by ·Comments Off on CES Recap 3: Verizon is going to be a broadcaster?

Verizon booth at CESIn his Broadcast Engineering Blog, Phil Kurz writes about a part of CES that I missed, but which might be important. The event was one of the keynotes, which I avoid at CES because they rarely include anything new and substantial. Kurz caught something in Verizon Chairman and CEO Lowell McAdam’s afternoon keynote on CES’s opening day. (You can watch that keynote here.)

In his keynote, McAdam unveiled LTE Broadcast, a new way to use wireless phone spectrum to deliver video to viewers. As McAdam explained, “We are also developing a service to broadcast live video over LTE. Now to do that today, we have to dedicate a separate channel to each individual user, which uses up capacity pretty fast as you can imagine. With LTE Broadcast, we’ll be able to stream to everybody over the same channel at the same time.”

Kurz offers the proper perspective to this announcement: “What a revolutionary concept! Transmit, excuse me, that’s stream, ‘to everybody over the same channel at the same time.’ Where have I heard of that before? Oh, that’s right. There’s already nearly 1800 full-power commercial and public television stations that are streaming, excuse me, that’s transmitting, digital video and audio content on their own ‘same channel at the same time’ to everybody.”

There’s a lot more to Kurz’s blog post about the silliness of taking broadcast TV spectrum away and handing it to broadcast video. You really should go read it!

by ·1 Comment

Mobile TV logoThe Mobile TV TechZone was a part of CES this year. Its name sounds a lot more important than it looked, occupying a small island of modest booths near the back of the Central Hall of the Las Vegas Convention Center. I went there to chuckle at the exhibitors’ plans, but I came away with a deeper respect for mobile TV, even if that’s not saying much.

Let’s start by cataloging the organizations involved in promoting mobile TV:

  • Dyle. That’s the trademark of Mobile Content Venture, which is pushing a subset of channels with “no subscription fee through the end of 2013.”
  • The Open Mobile Video Coalition. That’s “an alliance of broadcasters dedicated to accelerating the development and rollout of mobile television”. The National Association of Broadcasters recently assumed control over the OMVC.
  • The Mobile500 Alliance. That’s a group of TV station owners, “all with the common goal of bringing broadcast television to consumers on their mobile devices.”

I didn’t get too close to the Dyle booth. The folks there were busy demonstrating their latest iPad dongle to some other attendees. It looked like the same old Dyle stuff, and frankly, I don’t care for Dyle. I’m a big fan of the implicit contract between over-the-air broadcasters and their viewers. We own the airwaves, but we allow the OTA broadcasters to use them to entertain and inform us. Subscriptions shouldn’t be part of that relationship.

On the other side of the island was the Mobile500 Alliance, and there I got into a long conversation with John Lawson. At the time, I figured that he was just another suit working the booth, but after our talk, when he gave me his card, I saw that he’s the executive director. Maybe that’s why he was so persuasive.

Lawson agreed with me on a lot of things. He thought that broadcasters didn’t do enough to promote their exisiting digital subchannels. He recognized that in most of the circumstances that mobile TV is available, regular digital TV is also available. And he agreed with the free model for broadcast TV, mostly.

The Mobile500 Alliance system will require a one-time user registration for the tuner to work. Lawson said that will be used for accurate audience measurement, and possibly to choose the best advertisement from a small set of ads pushed to the mobile device. He also allowed that some channels could be subscription-based, but only if they were “premium, cable TV channels,” and that the majority of mobile channels would stay free.

I’m a little uncomfortable with having a lot of the airwaves used for something I’d have to pay to watch, and I don’t like the fact that mobile broadcasting takes away bandwidth that could otherwise be used for regular digital subchannels, but Lawson thought that mobile TV and subchannels could exist together in each market.

“I believe that mobile can save broadcast TV,” Lawson told me. Now there’s a goal we can both agree on. I’m not 100 percent behind the Mobile500 Alliance, but now at least I have a bit of cautious optimism about its work. We’ll see.

Update, sort of: Hiawatha Bray of the Boston Globe experimented a bit with some mobile TV devices from CES. He had four channels available in Boston versus one here in Denver, but I don’t think he thought it was worth it. YouTube-quality video, loss of signal in tunnels, and some occasional above-ground signal dropouts were among his findings. My optimism is getting more cautious all the time. Here, go watch Bray’s video report.

by ·Comments Off on Dish takes a big step towards mobile video

During Dish Network’s press conference at the International CES Monday, I saw a more likely future for TV on the go than the one promoted by Dyle and the Open Mobile Video Coalition. Those are the groups that think viewers will want to watch live TV when they are moving but not driving, not in an airplane, and not in a subway. As I’ve written before, that type of mobile video is a weak solution for a limited audience. On the other hand, Dish showed its answer for everybody on the go.

