Share on Social Media:

Title II ‘Net Neutrality’ May Be Repealed

Internet service providers all across the fruited plain are awaiting December 14, 2017 with bated breath. On that date, the Federal Communications Commission will vote on possible repeal of Title II classification of the internet as a utility and ISPs as ‘common carriers’. Under Title II, ISPs are subject to regulation like land-line telephone services. The rules are often said to promote ‘net neutrality’.

A repeal ruling would revolutionize digital communications, though observers disagree vociferously about whether it would improve or degrade them.

Related image

What is ‘net neutrality’?

In theory, ‘net neutrality’ seems unassailably right. As described by its supporters, it is the concept that ISPs should treat all data alike. They could neither slow or block disfavored content, nor accept payment for speeding other content. Without the rules, proponents say, an ISP might block or slow content from political opponents or market competitors. Comcast, for example, might throttle streaming of DirecTV.

‘Net neutrality’ is said to be necessary for a free and open internet.

What do the critics say?

Critics of the regulations say there has never been a convincing case that they’re needed. They point out that from 2005 to 2015, before the Title II web rules went into effect, average consumer data speeds surged by more than 1000% while internet traffic soared exponentially. Opponents of the rules argue that market forces will prevent abuse. If Comcast does throttle DirecTV streams, the cable system will lose credibility and alienate its customers. Comcast subscribers will then seek other providers.

What are the odds?

After December 14, we are likely to find out which view is correct. Given the partisan composition of the FCC (three Republicans, including chairman Ajit Pai, and two Democrats), a vote for repeal is nearly a foregone conclusion.

Since his appointment as FCC Chairman, Pai has often criticized the Tie II web rules. And on November 21, he issued a draft order to schedule the repeal vote.

How does this affect you?

If you have HughesNet service, you’ve nothing to worry about. We do not have a video division, and we don’t block or throttle any content.

 

(For the most reliable internet connection, talk to us. we can help.)

Share on Social Media:

NETWORK BRANDS ERODED BY STREAMING VIDEO 

Image result for roku images

As volatile as the TV industry has been lately, the one segment that has been relatively stable– and consistently profitable– is network broadcasting. This may be about to change.

With the release of new video interfaces such as the most recent upgrade of Comcast X1, and with the launch of multichannel live TV streaming platforms such as Sling TV, DirecTV Now, and Hulu Live TV, the most prominent broadcast networks finally have reason to fear possible extinction. They’re losing their ability to keep their brands in the public eye.

Investment Bankers Weigh In

Kannan Ventakeshwar, an investment analyst for Barclay’s, a multinational British bank, wrote a letter about the TV industry’s future to investors. In it he stated: “Every OTT product is organizing its default user interface by the type of content and not by network. So sports does not show up as ESPN or YES Network. Instead, the default interface is organized by sport and/or teams. This is also becoming true with legacy user interfaces like X1. As a result, it is tough to see the brands of individual networks retaining value in the coming years.”

Until recently, the program guides for cable and satellite TV listed channels under assigned numbers. It was only by looking up particular channels that the viewer could see what shows were airing on those channels at what times.

Viewers Want Convenience

Ventakeshwar said, though, that viewers are losing patience with this system. “…In every evolution of OTT”, he said, “the number of clicks needed to get to a program guide or a network viewing option is actually increasing. Given the importance of consumer inertia in usage patterns, this is not a trivial shift.”

In other words, the harder it is for the viewer to find the shows he wants, the
more likely he is to tune out altogether.

Listing by genre or title saves time, but reduces visibility of network brands. This threatens the network business model. Under the old model, new shows are far more likely to succeed if they immediately precede or follow established hits. A highly popular show might even carry an entire evening’s lineup. A ‘halo’ effect– the network’s reputation for airing shows the viewer likes- can induce him to try out its newer shows.

