On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 8:25 PM, William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: > On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Charles N Wyble <char...@thefnf.org> wrote: >> On 4/27/2014 3:30 PM, John Levine wrote: >>> In a non-stupid world, the cable companies would do video on demand >>> through some combination of content caches at the head end or, for >>> popular stuff, encrypted midnight downloads to your DVR, and the >>> cablecos would split the revenue with content backends like Netflix. >> >> >> So why hasn't someone like he or cogent done this? > > Because 30 years later the big content owners still hate VCRs. > Streaming doesn't bother them so much but they avail themselves of > every opportunity to say no to the end-user recorded content. > > This is hardly a surprise... A century later they still hate the first > sale doctrine too and avail themselves of every opportunity to > undermine it.
This UKNOF presentation gives another reason - the distribution of demand for content is such that "content bundling", i.e. pro-active push of content to users' machines based on predicted demand, doesn't provide much benefit compared to "historical cache", i.e. caching in the usual sense. https://indico.uknof.org.uk/materialDisplay.py?contribId=20&materialId=slides&confId=30 > > Regards, > Bill Herrin > > > -- > William D. Herrin ................ her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us > 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> > Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
