LIVEdigitally

Tag Archives: internet tv

If AppleTV is 1/3 of the market, who's selling the other 2/3?

Posted on by

A few blogs are reporting about Strategy Analytics’ recent claim:

Strategy Analytics projects that the market will reach almost 12 million units globally this year, with Apple alone predicted to sell nearly four million devices.

Wow. Pretty bold claim.  Let’s deconstruct it.  Let’s assume it’s a correct prediction:

AppleTV will sell 4 million units, leaving ~8 million for “the rest”.

what do you mean "and the rest"?

Here are “the rest”: Roku, Western Digital, D-Link (Boxee), and… er… I don’t know, how about Logitech? Maybe a few other smaller players, but nothing you and I are buying in a Best Buy, Target, Walmart or Amazon – the only places that matter at all for moving these kinds of numbers.  Yes, there are some other odds and ends in the bizarre category known as Internet Set Top Boxes, but they aren’t mustering up sufficient sales to count here.

Roku: I’ve heard all sorts of things, but lets use publicly available information: as of last January, Roku hit 1 million devices sold.  I’ll assume they’ve at least doubled that in 2011, possibly as much as tripled, due to new products, more viability, and lower prices.  That said, they are now up against an ever-improving AppleTV product.  Even so, let’s assume they can hold pace against the world’s largest marketing machine for digital lifestyle products, and sell another 3 million units in 2012.

Western Digital: You probably haven’t heard of it, but that little gadget your buddy has for watching photos on his TV is called the WDTV Live, and they’ve sold somewhere in the 1-3 million unit range (I know that’s a big range, but it seems pretty fair based on some poking around).  Not a bad showing for a company known for making hard drives.  But in the presence of both Apple and Roku, it’s a pretty fair bet that they aren’t edging out of third place for future market share.  I’ll again be kind with 1.5 million units sold in 2012.

From these guys, only for your TV. Perfect.

D-Link (Boxee Box): Disclosure: I was a core part of the launch teams for both Boxee and the Boxee Box by D-Link, and wish to see them extremely successful, though I am no longer professionally engaged with either company in any way.  And that said, I don’t think they’re anywhere close in numbers yet, and don’t see them hitting the million unit mark any time soon (specifically in regards to unit sales, this has nothing to do with downloads, active community, or positive thoughts). Optimistic high end prediction in 2012: 750K units.

Logitech: $100 million loss.  Let’s move along shall we?

Have the factory spin up about a bajillion of them, nothing will go wrong.

Everyone else: I’ll generously band them all together, and predict they maybe move 500K units.

Unknown entry by traditional consumer electronics brand: Look, anyone can make a media streamer, in fact you can make an adequate one by buying off the shelf parts and licensing open software platforms.  But even the formerly mighty Sony and the young stalwart Vizio is going to have a tricky road in getting a product out in this category that doesn’t include a full end-to-end solution.  And there just aren’t enough to go around.  Maybe Amazon could have some kind of Kindle Fire: Home Media Edition or something, but something tells me they are still getting their feet wet in hardware and aren’t going to jump too rashly into the space (though I’ve been known to be wrong about Amazon and hardware in the past).  Top guess: 250K units.

Grand Total Units Sold, Highly Optimistic Prediction Mode: 6 million units.  Giving Apple TV, with 4 million sales, a 40% market share.  And that’s me being *quite* optimistic, and I’d wager it’s more like a grand total of 4 for the rest.  Or less.  Giving Apple TV a significantly larger potential – and by the way, it’s not exactly Apple’s strongest product.

But their math was so good!

This whole story just reminds me of the time when I was reviewing an analyst report for the *exact same space* back in 2003 when we had just shipped the HP Digital Media Receiver (the first mainstream Internet Set Top Box, by the way).  This was, by the way, before consumers had Flips or other simple video recording devices, digital cameras were mostly a novelty, and there was no YouTube, Netflix streaming, or pretty much anything else to watch on the darned thing.  But still, the potential!

The analyst predicted hundreds of thousands of “streaming video boxes” sold in 2003.  The only snag was, we were literally the only game in town, and we had predicted tens of thousands at best.  When I spoke with the analysts, they said they predicted several years forward, based on consumer interest, to arrive at several million units a year.  Then, they backtracked it into 2003 and, boom, hundreds of thousands.  What could possibly go wrong with this kind of logic?

