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 CES: Showcase of the great and mundane

Screensters from Toddy GearThe International CES (don’t you dare call it Consumer Electronics Show) is coming up next week, and I look forward to prowling its exhibit floor in search of serendipity and the Next Big Thing. That search will include the huge displays that you’ll see in the news, plus lots and lots of small booths that you probably won’t see. That Next Big Thing is often found in one of those little booths, but finding it requires glancing at hundreds of exhibitors promoting stuff that’s actually pretty mundane.

You see, down deep CES is a trade show. Only folks who are involved with the industry are allowed to attend (if you want to qualify, see my workaround). With all these industry people walking around, a lot of companies are just trying to get their products featured in stores. And a lot of those products are accessories to popular devices, accessories that are just a little better, or just a little different, than what’s already available. For example, I know from a press release that the fine folks at Toddy Gear will use their CES appearance to unveil Screensters, “their latest collection of cleaning solutions for touchscreens and sensitive surfaces. Inspired by the characters you encounter in everyday life and catered to children and adults alike.” We all need cleaners for our smartphones and tablets, and these look as good as any of them. But I really don’t think that I’ll be telling my grandkids about the time I was present for the debut of Screensters.

Take that scenario and multiply it by hundreds. Need an iPhone case? CES exhibitors will have hundreds, maybe thousands of models available. G-Form has a case that dropped 100,000 feet to “a rocky hillside” and successfully protected its iPhone 5. (I’ve embedded G-Form’s video below.) There’s OtterBox, a well-known company from Colorado that’s been making great protective cases for years. And there will be dozens of other companies with multi-colored, character-licensed, oddly textured, or just plain cheap iPhone cases on display.

How about some earbuds for that iPhone? For every earbud that monitors your vital signs (cool!), there are dozens of fine, regular earbuds on display. Want speakers? You’ll find lots of really wonderful speakers in every size for every purpose. And the same for electronic toys and connection cables and car stereos. And every booth is operated by earnest, friendly people who are eager to tell you about the fine quality and unmatched user experience provided by their earbuds (or iPhone cases, or speakers, or whatever) if you pause long enough to let them get started. I haven’t yet learned a diplomatic way to tell them, “I thought I saw something relevant to what I cover, but as you explain it, I see that I was wrong. Excuse me, but I need to move on to glance quickly at the next 20 rows of small booths.”

Make no mistake, there are truly innovative technologies that are first exhibited at CES. And you can get a feel for trends just by seeing what technologies are attracting a crowd. Two years ago, there were dozens of different electronic book readers with little to distinguish themselves from each other. Last year, there were dozens of Android tablets that looked a lot alike. I wonder what everyone will be showing this year.

CES has some great stuff to see, but sometimes it’s just a needle in a haystack. What I learned is that to find that needle, you’ve got to look at a whole lot of hay. I’ll tell you here what I find next week.

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.

by ·Comments Off on Will broadcast networks turn to permanent static?

Bob Garfield wrote a column this week about the withering of the Big 4 broadcast networks. He concludes, “The question, therefore, should not be how the Big 4 can cure what ails them. They cannot cure what ails them.” Go read the whole thing, then come back so we can talk about it.

Most of Garfield’s points are absolutely right. As I mentioned awhile back, viewer fragmentation is keeping broadcast TV alive. As viewers scatter, advertisers can still find them in the largest groups watching broadcast channels.

But I disagree that the Big 4 absolutely cannot create breakout hits like Mad Men or Game of Thrones. At its peak, Lost drew over 20 million viewers but Mad Men has trouble reaching 4 million. What does that make, say, The Mentalist with over 14 million viewers? A hit? Mediocre?

The scale and the stakes are different for cable networks than they are for broadcast. The scale is obvious; Fox swiftly cancelled Firefly (4.5 million viewers), but on FX, The Shield ran for seven years (2-3 million).

The different stakes are not so obvious. Broadcast networks need to get acceptable overall ratings to keep their affiliates and advertisers happy. Cable networks need a big hit or two to ensure that customers subscribe to their channels, but the rest of the lineup can be retreads, reruns and filler.

The kicker is that six corporations own all major broadcast and cable networks. So losing a viewer from broadcast to cable doesn’t subtract money from a corporation’s profit, it just shifts it from one pocket to another.

Considering all this, broadcast network programming choices make a lot more sense. Competition and reality shows are cheap to make, and some of them become hits anyway. There’s no need to try to fill the schedule with high-quality scripted programming. If you go too lax and overall ratings suffer enough to rile the affiliates (see: NBC), then bump up the quality and get back in the ratings pack.

In other words, the Big 4 can cure a lot of what ails them. There’s no reason they can’t spend money and take chances to make the next Lost or 24. But it’s a lot safer for the Big 4 to avoid all that. They simply don’t care that much about finding a new cure.