Comments on: Do we really need Live TV on the Net? http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/ NewTeeVee Sun, 22 Nov 2009 12:45:20 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Do we really need Live TV on the Net | Wood TV Stand http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-262101 Do we really need Live TV on the Net | Wood TV Stand Sun, 31 May 2009 23:51:07 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-262101 <p>[...] Do we really need Live TV on the Net Posted by root 2 hours 17 minutes ago (http://newteevee.com) Public access has just started to burgeon online as it should since it really is top posts wordpress com on july 9th 2007 at 5 03 pm permalink if your comment doesn 39 t show up immediately it may have gotten caught in our trusty marketing consulting by a Discuss  |  Bury |  News | Do we really need Live TV on the Net [...]</p> [...] Do we really need Live TV on the Net Posted by root 2 hours 17 minutes ago (http://newteevee.com) Public access has just started to burgeon online as it should since it really is top posts wordpress com on july 9th 2007 at 5 03 pm permalink if your comment doesn 39 t show up immediately it may have gotten caught in our trusty marketing consulting by a Discuss  |  Bury |  News | Do we really need Live TV on the Net [...]

]]> By: Anorguma http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-251295 Anorguma Sun, 21 Dec 2008 20:56:29 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-251295 <p>p2p is the best live channel, especially ESPN and FSC is the best channel. If u watch footbol match, u must watch them...</p> <p>http://www.macgunu.com / Watch Live Match With P2P Station</p> p2p is the best live channel, especially ESPN and FSC is the best channel.
If u watch footbol match, u must watch them…

http://www.macgunu.com / Watch Live Match With P2P Station

]]> By: GRDGF » Blog Archive » Monday Quick Hits http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-232325 GRDGF » Blog Archive » Monday Quick Hits Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:27:43 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-232325 <p>[...] is an interesting theme developing around Live Streaming. Om Malik asks if we need it. Dan Rayburn asks is it profitable. But everyone is thinking too near-term. People [...]</p> [...] is an interesting theme developing around Live Streaming. Om Malik asks if we need it. Dan Rayburn asks is it profitable. But everyone is thinking too near-term. People [...]

]]> By: Does live TV over the net make sense? | Poor Tag http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-229909 Does live TV over the net make sense? | Poor Tag Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:53:16 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-229909 <p>[...] Over at NewTeeVee (a favorite blog of ours), Om Malik questions the logic of streaming live TV over the Internet. Echoing comments made by Business 2.0’s Erick Schonfeld, in reference to LiveStation, Malik writes: In this age of hyper personalization, where DVRs are at our command, ready to playback the latest escapades of Vinnie Chase & the Boys, who needs live TV. Unless it is live sports extravaganzas, say NBA finals or SuperBowl (or Wimbeldon Tennis), television is no longer what appears on the TV Guide grid or on the hour. [...]</p> [...] Over at NewTeeVee (a favorite blog of ours), Om Malik questions the logic of streaming live TV over the Internet. Echoing comments made by Business 2.0’s Erick Schonfeld, in reference to LiveStation, Malik writes: In this age of hyper personalization, where DVRs are at our command, ready to playback the latest escapades of Vinnie Chase & the Boys, who needs live TV. Unless it is live sports extravaganzas, say NBA finals or SuperBowl (or Wimbeldon Tennis), television is no longer what appears on the TV Guide grid or on the hour. [...]

]]> By: Satellite TV on Your PC http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-136229 Satellite TV on Your PC Mon, 05 Nov 2007 23:47:51 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-136229 <p>I think there will always be a need for Live TV. It isn't going anywhere. There's nothing like watching history as it happens. I've had times in which I've been at my computer, and a boxing match or something would be on, but I'd have no TV around me. All I have to do is log onto TVFreeOnYourPC.com and it's all right there!</p> <p>Read my lips: Live TV isn't going ANYWHERE!</p> <p>Van - <a href="http://tvfreeonyourpc.com/faqs.html" rel="nofollow">TVFreeonYourPC</a></p> I think there will always be a need for Live TV. It isn’t going anywhere. There’s nothing like watching history as it happens. I’ve had times in which I’ve been at my computer, and a boxing match or something would be on, but I’d have no TV around me. All I have to do is log onto TVFreeOnYourPC.com and it’s all right there!