They sold literally dozens of them

12 by 2012: SXSW panels on the Future of TV

Posted on by

I’ve been in “Future of TV” startups directly and indirectly since 1999, yet haven’t once made it to SXSW Interactive (I was even supposed to speak this year, but my third child arrived way too close to the conference for me to make it unfortunately).  For 2012 I’ve proposed a talk entitled “Why the Future of TV has Four Screens” and hopefully the conference organizers will find it interesting to include.  This is obviously a space I have a lot of passion about, so I decided to go peek around at what other interesting and related presentations and panels are in the “PanelPicker”.

Here’s the ones I’ve found, in no particular order:

Title: Why the Future of TV has Four Screens

Speaker: Jeremy Toeman, Dijit Media

Studies have shown that over 70% of TV watching happens with a second screen in hand, whether it’s a phone, tablet or laptop, people are no longer just watching TV. They are tweeting, checking-in, Facebooking, searching the web for information and more. The rise of this social TV trend is causing companies across the entire TV industry, including content providers, TV manufacturers and startups in the convergence space to take notice. They are now trying to blend content, social and additional screen interaction in a variety of ways, from social networking on your TV screen to controlling your TV with your phone. However this is causing more confusion, not more entertainment. In this panel, we will explore: How are consumers using the second (or third or fourth) screens? Why are the additional screens important? How do those additional screens affect the way consumers interact with TV? And how are the additional screens are changing the entertainment landscape for the next decade?

Title: Why Digital May Forever Alter TV As We Know It

Speakers: Michael Aragon (Sony Network Entertainment), Jason Spivak (Sony Pictures Home Entertainment)

With 24/7 internet access on our mobile phones, Blu-ray players, HDTVs, laptops and gaming consoles, the ability to easily stream movies, TV shows, and other digital content has forever changed the way we consume film and video. People older than 50 are more likely to tune into TV broadcasts, while people younger than 25 are actively watching online video. The revolution in business models and digital distribution that disrupted the music industry has turned the TV and film industry on its head. As a result we are seeing a paradigm shift where producers, TV execs, gaming publishers, and print authors are paving new roads to build business models around on-demand video that is accessible across multiple devices. This presentation will discuss where the present round of convergence is leading, what the opportunity is for monetizing content beyond ad-based revenue, and what forms of new interactive media we can expect to see on network-enabled devices

Title: The Future of TV: Bigger, Brighter and Greener

Speaker: Amit Jain, Prysm

The way we interact with our television is changing. Submissive TV watching is a thing of the past. What does the demand for larger, interactive video displays mean for the future of in-home entertainment? The days of passive television viewing are gone. Today’s audiences are savvier and more engaged in the technology around them and expect more from their television screen than simple 2-D moving pictures. Television screens continue to get bigger and deliver a more immersive viewing experience accompanied by high-def picture quality and 3-D capabilities. As these technologies continue to improve, in-home entertainment is getting more and more life-like. Unfortunately, the current television market cannot keep up with the consumer demand for a bigger, better viewing experience at home. While 55” plasma screens seem like the next best thing, they offer a logistical nightmare. From the transportation between store to home, to the installation and additional infrastructure needed to support them, to the mass quantities of power they consume, it seems the larger the screen the bigger the headache. In this session, Prysm CEO, Amit Jain, will explore the future of television and discuss the changes in technology needed to make this a reality.

Title: Brave New World of Smart TV: Myths & Misperception

Speaker: Mario Queiroz, Google TV

The age of convergence is finally here, but the landscape remains complex and confusing. In this session, Mario Queiroz will work to address the common myths and misperceptions around smart TVs and the promise the category holds for consumer electronics manufacturers, content owners, and consumers. Like the smart phone before it, the smart TV will bring a new layer of functionality to your existing home entertainment experiences. Mario will explore the value the web will bring to your living room experience. This platform will be targeted, personal, and discoverable with a touch of the button, and it will be integrated across multiple screens, from mobile phones to tablets to TVs. The developer transformed the world of smart phones and is doing the same for tablets. Mario will also address why smart TV is the next frontier for application development and why the prospects for killer apps that will fundamentally change the way we view and engage with television look promising.

Title: Second Screen and Social TV: Which way from here?

Speakers: Carlton Cuse (Carlton Cuse Productions), Brad Pelo (i.TV), Lisa Hsia (Bravo Digital Media), Alex Iskold (GetGlue)

For years we’ve debated the promise of interactive TV. Until now, the promise has not been realized but with the advent of real-time social services like Twitter and TV-specific social apps, we seem to be on the cusp of a sea change when it comes to how people watch and engage with television. This session will discuss the state of the second screen, why it’s important and what it will take to finally make interactive TV a reality.