No More ‘Halo’ Effect

If video interfaces are no longer listing shows by channel, though, the lead-in.
lead-out, and halo effects nearly disappear. Each show is an orphan, standing or falling on its own, and offering little market support to other network programming.

Some streaming platforms, such as Amazon Prime Video, Netflix, and Hulu, further undermine network brands by offering their own original content. And you can find their content only on their own platforms. If you want a Netflix original, you’ll find it only through Netflix.

 

How can the networks adapt to these developments? We don’t know, but they haven’t yet. Perhaps they never will.

If they can’t figure out how to protect their brands, the giant broadcast networks may be headed for extinction. Productions studios could live or die by their latest hits.

Notes:

Comcast owns NBC Universal, the largest and oldest broadcast TV network.
With its updated X1 interface, then, the cable system is partially cannibalizing its own business.

OTT is ‘over-the-top’ video. It is content streamed via the internet as a standalone service. With OTT, no cable or satellite system controls or distributes the content.

(For streaming video, you need a strong internet connection. Is yours adequate? If it isn’t, talk to us. We can help.)

Share on Social Media:

ROBOTS:  WILL THEY TAKE OUR JOBS?

Related image

Apocalypse by Robots is a recurring theme in technical publications and science fiction. As our tools become more sophisticated and able to learn, the more alarmist writers tell us, they might attack us. A machine programmed to make paper clips might try to turn the entire world into a paper clip factory. Robots programmed to find their own power sources could deny us the power we need for survival. Robots could be deadly.

Some of the less excitable tech writers dismiss such alarms,. They still say, though, that say automation will foster mass unemployment. In fact, we’ll need a guaranteed minimum income to save the hordes of technologically unemployed from rioting in the streets because they can’t support themselves. MIT’s Technology Review, Wired, Gizmodo, The Verge, Singularity Hub, Mashable, Ars Technica- almost every technical rag echoes the same theme.

There are a few dissenting voices, but almost every article addressing the subject warns that automation will destroy far more jobs than it will create. In the past, technical development has only disrupted job markets for the short term, and in the long run has created far more jobs– and far more remunerative jobs-  than it has destroyed.

But this time it’s different, the alarmists say. We can’t use the Industrial Revolution or the dawn of the Information Age as our model. The big difference now is artificial intelligence or machine learning. As our tools learn from ’experience’, instead of just responding to specific inputs, the need for direct human control nearly vanishes. A small technical and financial elite will control almost everything, and will become fantastically wealthy. The rest of us will be mired in poverty, permanently shut out from the labor force.

How Have Robots Affected Job Markets Before?

This certainly is a grim prospect. But is it likely?

We doubt it. Suppose we concede that the distant past has nothing to teach us about out own futures. We’ll look into just the rise of robotics in the last sixty years. In all that time, robots have finally and irrevocably destroyed only one job category, elevator operators. But automation has created more jobs for elevator engineers and repairmen.

We’ve seen the same trend in other industries. Replacement of land lines with mobile phones has radically altered the work of telecom technicians, but has not made them obsolete. Replacing cathode ray tubes with LCD, LED, and OLED TV sets radically shrank the market for TV repairmen, but created new jobs for electronics designers and coders. The waning influence of broadcast TV networks has opened new markets in cable TV, satellite TV, and streaming video,. It has created more demand for content– and for content creators.

Automation has brought us an enormous blessing: assignment of the most dangerous, dirty, exhausting, and boring tasks to machines. This leaves us with far less onerous work, often in air-conditioned comfort. Machine learning will accelerate this trend. The tasks we handle in the future might not be what we call ‘work’ today. They might even seem like play. But suppose you could enter a time machine, and could talk with a farmer or a merchant living two centuries ago. If you describe your current job to him, will he understand it? Will he consider it work? Not likely. He’ll probably think you’re just playing.

What Can You Do?

This doesn’t mean you should be complacent. If you’re unprepared, a rapidly changing job market can hurt you badly. Your best job insurance is continually upgrading your skills.

