On 5/4/2011 12:26 PM, Tim Franklin wrote:
I think that George's POV -- which is also mine -- is that as the
world shifts, the percentage of video distribution which is
amenable to multicast, and not well served by unicast, is likely
to grow, and it would be a Good Idea to be ready for that
situation already when it arrives.
Really? If anything, I'd say quite the opposite. Watching media in the
time-slot that someone else has decided on is *so* 20th-century - I can't
remember the last time I sat down to actively watch a programme in its original
transmission slot. (As opposed to having the TV on as background, e.g. 15
minutes of breakfast news in the morning). I guess multicast to a recording
application (or appliance) might work - but essentially my requirement is
strongly skewed towards video-on-demand.
I have absolutely zero interest in sport of any kind though - I'm given to
understand there's quite a high demand for live viewing of that.
Regards,
Tim.
I agree, I think less and less content will be multicast with live
events (like sports) being the notable exception. Having said that I
think that multicast will increase in importance as more live events
move into the remotely viewable venue. There is a huge market for
concerts, live pays, comedy, and other content that just isn't available
right now. The viewing market will continue to fragment requiring more
sources of content than are available today. In short the percentage of
video sent as multicast will decrease (IMO) over time but the overall
volume will increase as total video content as IP greatly expands.
--
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ISP Alliance, Inc. DBA ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
--------------------------------
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
--------------------------------