Title: Can a Social Web of Things keep TV cords connected

Speaker: Alison Moore, HBO

It’s 2015 and over half of the devices in your home are connected to the Internet. On the drive home you consider taking a longer route, but when you ask for directions the GPS system reminds you that you need to get home soon – you have a viewing party. The television recognizes you when you walk in the door and suggests that you pour a glass of wine since everyone else is online and waiting for you to join the Game of Thrones premier party. In response, the wine cooler switches on, illuminating the last bottle of red – a 2007 Scarecrow. You cringe but open it anyway. Your HBO app automatically loads a summary of last season’s characters since you still seem to have them confused, and then asks if you’d like to join the group video chat. “Go ahead”, you say, “I will catch up as we go.” Join Rhonda and Allison as they think aloud about the future of media immersed in a world where everything is connected, and television becomes something that you live instead of just watch.

Title: Power Shift: Gadgets Rock Entertainment Ecosystem

Speaker: Richard Bullwinkle (Rovi Corporation)

We love our gadgets — all three, four, or even five of them. Daily, we constantly use our iPad, smart phone, laptop, iTouch, and devices that interact with our TV. Research confirms that we love to multi-task with our media — while watching TV, we surf the web, text and instant message. Generation Y may not have grown up with electronic gadgets but they face it full on as corporate America is grappling with how to use the iPad as a business tool while for many Generation Z ankle-biters, the iPad is their Fisher-Price busy-box. Today, technologists and content owners struggle to make content flow freely from one device to another, but we all know that day will come. This session will take a look at our fascination with being connected anytime, anywhere as it weaves itself into the very fabric of society, forever changing how we live, work and play. It will address how touch screen, connected, and high-resolution technologies are shaping consumer and social behavior, and defining what consumers expect their gadgets to do for them tomorrow.

Title: #futureoftv: Breaking through the noise

Speaker: Maureen Costello (Little Cannonballs)

New TV technologies are being launched at a breakneck pace, yet, right now it is all noise until some standards are set. Our industry is poised for a future of innovation, but the landscape still looks like a jumble of wires. Who are the current players breaking through the noise? What intellectual capital have we netted from the world’s investment in the Internet and its standards? What have we learned from the mistakes of the music industry? How can industry players—new and old—work together to define standards for success? Can we predict who will be left standing in the greatest reality competition ever—for TV’s digital future? Let’s break through the noise and get with the program folks!

Title: Enriching TV experience with companion apps

Speaker: Perry Cooper, NHL

As TV audiences age, marketers are challenged to appeal to their prime demographic of 18-to-49-year-olds. The younger demographic is definitely watching TV, but they now require a second screen to enhance their viewing and steer away from the traditional TV experience. The second screen of choice, being the mobile device, is now accessed by 86% of mobile Internet users simultaneously while watching TV to browse the web, social network, and text, according to a recent Yahoo! study. To appeal to this younger, more tech-savvy demographic, the NHL will be offering an in-game experience for the mobile users that will stimulate behavior and keep fans engaged throughout the entirety of every game. What will be referred to as “predictive gaming” will combine the attraction of fantasy sports to live games where users can compete with friends to predict what their favorite player or team will do next in real-time, adding a new layer of excitement to the game. The proposed presentation will examine how the second screen will become the virtual requirement for future TV programming.

Title: Convergent iTV Apps: Factors for Great Products

Speaker: Wes Williams, Scripps Networks

Many factors distinguish great apps from coulda-been-a-contender apps. We’ll do a deep dive into questions you should ask when producing convergent apps for connected TVs, smartphones and tablets. The framework will be an unbiased review of apps in the real world, balancing user-oriented thinking with business needs. This will reveal factors to consider when building interactive apps related to TV viewing. Learn how to determine which features you need to reach marketing, advertising and audience goals, whether on just the TV screen or multiple platforms.

Title: Tablets & TV – Building Second Screens Experiences

Speaker: Klemens Wengert, Turner Broadcasting

Creating phone and tablet companion applications for television shows presents a unique opportunity for content providers. By linking the two screens together we have a new way to engage and deliver content to the users, integrate advertising and enhance the experience of watching television. This presentation is going to focus on how to create a second screen experience that makes sense for your audience, for your brand and your advertisers through case studies from Turner Broadcasting as well as some best practises and lessons learned.

