The ShowmeTV thread

Forums › Online streaming services › The ShowmeTV thread

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

2798 posts

Uber Geek

#994764 26-Feb-2014 12:06

Silverlake,

To be replaced by what? Smart TVs, MediaPC's, etc most definately (I don't use Sky's STB for my viewing :-) ) but if you simply mean on demand via webpage then no. I can't stand the idea of not being able to control the content with a remote control.

My holy grail would be a single smart TV/MediaPC/Android,Roku etc. device application that can aggregate all the online/physical channels in to one program guide with the ability to record according to certain loaded parameters that the company can 'control' (ideally there would be no control but we know that won't happen). I hate having to flick to different web addresses or to load different applications to watch content.

Currently I do this with MediaPortal and can view all FTA/Sky channels in one guide, record anything I want and also view my movies, music and pictures using a single remote control.

EDIT: Another question, how do people remember all those programs they want to watch if they're spread across multiple providers with guides or are on deman only? If you can't set a reminder then you might miss something, especially if you're getting drip-fed programs as they're released.

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#994785 26-Feb-2014 12:34

silverlake:
Jas777: tdgeek,

Don't get me wrong, I actually like the current model and I don't think it will lead to a reduction in price if you watch a reasonable amount of content.

What will happen if the content was split across platforms or could be sold anywhere is that the premium content will still be expensive not the average unit price like a lot of people think it should be. And that some content will disappear as it is not economically viable.

The other thing is that when people compare SKY to streaming etc they include that cost of SKY equipment in the comparison but not the cost of computing hardware.

Part of the problem with the current model is that you have no choice but to rent the SKY equipment - and it is expensive!
The STB constrains us from being able to watch the content that we pay for whenever and wherever we want to watch it.
The STB needs to go the way of the VHS recorder.

I disagree. What's your alternative, Everyone buy a new smart TV and install a plugin or buy a laptop and hook it up to their TV?? Neither will happen.. Telecom need to make plugins for existing smart TVs and existing STBs like Apple TV, WD Live and maybe Freeview DVRs but i see Quickflix haven't been able to pull that off yet..

Regards,

Old3eyes

silverlake

142 posts

Master Geek

#994850 26-Feb-2014 14:14

old3eyes:I disagree. What's your alternative, Everyone buy a new smart TV and install a plugin or buy a laptop and hook it up to their TV?? Neither will happen.. Telecom need to make plugins for existing smart TVs and existing STBs like Apple TV, WD Live and maybe Freeview DVRs but i see Quickflix haven't been able to pull that off yet..

I'm not saying that STB's are going to become obsolete because Telecom have announced ShowmeTV.
I'm saying that STB's are constraining us from accessing content from wherever we want to access it.
Most Smart TV's are also constraining us by resticting the client software that they run. We need Smart TV's with fully functional operating systems that will allow us to install whatever software we want in order to manage the media we choose to view.
The software needs to be independent of the content provider so that we are not restricted to their content.

Benoire

2798 posts

Uber Geek

#994864 26-Feb-2014 14:33

This I agree with, many programs can run with DRM enabled content as long as the provider opens an API to tie in to. This would make the content platform agnostic; a much better view in my opinion.

trig42

5809 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#994871 26-Feb-2014 14:42

old3eyes:
silverlake:
Jas777: tdgeek,

Don't get me wrong, I actually like the current model and I don't think it will lead to a reduction in price if you watch a reasonable amount of content.

What will happen if the content was split across platforms or could be sold anywhere is that the premium content will still be expensive not the average unit price like a lot of people think it should be. And that some content will disappear as it is not economically viable.

The other thing is that when people compare SKY to streaming etc they include that cost of SKY equipment in the comparison but not the cost of computing hardware.

Part of the problem with the current model is that you have no choice but to rent the SKY equipment - and it is expensive!
The STB constrains us from being able to watch the content that we pay for whenever and wherever we want to watch it.
The STB needs to go the way of the VHS recorder.

I disagree. What's your alternative, Everyone buy a new smart TV and install a plugin or buy a laptop and hook it up to their TV?? Neither will happen.. Telecom need to make plugins for existing smart TVs and existing STBs like Apple TV, WD Live and maybe Freeview DVRs but i see Quickflix haven't been able to pull that off yet..

