At some point, as much more video starts to be delivered using IP networks, network marketers and engineers are going to have to come up with ways to entice people to use alternate means of delivery, when it is feasible to do so. At some point, it simply will not make sense to chew up valuable voice and interactive data bandwidth for relatively low value YouTube clips, as entertaining as they might be.
Consider for example what Qwest is doing: it has esentially decided to keep all traditional linear video programming, including high definition TV and on-demand programming intended for TV screen viewing, off its IP pipe. It is doing so by delivering linear TV in the most bandwidth efficient means possible, namely by satellite, streaming point-to-multipoint.
As would be the case for IP multicasting, the idea is simple" launch one single copy of each program to a virtually unlimited number of users who can view the stream at the same time or on a store-and-watch-later basis (TiVo or another digital video recorder).
That will reserve the IP connection for unicast video and other interactive applications. The same sort of "offloading" principle is used by Netflix with its "DVD in the mail" approach. The point is that we do not have to force everybody to use IP bandwidth for watching unicast video when multicasting, sideloading, satellite, physical media or some other approach, including time-shifted delivery, might work just as well.
The baleful alternatives will find service providers unable to meet customer demand for bandwidth because there no longer is any money to be made; a dramatic increase in monthly prices; or both. Consumers are smart. Given a reasonable set of different ways to get video, at discrete prices for different delivery times and media, they'll make choices that relieve pressure on access bandwidth bottlenecks.
No comments:
Post a Comment