Title: 3 Screen Minimum: Convergence of TV & Social Media

Speakers: Fred Harner (SportsNet New York (SNY)), Stephanie Agresta (Weber Shandwick.com), Eric Bruno (Verizon), Soraya Darabi (Foodspotting)

A full 70 percent of US tablet owners say they use their devices while watching TV. Companies like Verizon are baking social into their products and enabling users to tweet, watch online videos and update Facebook directly from their TVs. Channels like Bravo capitalize on this by weaving emerging tech like Foursquare, Foodspotting and Shazam into their TV output, as well as having personalities engage actively with fans and critics on Twitter and other social media. Google Hangouts allows people to watch web video together online. Join as forward thinkers from Verizon, Foodspotting, SportsNet NY (SNY) discuss what’s next for the convergence of social media and TV.

They Pulled Me Back In! I’m Joining Dijit Media as Chief Product Officer

Posted on by

A week ago I announced that Jim Schaff would be taking over active duties at Stage Two, and that I’d be focusing on “other stuff.”  Today I’m excited to share the stuff:  I am joining the management team of Dijit Media as Chief Product Officer, where I’m responsible for product and marketing (here’s the official update).  Not only that, my virtually common law married colleague (business partners for much of the past 14 years) and very close friend Adam Burg is the company’s VP of Business Development.

What???

Last Fall, I gave a presentation at the Set-Top Box Conference in San Jose, and the entire drive back I had a feeling of near elation.  Not that I had said anything extremely profound, but it was wrapped up in the feeling of doing something I had a lot of passion for – in this case, discussing the future of television.  Over the next few months, I spent a lot of time doing research in the Smart TV (also called Connected TV or Internet TV) space, and started seeing some trends emerge, and realized there were some very interesting business opportunities on the horizon.

Adam and I spent months developing a prototype concept of the vision we had, and went to meet with some of the brightest folks we know in the convergence field.  One such bright folk was well-known VC Stewart Alsop, who I’ve known since the late 1990s, who introduced us to Maksim Ioffe, CEO of Dijit.  In our very first meeting with Maksim it was clear he shared much of the same industry and product vision and philosophy with Adam and me. I’ll keep this part of the story short, as we’ve all seen this movie before – we ended up agreeing to join the company. And there was much rejoicing (yay).

Why Dijit?

The grand vision of Dijit is to create the ultimate “four screen” (phone, tablet, computer, TV) social entertainment experience, one which seamlessly merges disparate products and platforms and content into one single, easy to use, consumer offering.  The company is well on its way, and its first product is an iPhone app that enables a really sophisticated, yet elegantly simple control experience for home media centers.   As Maksim put it, “Consumers have 21st-century home entertainment experiences but are stuck with remote controls that haven’t been updated since the 1980s.”  The company partnered with Griffin to produce the Beacon, a clever take on the “IR blaster” product, and one that’s already receiving solid reviews (and I haven’t even done anything yet!).  This is going to be a very exciting company to be a part of, and I’m thrilled to have such an opportunity.

Reminiscing.

I still recall the early days at Mediabolic, where we enabled networked home entertainment solutions that interfaced with legacy, analog consumer electronics devices (yes, we were networking the living room in an era where there were virtually no HDTVs, no YouTube, no Pandora, and no… iPod!).  At Mediabolic I learned what it takes to design and build embedded entertainment devices, to work with consumer electronics manufacturers, and the deep set of challenges surrounding the connected home industry (fun trivia: I heard the phrase “this is THE year of the digital home” every single year starting in 2001 – possibly earlier).  It was a great experience, and key people from that team now work at amazing companies like Netflix, Rovi Corp (Rovi acquired Mediabolic in 2007), etc.

At Sling Media I had the unique opportunity to work for and with some outstanding individuals, not to mention the position of being tasked with figuring out how to deliver the perfect “living room experience” – only over the Internet.  The company’s CEO, Blake Krikorian, taught me the meaning of focusing on every detail and nuance, remaining truly innovative, and keeping the consumer’s wants and needs in the forefront of every product decision.  I also had to learn the ins and outs of social media, back in the era before it was called “social media,” where “the bloggers” were a special, hard to understand subset of humanity (or, as I rapidly learned, just cool people).  We accomplished a great success building the Slingbox, and I’m proud of the product, the team, and the experience.

