# Internet to Revolutionize TV in 5 years: Gates



## John W (Dec 20, 2005)

A key relevant part of the article, possibly why folks such as Charlie Ergen need to make their money now:

"Certain things like elections or the Olympics really point out how TV is terrible. You have to wait for the guy to talk about the thing you care about or you miss the event and want to go back and see it," he said.

"Internet presentation of these things is vastly superior."

At the moment, watching video clips on a computer is a separate experience from watching sitcoms or documentaries on television.

But convergence is coming, posing new challenges for TV companies and advertisers.

"Because TV is moving into being delivered over the Internet -- and some of the big phone companies are building up the infrastructure for that -- you're going to have that experience all together," Gates said.

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=OBR&Date=20070127&ID=6398506


----------



## JM Anthony (Nov 16, 2003)

I agree with Bill's vision, but I'm not sure it'll be 5 years. My guess is a bit longer. But this is definitely one of those "when" not "if" issues.

John


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

With all his billions, Gates still can't seem to out-prognosticate Jobs or, for that matter,
half of the knowledgeable posters on this board.

Zune is/was a joke, X Box is a struggling also ran and it looks like Vista is little more
than an incremental dot revision. 

"Convergence" is a process that has been happening for some time, and "TV on the
Internet" is not exactly a new concept, nor is it a technological breakthrough.

Gates speaks to Money readers and they soak it up like his are great new ideas, but
they're not -- he should take the challenge of addressing a more technologically-astute
audience or keep his yap shut, billions or no.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

If Gates can put ole Chucky out of business, I'll donate a paycheck to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.


----------



## JM Anthony (Nov 16, 2003)

I've listened to both Gates and Ballmer speak before thousands of senior technologists and they do a pretty good job of holding their own. While I tend to agree with Nick on a lot of issues, I think Vista will prove to be a lot more than just another dot release. It's a good product right now and will be even better later this year. MSFT now has an OS that will do a pretty good job of ushering in more advanced digital entertainment.

John


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

I have to wonder when the internet will have the capacity to send hundreds of DTV streams around the world. I can't see it happening when Bill thinks it will. Has anyone out there seen broadcast quality TV over the internet?

--- CHAS


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

> I have to wonder when the internet will have the capacity to send hundreds of DTV streams around the world.


Bandwidth is unlimited, money for that bandwidth is not. What this will do is force ISPs to increase bandwidth for their users, I'd like 25Mb down/5Mb up myself, perfect for HD streaming, but if everyone is downloading or streaming the same content at once...


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Steve Mehs said:


> Bandwidth is unlimited, money for that bandwidth is not. What this will do is force ISPs to increase bandwidth for their users, I'd like 25Mb down/5Mb up myself, perfect for HD streaming, but if everyone is downloading or streaming the same content at once...


Which tends to imply the bandwidth is not unlimited after all!


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

On one hand, the advantages of streaming TV from a nearby server are huge. That setup can do a lot of fun things, such as Start Over, that are impossible any other way. And the essentially limitless menu of channel possibilities could work to serve a lot of niche markets.

But Charlie was right when he told me that nothing beats the economics of broadcasting. He was talking about satellites, but even terrestrial broadcasting is relatively cheap to do. Beam it from one spot and millions can watch, even in HD, without any need for two-way communication.

I think there's going to be a big change in broadcast TV, but it'll more like the change to radio in the 1950s. Some live events or some folks' circumstances will still require broadcasting for best service, but the on-demand entertainment supplement of IP-delivered TV will change the way those broadcast networks operate. Someday. Maybe.


----------



## dave1234 (Oct 9, 2005)

Nick said:


> "Convergence" is a process that has been happening for some time, and "TV on the
> Internet" is not exactly a new concept, nor is it a technological breakthrough.


 I remember 10 years ago around 1996 when the talk was "convergence" was just a couple of years away. That's when we would all be surfing the internet on our TV while browsing the internet. It never flew because very few people wanted to sit in the living room typing on a keyboard reading the TV as a display. Conversely watching TV on my computer display will never happen (with me) either.

I do see a day when fiber is routed to everyones home like POTS is today. When that happens streaming data intensive content will be easy. I think that is a least 10-20 years out however. Even then my computer browsing and TV viewing will NOT converge...


----------



## John W (Dec 20, 2005)

dave1234 said:


> I remember 10 years ago around 1996 when the talk was "convergence" was just a couple of years away. That's when we would all be surfing the internet on our TV while browsing the internet. It never flew because very few people wanted to sit in the living room typing on a keyboard reading the TV as a display. Conversely watching TV on my computer display will never happen (with me) either.
> 
> I do see a day when fiber is routed to everyones home like POTS is today. When that happens streaming data intensive content will be easy. I think that is a least 10-20 years out however. Even then my computer browsing and TV viewing will NOT converge...


I'm thinking the pc is an interface and there is a wire to the tv.


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

John W said:


> I'm thinking the pc is an interface and there is a wire to the tv.


Actually you don't need to bring a PC into play although a media center type computer may provide flexibility. You might also consider a dedicated interface box that converts Gigabit Ethernet to HDMI or, when IPTV really becomes practical, an internet enabled TV set that connects directly to your internet modem via Ethernet cable or WiFi. There are many interesting possibilities.

The key will be getting the bandwidth to my home. My 750 kilobits/s DSL won't cut it unless some information theory guy comes up with a 'super-duper' compression scheme. The cable system in my area slows to a craw when the kids come home from school.

--- CHAS


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Likewise, I don't like my 15Mb cable modem will be able to handle all of this either. Fiber or dedicated optical carrier lines are probably the only medium that will be able to handle IPTV.


----------



## Art7220 (Feb 4, 2004)

HIPAR said:


> I have to wonder when the internet will have the capacity to send hundreds of DTV streams around the world. I can't see it happening when Bill thinks it will. Has anyone out there seen broadcast quality TV over the internet?
> --- CHAS


If you mean streams, then it's more like VHS quality from what I've seen. If you mean the XviD files found on torrents, there's broadcast quality. The HD Xvids are even better. -A-


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

Given the latest numbers I've read, I'd hardly consider the Xbox360 an 'also-ran'.


----------



## audiomaster (Jun 24, 2004)

There are a lot of us that will never see cable down our streets and probably not fiber for a looong time. I can get 44 khz on my dial up line on a good day if my phone cable isn't too wet underground. DBS is my only hope for a loong time


----------

