decode digital video → in addition to integrating PVR, expectation that STB will enable them to get access to personal content stored on PC and other devices, including photos and videos, and their favourite content from the Internet Expectation of ‘free’ content • Experience of Internet music and availability of pirated video leading to expectation that some premium video content should be ‘free’ at point of consumption

  4. TV/INTERNET CONVERGENCE? Confidential and Proprietary What happens when you marry these two sets of trends together? TV TECHNOLOGY ENABLERS CONSUMER DRIVERS ? OVER-THE-TOP (OTT) VIDEO + ‘TRADITIONAL’ DTV convergence

  5. AGENDA 3 1 OVERVIEW OF THE FARNCOMBE GROUP DIGITAL TV TECHNOLOGY TRENDS CHALLENGES OF DTV/OTT CONVERGENCE 2

  6. HYBRIDISING DTV WITH OTT VIDEO: STB PERFORMANCE Today’s STBs are still not powerful enough • STBS are more powerful today than they used to be, but…. • Today’s STBs typically decode video with: • dedicated hardware • limited range of “frozen” standards such as MPEG-2/MPEG-4 • A wide range of OTT video formats that generally demand: • software-based decoding, and • higher level of processing-power than most STBs can deliver (even today, after much progress) • This problem can be solved, but …. • Requires spending much more per box • This makes deployment prohibitive

  7. HYBRIDISING DTV WITH OTT VIDEO: ARCHITECTURE A more fundamental difficulty: marrying a stable technology environment (DTV) with a highly dynamic one (the Internet) • OTT video services change rapidly/are frequently upgraded • Media players, Internet browsers used for OTT video playback frequently upgraded • Similar issues arise with Internet technologies such as DRM and HTML • Issue not so much technical as economic • Even if engineers could adapt STBs to upgrade dynamically (like PCs), PCs have scale – 1bn+ now installed around globe (Gartner, 2008) • Vast majority are interoperable through use of Windows OS • PC software developers can spread costs of codec/player/browser/plug-in software development across large number of new PCs installed/yr • Plus receive occasional upgrade fees from installed base • This is not the case with STBs!

  8. THE PROBLEM WITH STB ARCHITECTURE STBs do not enjoy economies of scale that PCs do, because DTV is highly fragmented Pay-TV providers generally use proprietary combinations of hardware and software tailored to their own needs/territorial standards Applications HTML JAVA MHEG5 FLASH • Interactive TV providers have tried over last 20 years to make ‘middleware’ platform-agnostic, e.g. using a Java ‘virtual machine’ (as in DVB-MHP) • But MHP generally acknowledged to have been a failure • MHP implementations have in practice been • stripped-down and customised • only nominally independent of platforms Applications Manager Network Provider Special Services Middleware Services CA OS + Drivers Hardware Source: Farncombe Consulting Group

  9. WHAT IS THE ANSWER? Responses to PC/STB dilemma lie along a continuum, clustered at either end Accept that STBs will never be like PCs? Demand that STBs be PCs by any other name? OR

  10. WHAT IS THE ANSWER? Neither extreme of continuum offers satisfactory solution OTT decoding confined to a restricted range of video types Accept that STBs will never be like PCs? Consumer not offered full range of OTT services available over the Internet Customers who expect full range of Web video services may rebel against “walled-garden” approach

  11. WHAT IS THE ANSWER? Neither extreme of continuum offers satisfactory solution Technical solution problematic: PC architecture unlike STB’s Demand that STBs be PCs by any other name? Implied power consumption levels run risk of breaching new EU rules on ‘eco-STBs’ Even if possible for STB to migrate to PC universal/flexible architecture, cost of ‘STB-PCs’ prohibitive

  12. WHAT IS THE ANSWER? Connected TVs present an intermediate solution ‘Connected TVs’ with limited HTML browser or ‘widget’

  13. WHAT IS THE ANSWER? But limited services and potential non-upgradeability problematic Technologies not standard/complete, upgradeable only if TV makers willing to pay ‘Connected TVs’ with limited HTML browser or ‘widget’ ‘Widget’ does not offer PC/Internet functionality, potential lack of upgrades implies limited services Risk of consumer hostility because ‘connected TV’ experience just another ‘walled garden’

  14. WHAT IS THE ANSWER? Responses to PC/STB dilemma lie along a continuum, clustered at either end Accept that STBs will never be like PCs? Demand that STBs be PCs by any other name? OR

  15. WHAT IS THE ANSWER? Rejecting PC/STB dilemma by using headend may lead to scalability problems Headend Consumers Traditional DTV • Set-top Box Video, Audio Transcoder Traditional DTV codecs MPEG OTT video MPEG-4/MPEG-2 + OTT codecs Standard MPEG-4/MPEG-2 chipset • Place transcoders at network headend • Can convert Web video standards in real-time into (narrow) range of formats supported by STB • Solves issue of making STBs dynamically upgradeable • But introduces additional, expensive infrastructure which might prove difficult to scale

  16. CONCLUSIONS • Clearly, the digital TV industry is at a turning-point: • Consumer expectations are changing • Customers with broadband are creating home networks, leading to demand for OTT video (to the TV and PC) and to content-sharing between the TV and PC • Video-capable devices are all being connected to IP/broadband • This represents a major challenge to both operators and equipment-providers • Properly managing CPE strategy is the key to success • (FARNCOMBE CAN HELP YOU WITH THIS!)

  17. INTRODUCTION Thank you! • Barry Flynn • Principal Consultant • Farncombe Consulting Group • E-mail: barry.flynn@ftl.co.uk • Tel: +44 1256 844161 • Mob: +44 7720 566585 • www.farncombe.eu • For further information, please contact:

  18. BBC IPLAYER AND VIRGIN MEDIA • An example of OTT viewing on the TV screen • Virgin Media, which offers the BBC OTT iPlayer service to its VOD cable homes, has reported that its cable network accounted for around a third of all BBC iPlayer views in May 2008 • But the Virgin cable platform has a significantly smaller universe than the BBC’s online one • Around 44% of Virgin’s 3.5m TV customers were regularly watching on-demand content at that time (1.5m) • But the number of regular online iPlayer users was around 6m, on Farncombe estimates • This would mean viewers on the TV-based platform were each responsible for at least twice as many iPlayer views last May as those on the PC/online one

More Related