Over the past four years at Stage Two, I’ve had tremendous exposure to startups, big companies, CEOs, visionaries, the media, and managing a great team.  We literally put companies like Boxee, Bug Labs, and Pogoplug on the map, and have also had the chance to work for well-established firms like Electronic Arts, Best Buy, and VUDU (now Wal-Mart).  I’ve learned from entrepreneurs like Jim Lanzone (now president of CBS Interactive), Peter Semmelhack (Bug Labs), David McIntosh (Redux), Rahim Fazal (Involver) and so many others (I’ll write another post in the next little while chock full of shout-outs).  I’ve redesigned product experiences for dozens of products, and created marketing/PR/social media campaigns for dozens more, and had the pleasure to work with great teams along the way.

The Future.

And now I’m taking all of the above, and putting it to work at one place.  Welcome to Dijit.

Roku vs AppleTV smackdown

Posted on by

I don’t have cable. But I watch a lot of TV.

For my birthday I got a Roku and after tooling around with it for a couple of weeks, I cut the cable cord, much to the wife’s chagrin. Then, last Christmas, I found under the tree an AppleTV (although it is small enough it could have gone in the stocking.)

AppleTV and Roku essentially inhabit the same space. Both are around (or under) $100, both are solely media streaming devices and, unlike the mythical GoogleTV or the enigmatic Boxee, neither offer web access.

So with no methodology and no experience in product reviews, here is my official, unauthorized, David-vs-Goliath head-to-head streaming media device smackdown. In one corner, Apple, the single greatest human accomplishment in the history of the universe; the company that proves Intelligent Design is real. And in the other corner, Roku, which means “six” in Japanese.

Design

OK, this isn’t really fair because this is where Apple has always excelled. When I first got my Roku, I thought it was a pretty slick device. Black plastic, pleasing angles and the size of a turkey club sandwich (hold the mayo). Then I unwrapped the AppleTV and…. My God you’re beautiful! So small, so sleek…

I looked at my Roku, what is that hideous oversized slab of a streaming device currently attached to my TV?

Point: Apple

UX

I won’t even go there. Apple’s is amazing… Roku’s has always sucked.

Point: Apple

Content

So this is where it gets interesting. The gateway drug for both of these is Netflix and Pandora, which are both awesome services and the reasons why the sun still shines in my world. But what’s there beyond that?

With Roku, yes there is MLB if you like baseball (I don’t) and HuluPlus if you’re able to figure out why you would want it (I can’t). Where Roku really shines is access to all the weirdo webTV shows on Koldcast, Blip.TV, Revision3 and so on. You have to really like web-only TV and fortunately, I do. The wife doesn’t so I end up watching a lot of it by myself. You can also watch Al Jazeera streaming live on Roku in the event you need more proof as to how f-ed up the world is.

With Apple TV, your channel flipping will lead you to YouTube or to all the various audio and video podcasts on iTunes. That may sound lame, but it really isn’t. There is a ton of great stuff there and most of it is pretty bite-sized. So in 3-5 minute increments you can flip from news to comedy to movie trailers… unless you land on the “This American Life” podcast, in which case you’re stuck on the couch listening to your TV for an hour.

Winner of this round? I’m going to give it to Roku. I love all the cheese that webTV has to offer. My big complaint is again the UX… it is hard to find content and then to remember which channel it is on if you want to go back to it.

Reliability
So here’s the knock-out blow… this goes to Roku. Yes, it is close, but Roku wins it. I found a better picture and fewer artifacts when streaming from Roku. Also, surprisingly, AppleTV hung up and crashed more than the Roku did. Not by a long shot, mind you, but enough to notice.

Final Verdict

If you like design, UX and more mainstream content, you’ll love AppleTV.

But this is my smackdown and I’m giving the prize to Roku. They’ve got the edge in reliability and I love the goofy webTV access… but that is just me.

Quick Thoughts: buying a new TV, cord-cutting, smart TVs, delicious shutdown, online privacy

Posted on by

I'm on a Truck. With a TV.

Buying a new TV:  I came to the realization that my manroom, while great, was inadequately equipped with a mere 50″ screen.  So I decided to go big (then go home).  Spent a long while researching options, ended up with the Samsung PN63C590, Samsung PN63C8000, and the LG 60PK950 as my top three choices.  Two of these three had 3D and Internet connectivity, the other was just a big honking 63″ screen.  I went with the big honking screen and skipped on the frills.  I realized I don’t much like the current 3D experience in theaters or homes (makes me a little nauseous), and the likelihood that I’d want to frequently watch 3D at home was pretty low.  Regarding Internet apps, I’m not really impressed with most of the available apps, and I’m not very convinced that the current platforms won’t be obsolete within 12-18 months (looks like I’m not the only one who feels that way on both topics).