Read my lips: Live TV isn’t going ANYWHERE!

Van – TVFreeonYourPC

]]> By: Daniel http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-71423 Daniel Thu, 09 Aug 2007 13:07:11 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-71423 <p>I have to say, that I could not agree with you in 100% regarding , but it's just my opinion, which could be wrong :)</p> I have to say, that I could not agree with you in 100% regarding , but it’s just my opinion, which could be wrong :)

]]> By: Brad Thompson http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-49931 Brad Thompson Fri, 20 Jul 2007 23:10:51 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-49931 <p>For sports and news coverage, there will always be a demand for live transmission of content. As for hardware, if the ability to handle live content were piggy-backed upon a good digital video delivery device (for instance, a future version of the Apple TV), then all the other boxes could be cleared off the shelf (DVD players, digital cable or satellite, and DVRs)</p> <p>techshouldwork.blogspot.com/feeds/5614571690820366728/comments/default</p> For sports and news coverage, there will always be a demand for live transmission of content. As for hardware, if the ability to handle live content were piggy-backed upon a good digital video delivery device (for instance, a future version of the Apple TV), then all the other boxes could be cleared off the shelf (DVD players, digital cable or satellite, and DVRs)

techshouldwork.blogspot.com/feeds/5614571690820366728/comments/default

]]> By: Ingjerd Jevnaker (RawFlow / Selfcast) http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-44255 Ingjerd Jevnaker (RawFlow / Selfcast) Mon, 16 Jul 2007 21:47:59 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-44255 <p>My opinion: There is room for both - and media must be expected to deliver both to its viewer base.</p> <p>There's also a "democratization of tools" aspect to this debate:</p> <p>Live has been reserved for the professional users - even online - whereas On demand has been easier for users to get on board with because YouTube provided simple and free tools to do this. However, this does not mean that development has to stop there?</p> <p>Adding to that, even broadcasters do not quite know what to do with live TV on the net yet as "professional" (I don't like the word!) Internet TV for events are usually available elsewhere (like on your normal TV) and will therefore not attract audiences in particular not when geo-locks etc are in place (as an example: I live in London but I am from Norway originally - but due to geo locks on the public broadcast service in Norway I can't watch any programs from Norway. Ok, so I am one person. But how many more people like me are out there?)</p> <p>UGC based Internet TV has also not had a chance to flourish yet because the tools have not been there to do it. But now there's several new tools and sites popping up around this which gives users these tools. I can mention justin.tv, stickam.com and of course our own service Selfcast (yes, I do work for the company that developed it) which was covered by ReutersTV - watch it on demand (isn't it ironic? :-) ) here:</p> <p>http://www.reuters.com/news/video/videoStory?videoId=60521</p> <p>In conclusion: I do think there will be room for both live and on demand in the future of TV, and we do not yet know how people will use live TV online.</p> My opinion: There is room for both – and media must be expected to deliver both to its viewer base.

There’s also a “democratization of tools” aspect to this debate:

Live has been reserved for the professional users – even online – whereas On demand has been easier for users to get on board with because YouTube provided simple and free tools to do this. However, this does not mean that development has to stop there?

Adding to that, even broadcasters do not quite know what to do with live TV on the net yet as “professional” (I don’t like the word!) Internet TV for events are usually available elsewhere (like on your normal TV) and will therefore not attract audiences in particular not when geo-locks etc are in place (as an example: I live in London but I am from Norway originally – but due to geo locks on the public broadcast service in Norway I can’t watch any programs from Norway. Ok, so I am one person. But how many more people like me are out there?)

UGC based Internet TV has also not had a chance to flourish yet because the tools have not been there to do it. But now there’s several new tools and sites popping up around this which gives users these tools. I can mention justin.tv, stickam.com and of course our own service Selfcast (yes, I do work for the company that developed it) which was covered by ReutersTV – watch it on demand (isn’t it ironic? :-) ) here:

http://www.reuters.com/news/video/videoStory?videoId=60521

In conclusion:
I do think there will be room for both live and on demand in the future of TV, and we do not yet know how people will use live TV online.

