Infrastructures

You are currently browsing the archive for the Infrastructures category.

Last year I reported that the Superbowl was not available off the Net. After my positive experiment last summer with the soccer WorldCup 2006, I knew I should be able to access a live peer-to-peer stream of the Superbowl somehow. Well, thanks to Technorati and this post at The Frog Blog, I was watching the show live within a minute.

Notebook vs TV

Here you see the two live scenes I could watch simultaneously earlier tonight; a wifi notebook with the P2P TVUPlayer software and my plain old 36″ tube. I observed a one minute latency on the notebook.
Like the WorldCup on TVAnts, the stream robustness was impressive. Once it got started, the stream simply never stopped. Its data rate fluctuated between 350 and 400 kbps. This is not great video quality but when that’s the only signal you have access to, it’s far better than nothing. For myself, I was happy to see the original CBS Superbowl commercials live for the first time. Here in Canada, the original commercials are always “Canadianized” by the local networks except on some pricy pay TV services.

TVU Player

So overall, it looks like P2P streaming works well. However, TVU Networks statistics would be required in order to really be able to assess what’s going on here. Also, I don’t know at this point if TVU is a pure P2P solution of if they rely on additional servers or CDNs to provide critical capacity.

Although I find these new P2P developpments very exciting, the real new trend in the States this year was certainly HD TV. With their new HD wide screens, sports fans got closer to mother nature this year; they could enjoy and observe each and every raindrop that fell on the field in Miami Gardens!

Tags: P2P+streaming, networked+media, Superbowl, peer-to-peer

In his EBU seminar report titled "From P2P to Broadcasting", Franc Kozamernik concludes:

Broadcasters have no choice but to adopt P2P technology and adjust it to their needs. In so doing, broadcasters should coordinate their activities closely with Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and P2P service/technology providers.
Thanks to P2P, the Internet (both wired and wireless) may become not just a complementary delivery channel (as it is today), but indeed a primary channel for niche content and on-demand services.

I strongly agree with this and as I probably mentioned here already, P2P is good for broadcasters but also for the the whole user generated media (UGM) community. With P2P, anyone can afford "large coverage": the distribution network is free. That’s why broadcasters have to do the same.

However, I would argue that P2P networks would be good for the head of the Longtail as well as for niche and on-demand content. In fact, P2P networks are much more efficient for content that is popular. In this case, many more seeds provide a much better and faster access to the desired content.

Tags:

So I’m sitting right there, waiting for the event to begin.

Beyond Broadcast 2006 is loaded with great, experienced speakers with all possible backgrounds: braodcasters, journalists, technologists and so on. The theme is important:

We will explore the thesis that traditional public media — public broadcasting, cable access television, etc — face a unique opportunity to embrace new participatory web-based media models — podcasting, video blogs, social software, etc — and create a stronger and more vital public service.

And if I’ m lucky, my MMB demo will work fine this afternoon! I’ll try to report later.

Technorati Tags: beyondbroadcast, broadcasting+2.0, public+media, public+broadcasting

Within some hours after its publication, Michael Geist already posted a first glance analysis of the final report of the canadian “Telecommunications Policy Review Panel”. To a certain extent, it looks like that Panel has recognized the need to protect network neutrality principles. To me, this sounds like good news.
 
Net neutrality is one of the important topics in telecommunications this year. To give you an idea, net neutrality guarantees that all IP packets get the same treatment whoever sent them, whatever they carry and whatever the path they travel. Without net neutrality, your ISP could “slow down” or even block a VOIP service that’s provided by a competitor. In the wireless world, net neutrality will allow you to make Skype calls with your cell phone over your data plan (and thus avoiding the usual premium fees for voice services). Net neutrality should consequently allow for a more competitive and innovative market.
 
With this in mind, I’ve been wondering if net neutrality principles could also somehow be defined for terrestrial broadcasting. Do current broadcast regulations guarantee content diversity and fair access to braodcast networks? Would they support the new “user generated media” trend?
 
First, let’s not forget that broadcasting IS telecommunications. Broadcasting is a particular form of telecommunications specialized in one-to-many messages. It is unidirectional but has a very high data transfer capacity (because we’ve allocated large spectrum chunks to it!). Digital broadcasting will be a component (if we ever get it) of the global communications infrastructure.
 
Considering these great properties, could we imagine a flexible, Internet-like broadcast context where content and applications would dynamically and fairly get their chance to “hold the mike” for some time?
 
To take an example, I could imagine a “Top 100 YouTube” off-air mobile video channel. In such a service, nobody would be in control… or actually everybody since popularity, derived form real Internet consumption statistics, would be the content selection criteria. So in the end, the people would decide, implicitly, what content they want to “promote” to the broadcast level. Because again, in an pre-WiMax era (?), terrestrial broadcasting is still an extremely powerful delivery network.
 