+1'd this.

Hopefully, Telecom have been beavering away behind the scenes, and have developers developing these apps for Apple (TV, Pads, Phones), Android (Phones, Tablets and TV Sticks) and Smart TVs (ALL Brands, not just Samsung or Sony). This must be ready to go at Launch, not 'coming soon'. And, content is king.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#994894 26-Feb-2014 15:15

Benoire: This I agree with, many programs can run with DRM enabled content as long as the provider opens an API to tie in to. This would make the content platform agnostic; a much better view in my opinion.

I don't disagree. If everyone had fibre optic interwebs and there were joint CDN's in the main centres, yes . But we are not there yet

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#994903 26-Feb-2014 15:26

trig42:
old3eyes:
silverlake:
Jas777: tdgeek,

Don't get me wrong, I actually like the current model and I don't think it will lead to a reduction in price if you watch a reasonable amount of content.

What will happen if the content was split across platforms or could be sold anywhere is that the premium content will still be expensive not the average unit price like a lot of people think it should be. And that some content will disappear as it is not economically viable.

The other thing is that when people compare SKY to streaming etc they include that cost of SKY equipment in the comparison but not the cost of computing hardware.

Part of the problem with the current model is that you have no choice but to rent the SKY equipment - and it is expensive!
The STB constrains us from being able to watch the content that we pay for whenever and wherever we want to watch it.
The STB needs to go the way of the VHS recorder.

I disagree. What's your alternative, Everyone buy a new smart TV and install a plugin or buy a laptop and hook it up to their TV?? Neither will happen.. Telecom need to make plugins for existing smart TVs and existing STBs like Apple TV, WD Live and maybe Freeview DVRs but i see Quickflix haven't been able to pull that off yet..

+1'd this.

Hopefully, Telecom have been beavering away behind the scenes, and have developers developing these apps for Apple (TV, Pads, Phones), Android (Phones, Tablets and TV Sticks) and Smart TVs (ALL Brands, not just Samsung or Sony). This must be ready to go at Launch, not 'coming soon'. And, content is king.

Perhaps Telecom are working on a new "Home Gateway" or something that will deliver the content to the TV.

Let's face it, boxes that are dedicated to receiving streamed content are not expensive, add on a loss leader to the idea and then the boxes could be quite cheap - I mean, if Apple can sell the AppleTV for $150 imagine how much it actually costs to build and distribute. A Raspberry Pi can cope with most of the requirements and is not dedicated to the task - look at the HD Home Run for an idea of TV distributed throughout your home network.

At the end of the day - the technology is there. The big question comes back to whether they will be able to secure distribution/broadcast rights in NZ. If Sky have the "monopoly" on the rights for the best films and current TV series they will either have to pay Sky (who retain the monopoly) or pay the distributer a lot of money to beat Sky - but then Telecom become the monopoly.

Personally I would like to see a system where the distributer sets a price that someone is prepared to pay - if two or more players buy the contract then both can distribute the content. It then relies on them to provide the best product to get the highest subscriber base to get the advertisers to continue to back them. Sky, Telecom and Vodafone - and why not include QuickFlix - are all big enough players and would have no problem getting backers if they could get the content.

Another option would be to have tiers in their contracts - tier 1 owner could play the content first within 48 hours of original broadcast, tier 2 after the 48 hours and everyone else after 28 days. Everyone gets access to the content within a reasonable time depending on what the user is prepared to pay.

All of this comes back to the distributer/owner of the shows and films to make this kind of non-exclusive deal available.

Yes, I do live in a dream world!!!

Procrastination eventually pays off.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#994938 26-Feb-2014 16:21

anyone want to register the www.showmetelevision.com website - apparently nobody owns it - the domain expired 21.01.2014!!

Procrastination eventually pays off.

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#994939 26-Feb-2014 16:24

StarBlazer: anyone want to register the www.showmetelevision.com website - apparently nobody owns it - the domain expired 21.01.2014!!

Same for www.showmetv.com also available. At least they appear to have www.showme.tv - well that's the impression the site gives. How do you do a site owner lookup?

Procrastination eventually pays off.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#994955 26-Feb-2014 16:27

Nice post

I work for Telecom but I do not know anything about Showme, my opinions are mine.