]]> By: LiveStation: Microsoft’s Live IPTV Solution http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-39245 LiveStation: Microsoft’s Live IPTV Solution Fri, 13 Jul 2007 07:24:24 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-39245 <p>[...] Do we really need live TV on the net? Related: Microsoft on your telly: a history of the company’s Internet TV strategy Sources: Ars [...]</p> [...] Do we really need live TV on the net? Related: Microsoft on your telly: a history of the company’s Internet TV strategy Sources: Ars [...]

]]> By: Amen, Om. « Jason Rosenberg http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-35667 Amen, Om. « Jason Rosenberg Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:31:45 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-35667 <p>[...] and NewTeeVee writes on Sunday about live broadcasting…it’s a good read. Check it out here. On the Internet, Live TV is even more irrelevant, which is one of the reasons my ex-colleague [...]</p> [...] and NewTeeVee writes on Sunday about live broadcasting…it’s a good read. Check it out here. On the Internet, Live TV is even more irrelevant, which is one of the reasons my ex-colleague [...]

]]> By: Francesco http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-35373 Francesco Tue, 10 Jul 2007 13:38:10 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-35373 <p>Half a million Zattoo users would probably argue that there is a reason for live TV on the Net. When asked why they use Zattoo, most of them answer that they like to watch TV while doing other stuff on their PC (call them media multi-taskers). Others say they don't have a TV at all and Zattoo is the remedy. Another group uses Zattoo to watch TV while in a place other than their living room. And for the rest Zattoo is like a second TV screen.</p> <p>The most viewed video <em>ever</em> on YouTube has 52 million views (http://youtube.com/watch?v=dMH0bHeiRNg). That's the number of viewers you get <em>in one evening</em> across a couple of European countries when airing a good soccer match or the season finale of a top TV series.</p> <p>Lastly, socializing is an important aspect of TV consumption. While people do share YouTube videos, they probably don't talk about them at the water cooler. But they do discuss the soccer match, the season finale, or the outcome of the elections. And guess where they got all those topics of conversation from...</p> <p>Disclaimer: I work at Zattoo. Despite my effort to be objective, the opinions expressed here could be biased ;-)</p> Half a million Zattoo users would probably argue that there is a reason for live TV on the Net. When asked why they use Zattoo, most of them answer that they like to watch TV while doing other stuff on their PC (call them media multi-taskers). Others say they don’t have a TV at all and Zattoo is the remedy. Another group uses Zattoo to watch TV while in a place other than their living room. And for the rest Zattoo is like a second TV screen.

The most viewed video ever on YouTube has 52 million views (http://youtube.com/watch?v=dMH0bHeiRNg). That’s the number of viewers you get in one evening across a couple of European countries when airing a good soccer match or the season finale of a top TV series.

Lastly, socializing is an important aspect of TV consumption. While people do share YouTube videos, they probably don’t talk about them at the water cooler. But they do discuss the soccer match, the season finale, or the outcome of the elections. And guess where they got all those topics of conversation from…

Disclaimer: I work at Zattoo. Despite my effort to be objective, the opinions expressed here could be biased ;-)

]]> By: Paul http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-34948 Paul Tue, 10 Jul 2007 01:43:46 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-34948 <p>What happens if your over seas and want to see your fav show or for people who live over seas and want to see a program only available in the USA</p> What happens if your over seas and want to see your fav show or for people who live over seas and want to see a program only available in the USA

]]> By: Top Posts « WordPress.com http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-34893 Top Posts « WordPress.com Tue, 10 Jul 2007 00:03:38 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-34893 <p>[...] Do we really need Live TV on the Net? In this age of hyper personalization, where DVRs are at our command, ready to playback the latest escapades of Vinnie […] [...]</p> [...] Do we really need Live TV on the Net? In this age of hyper personalization, where DVRs are at our command, ready to playback the latest escapades of Vinnie […] [...]