As part of its new Hopper with Sling receiver technology, Dish announced Hopper Transfers, a system where the receiver prepares and copies a DVR recording to a viewer’s iPad. Then that viewer can watch the show anywhere using that iPad, even on an airplane or in a subway.

Dish already provides TV Anywhere, so viewers with Sling-enabled receivers can watch live programming from smartphones and tablets through the internet, but there are some places the internet won’t reach. The answer there isn’t live TV in a few settings, it’s viewer-selected TV that’s available anywhere he has his iPad.

Todd Spangler wrote more about the press conference in his article at Multichannel News, so you should go read that for the most information about what happened. About the only thing he didn’t mention was that Dish said it will offer an over-the-air dongle for its Hopper with Sling receiver. Sorry I don’t have a picture of that dongle, but it looked like a USB stick, pretty close to the one I’m using to pick up a couple dozen OTA channels on my laptop here in Vegas. (2nd Update: The Dish booth confirmed the dongle is this one, released in late 2012.) My ViP 922 receiver back home uses an optional, modular piece that slides all the way in to a panel in the back of the unit. I wonder why Dish couldn’t make room for an internal OTA antenna in the receiver it hopes to use to differentiate its service from cable and DirecTV, and to keep viewers from cutting the cord. Even if it’s just the cord to the satellite dish.

by ·Comments Off on Hands-on reviewer unimpressed with Dyle

Lauren Goode published a great hands-on review of Dyle mobile TV service, which she tried on two coasts. Thanks to a $100 accessory, she could watch up to five channels with spotty reception and a full slate of commercials. As she noted, Dyle can’t record shows for later viewing and well, it’s just not that great.

Goode tried to be nice, including the Dyle company line that one of these days it’ll fit into devices that will be a lot more convenient and stuff. “But, for now,” she concluded, “Dyle is just a niche thing for consumers who really like to watch local TV on their phones, and its content is still too limited to make it appealing.” For a full step-by-step description of the service and its day-to-day frustrations, you really should go read it!

by ·Comments Off on Mobile TV looking for reasons to exist

Pointcast logoI feel sorry for the folks at the Open Mobile Video Coalition. Their marching orders are to come up with something really cool that uses some of TV broadcasters’ spectrum. As I wrote while discussing its possibly pay-TV cousin Dyle, the side-effect is to make that spectrum appear more valuable when the FCC and wireless internet companies want to buy it back. What the OMVC has failed to create is a need for mobile video, or a compelling case that the public wants to buy specialized devices for watching it.

Maybe someone has heard this lament, because the OMVC released a report yesterday detailing the non-real time applications for its technology. (The PDF of the report is available here; the news release PDF about the report is here.) So what else can mobile TV do? Collect video clips to be stored on the device’s memory, collect software updates, and act as an emergency alert notifier.

“Clipcasting” video for later viewing is almost an acknowledgement of one of my problems with mobile TV: You only need it when you’re moving, but TV reception is always poor in subways and often bad in trains and buses. If that’s a problem, then a solution is to watch stored video. But nowadays, if you want video podcasts or TV programs, there are lots of ways to add to your phone. OMVC’s embrace of video push technology reminds me a lot of PointCast, one of the first internet fads. If your memory stretches back to 1998 or so, you’ll remember how that turned out.

Software updates would be great for any standalone mobile TV viewer, but no one’s going to be interested in a standalone mobile TV viewer. Mobile TV will work only if it’s available on the smartphone that’s already in your pocket. But if it’s a smartphone, then you’re getting updates to all of its apps over the internet, so you won’t need TV-based updates.

The emergency beacon is the best use listed in this set of non-real time uses of mobile TV, but really we’re talking mostly about a real-time signal. As the OMVC report concludes, “Mobile TV played a key role in the safety of millions of people during last year’s Japan earthquakes, with virtually every cell phone in Japan serving as a Mobile TV warning device seconds before the earthquake reached heavily populated areas.” Except most of that functionality could be accomplished adding an inexpensive radio chip to cell phones.

A big reason I complain about this is that I love mobile portable TV. About 30 years ago, I hauled around a 5-inch screen embedded in a suitcase of electronics (including multiple C batteries) that was larger and heavier than any laptop I’ve ever used. As technology progressed, I upgraded to a Sony Watchman, which had a smaller screen but could be held in one hand. Both of these TVs made great friends for me when I’d bring them to sporting events to watch replays, and they were useful for picnics, other occasional outdoor activities, and whenever the electricity went out. Even then, I never tried to watch while in a moving vehicle. These days, my portable is a rechargeable 7-inch RCA model. As long as I hold still as I watch, it should satisfy my portable TV needs for years to come. Sorry OMVC, but you’re still pitching a solution in search of a problem.