I use Sky but I don't see them as a monopoly . They have been outbid on more than one time. EPL being the latest.

IMHO the issue is NZ. Under 5 million population is difficult. I've been to many countries and many cities double or more our population. That's difficult to provide a solution that satisfies everyone

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#994959 26-Feb-2014 16:38

I read that telecom did make a failed foray into tv back in the 90's, and I seem to recall that.
I think in order for it to be successful they really need to be in it 1000%, and this needs to become their main business, as potnetially it coul dbe a higher margin type of business. It could even mean paying to commission some new TV shows like netflix have done which they can sell overseas.
If they can get an app onto apple tv and the xbox, as well as the PS3 and 4, it will open them up to many NZ households.

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#995040 26-Feb-2014 19:08

My concern is that if the market fragments, with different bits of content moving exclusively to a range of providers, then in order to get the content I want I will potentially need multiple subscriptions and set top boxes.

On the subscription side, this could be a PITA to manage and likely cost more than the current Sky sub to get all of the content I currently get.

Multiple Set top boxes will be potentially even more annoying. My propensity to tinker means that my current setup is complex enough - the inputs on my TV (2xAV, 2xComponent, 4xHDMI) are already maxed out, and my powerstrips are full. I don't want to have to install AV switches etc to juggle routing many STBs to my TV and recorder. I doubly don't want to have to do this for elderly relatives that I am the unpaid tech support guy for - and then get them comfortable with using it and taking all the support calls when the press the wrong button etc.

Issues of price and monopoly aside, there is some ease/cost upside with basically only one delivery platform to manage. While more content and providers would be nice, I can also see it potentially turning into a bit of a nuisance.

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#995046 26-Feb-2014 19:14

JimmyH: My concern is that if the market fragments, with different bits of content moving exclusively to a range of providers, then in order to get the content I want I will potentially need multiple subscriptions and set top boxes.

On the subscription side, this could be a PITA to manage and likely cost more than the current Sky sub to get all of the content I currently get.

Multiple Set top boxes will be potentially even more annoying. My propensity to tinker means that my current setup is complex enough - the inputs on my TV (2xAV, 2xComponent, 4xHDMI) are already maxed out, and my powerstrips are full. I don't want to have to install AV switches etc to juggle routing many STBs to my TV and recorder. I doubly don't want to have to do this for elderly relatives that I am the unpaid tech support guy for - and then get them comfortable with using it and taking all the support calls when the press the wrong button etc.

Issues of price and monopoly aside, there is some ease/cost upside with basically only one delivery platform to manage. While more content and providers would be nice, I can also see it potentially turning into a bit of a nuisance.

Market fragmentation is inevitable, as each of these companies will want their slice of the paytv pie. But that may also mean that each service will be a lot cheaper, and then you can pick and choose the services you want, rather than being servied up everything by one provider including those channels you will never watch. So you end up paying for stuff you never watch.
Multiple set top boxes shouldn't be needed as this is why companies like microsoft, sony apple have got their devices into peoples homes, as they can run apps for each of these services. Eventually their investment will pay off. Also built in apps on tvs will become more common.
The downside is duplication of infrastructure and management etc for each pay tv company. I am not sure if the consumer will end up paying less, but they may end up with more choice.

Buzz Bumble

332 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#995048 26-Feb-2014 19:16

JimmyH: My concern is that if the market fragments, with different bits of content moving exclusively to a range of providers, then in order to get the content I want I will potentially need multiple subscriptions and set top boxes.

Yep, I said that yesterday(?). It already happens with games consoles - for some games you have to buy a PlayStation for some you have to buy an Xbox, for some you have to buy a Nintendo, ... :(

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#995052 26-Feb-2014 19:20

mattwnz: I read that telecom did make a failed foray into tv back in the 90's, and I seem to recall that.
I think in order for it to be successful they really need to be in it 1000%, and this needs to become their main business, as potnetially it coul dbe a higher margin type of business. It could even mean paying to commission some new TV shows like netflix have done which they can sell overseas.
If they can get an app onto apple tv and the xbox, as well as the PS3 and 4, it will open them up to many NZ households.

They did an extended trial of Firstmedia for cable but pulled it

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8