]]> By: Gary Keith http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-34775 Gary Keith Mon, 09 Jul 2007 20:00:04 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-34775 <p>Ours is a world dominated by the 24 hour news cycle and news networks that exist only because of the public's insatiable need to know not just what happened, but what is happening. As IP distribution continues to get faster and better, and live content is increasingly delivered to portable media, the future of live programming by IP is unfathomable. Add addressability, true interactivity and "push-pull" options to these factors and video entertainment as we have always known it to be, live or otherwise, is going to look very old. Whatever current video consumers consider to be "the norm", the coming generation of video consumers are already quite adept and comfortable with can watch television, text their friends, play a video game and eat a sandwich without skipping a beat. VoD? sure, but compelling live content with the ability not simply to view, but to participate in the action via interactive capability will drive more and more programmers to find and push live events and activities. Are we talking about niche audiences? Of course, but when the audience pool is as large as the online community, there is a lot to be made capturing even an infinitesimal fraction of the total available audience.</p> Ours is a world dominated by the 24 hour news cycle and news networks that exist only because of the public’s insatiable need to know not just what happened, but what is happening.
As IP distribution continues to get faster and better, and live content is increasingly delivered to portable media, the future of live programming by IP is unfathomable.
Add addressability, true interactivity and “push-pull” options to these factors and video entertainment as we have always known it to be, live or otherwise, is going to look very old.
Whatever current video consumers consider to be “the norm”, the coming generation of video consumers are already quite adept and comfortable with can watch television, text their friends, play a video game and eat a sandwich without skipping a beat. VoD? sure, but compelling live content with the ability not simply to view, but to participate in the action via interactive capability will drive more and more programmers to find and push live events and activities.
Are we talking about niche audiences? Of course, but when the audience pool is as large as the online community, there is a lot to be made capturing even an infinitesimal fraction of the total available audience.

]]> By: jasonrosenberg http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-34740 jasonrosenberg Mon, 09 Jul 2007 19:15:16 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-34740 <p>Couldn't agree any more. Live TV is dead: 14 percent of TV viewers have a DVR, it's not because they don't want to watch commercials, it's because people have things to do and can't watch when the networks want them to. Why anyone thinks that live events streamed on the internet are a good idea I'll never know. Unless, as you mentioned, it's an event like a sporting event or something like Live Earth or there is some element of viewer participation, live broadcasting is just an outdated concept.</p> <p>Consumers want to watch content when it's most convenient for them, not on the hour or at the half hour during a made up "prime-time." Great Post!</p> Couldn’t agree any more. Live TV is dead: 14 percent of TV viewers have a DVR, it’s not because they don’t want to watch commercials, it’s because people have things to do and can’t watch when the networks want them to. Why anyone thinks that live events streamed on the internet are a good idea I’ll never know. Unless, as you mentioned, it’s an event like a sporting event or something like Live Earth or there is some element of viewer participation, live broadcasting is just an outdated concept.

Consumers want to watch content when it’s most convenient for them, not on the hour or at the half hour during a made up “prime-time.” Great Post!

]]> By: Drew http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-34650 Drew Mon, 09 Jul 2007 16:02:39 +0000 http://newteevee.com/2007/07/08/do-we-really-need-live-tv-on-the-net/#comment-34650 <p>Disagree. To be sure it's more convenient to watch video on demand. The trouble is that nobody has figured out how to make money with VoD (except the YouTubers who sold out to Google.) The linear TV industry we grew up with is enormously profitable because it delivers 16 minutes+ of advertising every hour. You can't replace that with a few prerolls in front of a 5-minute YouTube clip. P2P streaming technology (like Skinkers and the stuff we use) allows traditional TV stations to simulcast their existing programming with a full adload to their existing viewers. They already have the audiences and the advertisers. Now you may not want to watch Judge Judy or Access Hollywood on your PC but imagine how many cubefarmers would?</p> Disagree. To be sure it’s more convenient to watch video on demand. The trouble is that nobody has figured out how to make money with VoD (except the YouTubers who sold out to Google.) The linear TV industry we grew up with is enormously profitable because it delivers 16 minutes+ of advertising every hour. You can’t replace that with a few prerolls in front of a 5-minute YouTube clip. P2P streaming technology (like Skinkers and the stuff we use) allows traditional TV stations to simulcast their existing programming with a full adload to their existing viewers. They already have the audiences and the advertisers. Now you may not want to watch Judge Judy or Access Hollywood on your PC but imagine how many cubefarmers would?

]]>