In a nutshell – the TV is awesome, manroom now operating at near-100% efficiency.

Cord-Cutting: So my new TV is great, and also huge.  And there’s an interesting downside to it being huge – the gaffes of lower quality video are worse than ever.  As soon as everything was hooked up, I turned on the NHL HD channel (sports channels seem to be at the top of the quality spectrum in the HD channel lineup).  All I could see were the jaggies and other terrible aftereffects of the highly compressed video Comcast delivers to my house.  So how did I make my TV look good?  I turned on my Xbox!  I think this “faux” HD experience is something that actually could cause cord-cutting in 2011 – far more than Smart TVs will.  More on this over on the Stage Two blog.

Smart TVs:  Speaking about Smart TVs (the continuity in this post would astound my high school English teacher), I read an article on “What Smart TVs need to Succeed” with the highlights being: Unlimited Content Access, Extensive Use of Apps, and Immersive Experience.  I think I understand that perspective, but I also think it is missing the boat.  People tend to compare Smart TVs to Smart Phones.  If you recall, the first several *years* of smart phones were some truly terrible products.  But when it comes to phones, that’s “ok” because they are low cost (relative to TVs) and owners expected to replace them in fairly short cycles.  TVs, on the other hand, are expensive and consumers tend to replace infrequently (unless of course they have awesome manrooms that warrant the upgrade).  A generation of underwhelming Smart TVs will likely put a damper on the entire industry.  What Smart TVs really need to succeed is great, intuitive, television-like user experiences.  And I will be blunt by saying none of them do it right now.  And I don’t see this changing for at least the first half of 2011.  Which is why we’ve got a new thing cooking in Stage Two’s labs, all about making a really good TV user experience.  Will show ya next year.

Del.icio.us shutdown:  Just like everyone else in the Web 2.0 era,  I used Delicious for about 45 minutes back in the mid 2000’s, then stopped.  I know there’s still a solid fan base, and a lot more people found it a lot more useful than I did, but Yahoo’s let it languish since about 6 months after purchase.  Other than buying a better domain for it, it doesn’t seem like the company cared about it one bit.  And now they are shutting it down.  I think this is pretty terrible, and as I tweeted… “irony of delicious shut-down? bartz could’ve made only $46.2M last year and still had a full-time TEAM on *improving* the product…”  Shame on them.  I’m sure there’s some great spreadsheet somewhere that shows why its the smart business decision, but the audacity of the entire Yahoo situation is just plain infuriating.  Highly recommended reading: Thomas Hawk’s letter to Carol Bartz.

Online privacy:  The entire concept of privacy is up for grabs these days.  Some feel it’s dead, some feel it must be protected at all costs.  I sit closer to the “protect my privacy” camp, and as a result am encouraged to see the government taking some form of action.  Unfortunately, I don’t know how much actual good it will do, but since the industry isn’t self-regulating, I have to assume it can’t make things too much worse.  I remain convinced that the mega-millionaires who run the companies who effectively control our online privacy have the incorrect moral incentives in place, especially considering they can pay their way out of the issues the rest of us face.

Is cord-cutting real?

Posted on by

We’ve all heard about the recent declines in cable subscriptions as of late and the digerati are breathlessly declaring this to be the ear of “cord-cutting”. The real test of the cord-cutting phenomena will be once (or if) the economy ever picks up. As stated:

Neil Smit, president of Comcast Cable, acknowledged in a recent call with investors that some customers had dropped cable for free signals. Company executives also said they expected business to rebound with the economy.

That may very well happen.

Thus far, despite all the brou-hah-hah, the relative number of cord-cutters has been small and it has mostly been low-margin customers, the type of customers cable companies don’t want anyway.

You could reasonably assign those customer losses to the crappy economy and anticipate customer increases once things get better. If that happens, then “cord-cutting” has been a fad. But if the downward trend in customer subs (or the upward trend in cord-cutting) continues when (or again… if) housing and/or employment picks up, then the cable industry is in trouble.

I’m a fan of the cord-cutting movement (as a cord-cutter myself), but I’m skeptical about how real this trend is in the mainstream.

There are a number of wild-cards out there besides just the economy. For example, high-profile channels like HBO start making their own moves could nudge cord-cutting from fad to trend:

(Time Warner Inc. Chief Executive Jeff) Bewkes has suggested recently that HBO could be sold directly to consumers on the Web.

