Is Microsoft IPTV’s Weak Link?

11 thoughts on “Is Microsoft IPTV’s Weak Link?”

  1. Om

    just one remark: Bluewin has been the brand name for the Swisscom ISP for years. We decided to launch TV under this brand instead of the Swisscom brand that is heavily related to “old-fashioned” phones…

    We can discuss the rest offline (in two weeks when we’ll meet).

    Andreas

  2. Creating an IPTV platform from scratch is a huge initiative for the bells which is why they *need* to count on external providers, they would obviously customize the offering to suit their individual needs. IPTV again, is a new concept and has the skepticism associated with it, but the way the TV watching tastes of mass markets are changing, certain features like on-demand stuff, DVR and sharing are features that IPTV provides seamlessly and with great efficiency (for starters).

  3. Most of the folks involved with both the software development and systems have little operational experience with large scale computing systems. One of the chief technical challenges facing the industries looking at IPTV is how to scale out such systems. The best (cost and scaleability) answer actually has little to do with computer. The answer can be found in how streaming audio services have been scaled on the Internet. For that — look less to software vendors and more to streaming media provider (spinner, netscape radio, et. al.) for the answers …

  4. Don’t forget about the recent ruling in Texas against the baby bells in this case – as if there weren’t enough barriers for them to get going, they now must be granted individual licenses for each city and town in order to run FTTP. So they’ve got problems on both ends – legal/deployment and software. The baby bells are clearly going to have a harder time rolling out video services than they previously imagined.

  5. The promise of IPTV based services and the legal issues surrounding IP based video deployments are not related issues. The FCC is cracking down in VoIP now as you guys know, but internet telephony has already started showing its promise. Bottomline is that all telcos concur on the fact that video services are the future for them and they all seem to have done some home work on this, now not to expect bumps on the road with such a huge paradigm shift, would be foolish.

  6. Nitin – Of course the two aren’t related….and in terms of “bumps in the road” – I think the ruling in Texas was quite a significant bump. How many years will it be before they can get a first version of a nationwide video network? How fast will cable be at that point by upgrading their equipment?

    If they have significant problems deploying a video solution from a technology point of view, it will be very hard for them to gain customers in a highly saturated market.

  7. Pingback: Plasma TV News

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.