Originally Posted by herbapou
I am sure it would be nice to cut cable, but its not possible technically if large amount of users do it. Again I worked on the BCE network and it would not be possible even for them and they have a much better network than cable. Cable bandwidth is already saturated trying to squeeze HD channels. IPTV structures broadcast the feeds to nodes than stream the channels to house so there are no limit to how many live HD feeds they can add.
I don't know how to make you understand this. Live feed can't be cache, so you must broadcast the feeds has close has you can to the houses. then stream them to the house using the telephone line. The telco line has limited bandwidth, but it doesn't matter because its a per channel stream on this line. IPTV is a combination of broadcast and streaming, its brilliant. And you can't stream the feeds from a central point because it will make too many duplicate and use insane amount of bandwidth. You must broadcast the feed to the nodes to save bandwidth.Cable has hit a wall:
The Cable bottleneck is between there node and you're house, its a broadcast of all the feeds. And to top it off they are still using MPEG-2 compression while iPTV is using MP4. Cable are in a very bad position they must upgrade to IPTV to add more HD channels. But cable is stuck with a huge inventory of MPEG2 broadcast set top boxes. To move from broadcast to IPTV they need to change all the user hardware and revamp there network. Just imagine how Apple could help them with that...
Originally Posted by herbapou
The problem with live TV is more at the ISP level than on the internet backbone. Once you enter the ISP network, a large amount of stream coming from the net will bring down the network. ISP will have to get in and reduce those stream bit per second the same way they do it with peer to peer transfert. But with live TV that means the live stream will be unwatchable.
An IPTV network is a complex system that is implemented inside the ISP network. The live feeds are broadcast to nodes close to homes using fiber optics. The streaming occurs between those nodes and the houses. This is why its crucial for Apple to strike deals with Cable and AT&T.
The way I see it, Apple will be providing the smart-TV ecosystem, TV's and set-top box. Cable wont have to invest money trying to build an ecosystem. The real negociation will be over Video on Demand. Apple need to strike deals that split the profits between the ISP and Apple. Apple will provide the VOD ecosystem and manage it. The ISP will distribute it inside there network for reliable streaming without consuming internet bandwith. An ISP could also strike deals with google or Amazon at the same time, different ecosystem and VOD sources, they get there cut on all sides and the consumer gets more choices.
I cannot stress enough that trying to fight the ISP over live TV would be a major mistake.
Wha? It's been a while since I've worked network and then only for core routers but this doesn't make any sense to me.
First, you can implement IP video broadcast (IP multicast) over DOCSIS 3.0...along with VOIP, VOD (IP unicast), etc. These can be broken out into different bandwidth groups with differing levels of QoS.
Frankly I'd say that Verizon has more reach than AT&T Uverse. And US deployment isn't just FTTN but also FTTP. UVerse is FTTN with the last segment being copper. My FiOS installation is fiber all the way to the ONU in my house.
As far as MSO plants, local loop bandwidth, etc even without DOCSIS 3.0 there are ways to manage traffic load. Of course D3 channel bonding only goes so far and eventually you have to do a node split. I understand Rogers hates doing that but congested ports on the CMTS has only one solution. More ports. Well, now that we've dumped some analog channels anyway so that route is largely used up when they ports saturate again. But freeing up 40-50 analog channels really gave back quite a bit of bandwidth.
Comcast, with FiOS nipping on it's heels, apparently is more than willing to do node splits in those markets.
Like I said, I've been out of it for more than a few years but back when Comcast was already talking all about VDOC (video over DOCSIS) using IP and the other major US MSOs were on the same track. AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc are all sinking large amounts of CAPEX in their builds. A little less now than before because of the economy but none are going to let the others get the technology edge unchallenged.
Comcast has been talking about IP convergence since before I left the industry. I recall reading that Comcast and Time Warner merged their CMAP and CESAR architectures into a new acronym last year called CCAP under Cablelabs. Comcast is trialing CCAP gear (relabeled CMAP gear)
on some test headends as we speak.
So I wouldn't count cable out. And UVerse with their FTTN architecture has many of the same issues as the cable MSOs in comparison to the FTTH FiOS approach.
My impression that the MPEG2 is driven by the STB deployment that can only decode MPEG 2. As more of these get replaced with STBs with MPEG 4 decode they can fix that.