HBO going online is a big WOW.

Also, the big question is of course sports, and how/if you’ll be able to access outside of a cable subscription.

The question ultimately comes down to money. Yes, Netflix may have almost 17 million subscribers, but under its current deal Starz, a key supplier of content  to Netflix, makes only 15 cents a subscriber, compared to the $2/subscriber it makes off of cable companies.

Until content owners and distributers start making that kind of coin, marquee content will remain elusive on cord-cut TVs, which may squash the cord-cutting revolution.

Rooting for Roku

Posted on by

Hello,

I’m a longtime fan of LiveDigitally but a first time contributor. Jeremy has been kind enough to invite me to write for the blog whenever the mood strikes and today seemed like the perfect day for my inaugural post.

Picking up on previous posts on what makes a great Google TV or Boxee app, I thought I’d jump in with some thoughts of my own on one of my favorite devices, the Roku box.

I got my Roku about four months ago and I love it, I really do. It gives me about 75% of the content I would want on my TV, which was enough to get me to “cut the cord” and cancel my cable subscription. So for the past few months, Roku has been my rocket ship to the TV universe.

I haven’t seen Roku’s latest offerings, but here are some thoughts on what I have seen and heard about their current boxes:

  1. Roku wins universal praise for its ease and setup, but not so much fanfare for its UI; I can’t disagree. The box is dead-simple to set-up and use, which is great. But the UI is uninspired and doesn’t really encourage you to really delve in to what is on offer
  2. Another piece of high praise is reliability, my box hardly ever flakes and we put it through the ringer. It is hard-wired into my router so I can’t vouch for the wifi capability, which appears to be improved in the new boxes launched today
  3. Content: At the outset, Roku was essentially a Netflix box. That was great a year-or-so ago but now, everyone and their brother is a Netflix box. Roku has some nifty content like MLB, Pandora, Amazon and a few others, but they need to continue to expand with more mainstream stuff.  Apple has Netflix and just scored ABC and FOX. It isn’t a huge leap forward, but it may be enough to peel off Roku users.
  4. Developer community: Related to the content problem, I know from some developer friends that Roku isn’t the easiest platform to develop on. Obviously this is a problem as competitors, both large and small have strong developer communities. Difficult development platform=difficult to get the choice apps/content.

Some of the pet peeves that are missing from my current box have been addressed by the new ones, the biggest being previously a lack of USB. With my current XR, I don’t have USB to view my own content, which is frustrating. Happily, that has been solved with the XDS

But even as it evolves, Roku is firmly staking ground in the low-end market, which I think is a good move.

The big battle around media-streaming boxes will be around price/performance; Google TV seems to be on the highest end, with estimates that their box will be in the $200-$300 range, Boxee is next at under $200, with Apple TV and Roku coming in at the sub $100 range.

GoogleTV and Boxee promise a more active experience, with more features, web surfing  etc., but also with a more complicated remote/UI. AppleTV and Roku look to be more of lean-back experience of just watching content via a simple remote/UI.

My money is on the lean-back experience, which I think is more viable for the short term. A simple box that lets people access most of the content they want will be the gateway drug to media-streaming boxes. Boxee and Google TV look/sound great on paper, but I wonder if they may be too complex too early in the lifecycle of this product segment.

Party Mode TV: great until the inevitable bathroom break

Posted on by


Watch live video from Jeremy Toeman on Justin.tv

For context, one of the “grand visions of the future” is how people from around the world will be able to watch TV “together”. It’s a wonderful idea except that the visionaries behind it seem to forget the pragmatic realities of how people actually watch TV…

Thinking about Googling my TV

Posted on by

Google, Intel, and Sony have apparently teamed up (and Logitech too) to develop an Android-based platform for interactive television. Let me start my post with some important background points and disclosure:

  • I was a cofounder of Mediabolic, a startup who built a platform for connected devices.  While there I designed about a dozen “convergence” products (one won a best-of-CES award), and the company eventually got acquired by Macrovision.
  • I was an early employee at Sling Media, where I was responsible for developing the Slingbox (another best-of-CES award).
  • I once interviewed at Google for a position in a “google TV” role, but didn’t feel it was a really great fit for me personally (not to mention the commute).
  • I am currently involved with Boxee.TV, a startup in a highly-related field. There is some amount of overlap here, though that is in no way related to this blog post.
  • I’ve also worked with VUDU, Clicker.com, DivX, and others on “future of TV” systems, services, and products.
  • I was on the original working group committees for UPnP (AV) as well as DLNA (even before it was called that).