Above all else, learn how to learn. We can’t always predict what occupations will be in demand. Students who spend years preparing for specific jobs in trendy fields often find, not long after they graduate, that their hard-won skills are obsolete. If you have solid communication, math, and reasoning skills, and if you know a fair amount about literature and history, you have a huge advantage over others. What you don’t know, you can learn quickly.

With a nimble mind and a solid work ethic, you probably don’t need to fear competition by robots.

(If you need a reliable internet connection, talk to us. We can help.)

Share on Social Media:

VUDU FREE-TO-VIEWER AD-SUPPORTED TV

Image result for vudu logo

As if cable and satellite TV systems weren’t under extreme competitive pressure already, now Wal-Mart is breathing down their necks. The nation’s largest retailer owns VUDU, a streaming video platform that is rolling out an ad-supported free-to-the-viewer movie service.

VUDU currently charges $3.99 for a 1080p movie download. Through its new “Movies On Us” feature, the downloads will be free to the viewer, provided he’s willing to sit through commercials

The first of the ad-supported movie downloads include True Grit (the 2010 remake starring Jeff Bridges), and School of Rock, starring Jack Black. VUDU is promoting both titles heavily.

For any movie title, VUDU will offer the choice of renting it, buying it, or streaming the “Free with Ads” version. Some of the rental and purchase options are available in 4K or Ultra HD.

Jeremy Verba, VUDU’s general manager, said, “This new service provides value for customers who want movies and TV for free, when and how they wish to watch, without sacrificing quality.”

The streaming video market is getting ever more crowded. Last year, Dish Network launched Sling TV, a multichannel streaming VOD service. AT&T has signed carriage contracts for more then 100 channels for its DirecTV Now platform, to be launched by the year’s end. Turner Networks has been working on its own streaming VOD (video on demand) platform, FilmStruck. It’s unveiling has been delayed until November, though, because of a series of technical glitches. Comcast has conducted consumer tests of its TV everywhere VOD service. PlayStation Vue, originally a gaming platform, has has moved into streaming TV.

(For advice about any TV or internet service, talk to us. We can compare all providers and plans available in your neighborhood. Then order any service with just one phone call)

 

Share on Social Media:

WAL-MART TELLS CUSTOMERS: ‘CUT THE CABLE!”

Cable and satellite TV system operators are in a tough, viciously competitive business. Not only do they have to keep close tabs on each other, they’re losing subscribers to internet video streaming services that threaten the long-term future of the entire industry.

As if these woes weren’t enough, the nation’s largest retailer has moved in on their turf. Early this month, Wal-Mart inaugurated a promotion for video streaming tools with the slogan: “Cut the Cable”.

Encouraging its customers to ditch the conventional pay TV subscription model, Wal-Mart outlined four steps for doing so– including, of course, buying video streaming players and antennae from Wal-Mart.

On its website, the retailer asks, “What better way to save money on your cable bill than getting rid of it altogether?” Though it doesn’t mention prices of its TV sets or streaming tools on the promotional page– the visitor has to find the product page for that– Wal-Mart hints that the move could bring big savings: “As TV Cable bills grow even larger– families spend an average of $160 per month on cable bundles!- an increasing number of people are opting to cut the cord and slice that monthly bill by up to half. Basically, this means dropping your cable or satellite TV subscription and opting for the ease and flexibility of watching all your favorite shows and movies on streaming services like Netflix and Vudu.”

Wal-Mart owns Vudu, though it did not mention this fact in the ad.

While some video streaming platforms offer live access to broadcast networks and their affiliate stations, most cord-cutters will need over-the-air antennae to receive them. Wal-Mart sells antennae, too.

The “Cut the Cable” promotion will continue until July 31.

In most rural areas, and some suburban areas, cable TV is unavailable anyway. For these areas, satellite TV or streaming services such as Sling TV are the only practical options. If this is the case where you live, we can help you find the TV service that best meets your needs.

