Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (7520)	7/7/2000 7:27:09 PM
From: lml	Respond to of 12823

Frank: Thanks for your input, and refocusing this debate on where VDSL channel SELECTION will most likely take place -- upstream. My own guess under the SBC Pronto model is that it WILL take place at the neighborhood gateway where the CEV will be located. I also recognize that an any one instant (real time) there is only going to one or two streams of DVB traveling over the copper leading to the home. By comparison, I ask how much different is this in terms of user interface than the present DBS model whereby the LNB on the dish limits the actual number of channels that can be delivered along the RF cable to the DBS receiver? On a more fundamental note, & as you point out, is it really necessary to have all of a 200 channel selection delivered to the set-top box in the home, when only a small percentage of such voluminous content will actually be "consumed" by the viewer either as it is delivered over the copper, or recorded for later viewing. The issues that you raise regarding HDTV, as well as live sporting events, appear to resolve in my mind some of the conflicts I initially perceived when learning of SBC's marketing relationship with DirecTV, and at the same time aware of SBC's plans to migrate into VDSL at a latter stage of its Pronto strategy. I initially rationalized that (1) perhaps not all broadcast content would be delivered over VDSL provisioned wire, and (2) SBC was highly unlikely to invest in such "turbo-charged" provisioning on a broad basis. but rather limit such deployments to the most lucrative of markets where the ROI made sense, at least in the case of the first rollouts. In light of your comments, I speculate that programming over VDSL might be limited to special event programming (ie pay-per-view), or local programming that compete with cable public access type programming not likely to be carried by DirectTV feeds. This all makes for interesting discussion, but its Friday afternoon here on the left coast, and it time to call it quits. Have a good weekend.

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (7520)	7/8/2000 8:48:48 AM
From: MikeM54321	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

"And a problem with sdv/vod is that most titles have not been digitized and stored on servers yet, and that leads me to the next factor, one being that of servers. Video servers are still expensive .... one could conclude, might also lead to a fewer number of overall channels being offered by startups who support video over VDSL." Frank- As I think you know, above is exactly my speculation as to why Kingston(the UK telco-MSO) could potentially only offer 50 TV channels. I just don't think I said it as well. In other words, SDV delivered via VDSL can support as many channel selections, and even more, as any other competing system. Be it MSO or DBS. The SDV VDSL channel count is limited only by the dollar cost of headend equipment and not much else. _______________________ On a completely different tangent, let's say we drop the VOD model out of the VDSL delivery system. Let's say we talk only, "live TV." Sporting events for instance. Let's say the teleco headend is receiving some 200 live channels of content, from the national broadcasters and local affiliates. And the telco needs to get it out to their 3,000 subs as each sub chooses to watch these live events. Some of that content is sent via terrestrial point-point microwave, some via a fiber optic link, some directly from the national broadcasters via satellite link. Let's say some of it's digital, some analog. Okay, now consider your comment, "Real time digitization of analog feeds which have been scheduled on a program basis is not such a burden here, since techniques exist to handle this, already, most notably MPEG encoding of content streams." So taking the 200 channels of live content delivered to the telco headend, making it all digital where needed, and sending it all down the distribution plant(in this case fiber-twisted pair), to their 3,000 subs, is not such a big deal(except for equipment money for course!), right? I just got the impression from reading your comments, that you thought a VDSL TV model could never handle 200 channels of live TV. I just wanted to clear this up. -MikeM(From Florida)