Through the above experiences, I have seen a lot of failure and some success in the “connected TV” space.  But mostly failure.

It’s a space where techies dream, entrepreneurs try, and companies fail. The list of failed convergence companies is notably longer than the list of successes. It’s a field where even Apple, the current king of the world when it comes to entertainment technology, can’t get a reasonable foothold in the home.

Most of the failure is due to deeply entrenched systems heavily controlled by huge corporations with little interest or need to innovate.  While we can yell and scream about how bad a job the Cable/Satellite companies are doing at future planning, the blunt reality is it’s hard to argue that it’s necessitated.  These megacorporations can drag their feet, and deploy mediocre DVRs and HD services, and consumers (for the most part) are satisfied with their experiences.  Further, due to their current business structures, the concept of opening up the market to third-party devices, content, services, or applications is not just daunting, but likely unprofitable.

When I consider the opportunity in the digital home, I am convinced it cannot come about by directly competing with traditional broadcast models. Broadcast TV, and all the services with it, are generally easy to use, convenient to pay for, and effectively “good enough” for most people – making “better than current TV” offerings a significant challenge to bring to market.  Historically, the only thing to attract the attention of consumers beyond their existing entertainment solutions are:

  • Transformative content playback experiences. From VCR to DVD was one example, and from standard definition to HDTV is another.  The key word here is transformative – it can’t just be “better quality”, as evidenced by virtually all other introduced formats and technologies based around content.
  • Notably difference content offerings. Again, moving up to HDTV-enabled set-top boxes was a natural flow, game consoles are the other shining example of a successful category.  Boxes that simply deliver “more of the same” or “stuff you can get elsewhere, now get it here (e.g. digital pictures)” are typically not big hits.  Consumers have to see some kind of service that’s worth the extra money.

Everything else has failed to make a dent.  Most “Internet Set Top Boxes” have been, and will be failures.  The typical logic that brings these products to market goes something like “consumers are about to cut the cables for their Internet content, and really hate watching it on their computers.”  The evidence behind this claim?  It’s in the same folder with the WMD evidence the government started a war for (zing!).

I’m very curious as to the potential from Google, Intel, and Sony.  Intel has wanted in on the “connected TV” for a long time (disclosure: they were an investor in Mediabolic), and has never really executed very well.  It’s not to say they can’t, but it’s safe to say the space is far far away from their core DNA.  Sony too has stumbled frequently in this space (here’s their version of a convergence device). Logitech? See Sony. And then there’s Google.

Part of me thinks Google believes that all devices are effectively the same, and their (limited) success in the phone market implies opportunity in the TV market.  Another part of me thinks Google is just so big they take on any sector they see opportunity in.  But most of me thinks Google wants to get firmly entrenched in the biggest advertising market there is – television.  And as hard as doing phones might be, doing TV boxes is much much harder.  Here’s why:

  • Phones play highly restricted media types.  Converged TV devices are expected to play all media types.  This topic alone is probably worthy of a blog post, but trust me when I say – it’s hard.
  • Consumers buy new phones on a recurring basis (multiple times a year in some countries). Consumers replace TVs infrequently, and buy TV “accessory” devices only a couple of times per decade. While the market is huge, it’s hard to get new devices into the home.
  • Carriers are motivated to push new devices and services into the hands of their customers, it’s part of their business model.  TV service providers are not motivated to do so (as discussed above).
  • As much as phones are “closed systems”, a manufacturer is able to purchase equipment and get a device certified and get it on the network without too much involvement by a carrier.  While the path is actually similar (CableCard Tru2Way certification), the realities for both the manufacturer and, more importantly, consumer are much much worse.
  • Again, as stated above, consumers are generally dissatisfied with their phones (a problem unlikely to go away) and are excited about new ones.  Consumers literally dread changing equipment in their living room – even us geeky dads with cool quadrophonic sound.

Now with all that said, I’m truly excited about the future of converged entertainment in (and out) of the home. I remain mostly cynical about seeing any real change anytime soon.  I think there are a few companies who have built the right foundation to make some inroads, but I’m hoping everyone involved is prepared to win their “realist” and “slow and steady wins the race”  badges over the next few years-to-decade (or longer).  Can Google be the catalyst of change, or will they just be the next in the long list of companies who tried and missed the mark?