Whatever your TV or internet needs, talk to us. We can help.

Share on Social Media:

PAY TV’S WEB REVOLUTION

The Federal Government wants to require cable and satellite TV service providers to ‘unlock’ their set-top boxes.  Under an ‘open-source’ standard, if you want to drop one provider’s service, you can use the box you already have for a new provider’s service. You don’t have to buy or lease a new box.

Some pay TV system operators are saying that the box will soon be obsolete, anyway. They say that changing the technical standards for set-top boxes will be futile. It is an unnecessary expense, they say, and may even be counterproductive, since almost all TV content will soon be streamed over the internet.

Last year, Dish Network demonstrated the market power of  a dedicated multichannel web streaming platform with Sling TV. The new service has been popular, and now has more than 600, 000 subscribers. Sling TV carried just seventeen channels at its launch, but now carries more than sixty, including premium movie channels. Its basic twenty-three channel package sells for just $20.00 per month.

Other pay TV providers, observing Sling TV’s success, have entered the internet video streaming market. Verizon Wireless has pursued the mobile market aggressively with its Go90 platform. Comcast has tested its XFinity Stream IP TV service in selected markets, for the purpose of bringing broadband users who aren’t pay TV customers into its TV System. Time Warner Cable has tested TWC TV, an internet-only TV bundle, in New York City. For now, only TWC’s broadband customers can get TWC TV, but the company wants to offer it to others soon. Sony’s PlayStation, once strictly a gaming console, now handles streaming video with the Vue upgrade.

More vendors will follow. Within two or three years, the set-top box is likely to become a relic of the past, as almost all multichannel video service providers will be streaming their content over the internet.

(For streaming video, you need the right internet connection. Talk to us. We can help.)

Share on Social Media:

image

STREAMING SERVICES: VIDEO & MUSIC

One advantage of having a HughesNet broadband connection is access to video and music streaming services such as Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime Video, Sling TV, Spotify, and Pandora. Such services stream content to you directly via the web. Most of them don’t require a cable or satellite TV subscription, nor installation of any proprietary equipment. Most are compatible with iOS and Android tablets and smartphones, XBox One and Playstation Vue gaming consoles, Mac and PC computers, and Chromecast, Roku, and Apple TV streaming devices.

Most such services are very inexpensive. Pandora and Spotify, two of the leading web music services, charge nothing for their basic service tiers. The only catch is that your music will be interrupted occasionally by commercials. To skip the ads, you’ll pay a nominal monthly fee: $4.99 for Pandora, $9.99 for Spotify.

Video streaming services are not free, but they don’t cost much. Hulu, which carries a wide variety of TV shows and movies, charges $7.99 per month for video streaming with “limited commercials”. For an additional $4.00 per month. you can get the commercial-free version. Netflix, the most popular streaming video service, carries a huge library of TV shows and movies. The basic Netflix service, at $7.99 per month, will stream to just one device, and is available only in standard definition. For $9.99 per month, you can get an HD-capable version for up to two devices. For $11.99 per month, you can get it in Ultra HD on up to four devices. Most of Amazon Prime Video’s content is free with a $99.00 annual membership, which includes free shipping for most items sold in Amazon’s online store.

Sling TV, launched by Dish Network in early 2015, is an interesting addition to the streaming video market. Sling TV differs from most other streaming services in offering live TV. The basic 23-channel package costs just $20.00 per month. Several movie and sports packages can be added to the core package for just $5.00 per month each. For about $50.00 to $60.00 per month, about half the cost of a standard cable or satellite TV subscription, you could get a combined live TV, sports, and premium movie channel bundle. You would have a very complete TV service, and if you don’t require a huge number of channels, you can save a substantial sum of money. Unlike the standard Dish Network service, Sling TV doesn’t require a satellite dish or a long term contract.

These are just a few of the internet video and music streaming services available. For a wide variety of convenient and low-cost entertainment options, you should look into it.