In other words, I realize that this would suggest a reversed broadcast system. Before, content got popular BECAUSE it aired on broadcast networks. Today, the actual popularity could be derived from the Internet and used as the principal criteria to decide how to populate the broadcast spectrum. This would probably allow for a more natural emergence of content.
 
Would this be a way to support network neutrality principles in braodcasting? Your comments please.
 
Will we consider concepts like these in the current canadian Review of the Commercial Radio Policy? I think I would not bet on this one!
 
 
Three weeks ago I reported about LiveSupport, an open radio automation software. Well, here is another platform I found: Rivendell. Doc Searls reports about it in his recent Linux Journal column:
 
Rivendell aims to be a complete radio broadcast automation solution, with facilities for the acquisition, management, scheduling and playout of audio content. As a robust, functionally complete digital audio system for broadcast radio applications, Rivendell uses industry standard components like the GNU/Linux Operating System, the AudioScience HPI Driver Architecture and the MySQL Database Engine. Rivendell is being developed under the GNU Public License.
 
2006_02_09_salem_rivendell.gif
 
This looks like a very professionnal an complete radio automation suite that’s already being used in commercial ventures. Intersetingly, Rivendell can be used as the basis for internet radio as well.
After radio, with Sirius and XM, PanAmSat plans to provide mobile video to consumers:
 
PanAmSat Holding Corp. is starting a new business that will sell and distribute ethnic programming for television in the United States, a move that the company hopes will pave the way for other new initiatives that get the satellite company into more consumer businesses such as Internet video and mobile phones.
 
This approach could be similar to the Korean DMB-S system.
 

Our canadian public broadcast engineers from CBC/SRC published in January the first issue of their new bi-annual  Technology Review . As Ray Carnovale (VP and CTO) puts it in his editorial :

This semi-annual electronic publication will give an opportunity for us at CBC/Radio-Canada to describe and promote the significance of our activities in the Technology group, and to share our ideas both inside and outside the Corporation. As a service group, our role is to bring our collective knowledge and expertise to enable the infrastructure for our media partners to create the highest quality programming for the Canadian public.

 

I like the WEB/PDF format that we also enjoy from the very famous EBU Technical Review .

I think it’s a great initiative and I’m looking forward to read about CBC’s views on the future of broadcasting…. or, well, broadcasting 2.0!

The 3GSM world congress is coming in two weeks and that is probably the reason why we see so many press releases these days. Mobile TV will definitely be a hot topic this year.
 
Well recently, the TDtv technolgy was anounced:
 
IPWireless Mobile Broadband technology is a packet data implementation of the international 3GPP Universal Mobile Telecommunication System (UMTS) standard. Time-division-duplex (TDD) is used, according to the 3GPP UMTS UTRA UMTS TD-CDMA standard, allowing operation on unpaired spectrum anywhere in these bands. Chip rates of 3.84 and 7.68 megachips/sec (Mcps) are supported, for operation in channelization of 5 and10 MHz (6 and 12 MHz in the MMDS band).
 
TDtv is a Sprint Nextel effort to keep Mobile TV within the 3G ecosystem. It is based on the multimedia broadcast and multicast service (MBMS) specification.
 
Peer to peer systems have properties that are very similar to those of broadcasting. Very often, the availability of content is strongly related to its popularity. For this reason, P2P is good for the distribution of the head of the long tail.
 
Here is an interesting paper that presents a methodology to maintain the availability of long tail content on P2P systems:
 
We describe an efficient incentive mechanism for P2P systems that gen- erates a wide diversity of content offerings while responding adaptively to customer demand. Files are served and paid for through a parimutuel market similar to that commonly used for betting in horse races. An analysis of the performance of such a system shows that there exists an equilibrium with a long tail in the distribution of content offerings, which guarantees the real time provision of any content regardless of its popu- larity.
LiveSupport looks like a promising open platform for small public radio operators:
 
LiveSupport is the first free and open radio management software that provides live studio broadcast capabilities as well as remote automation in one integrated system.
 
2006_01_19_livesupport_logo_side_by_side.jpeg
 
A short review at the NYT about the new Internet content dissemination models:
 
“At one level it’s clear that the dam has broken,” said Paul Otellini, chief executive of Intel. “There’s an inevitable move to use the Internet as a distribution medium, and that’s not going to stop.”
Mobile TV made the news last week at CES 2006 with announcments and product demonstrations. From now on, one of the two major ventures will be called Modeo (formerly known as Crown Castle Mobile Media) while the other one has been known under the name of  MediaFLO (Qualcomm) for a while now.
 
Both services will be very similar with, of course, some variations. This paper  at C|Net provides a very good comparative overview of the two technologies.
 
This Nokia device was presented running a Modeo demo last week. Here is another device by Motorola .
The slingbox is certainly a Broadcasting 2.0 device. It sits on top of your home TV and streams the remotely selected channel to you, anywhere you are in the world, through the Internet.
 

2005_12_22_slingbox.jpg

Jeff Pulver relates his very positive experience with this device.

I recall that around year 2000 we have seen many such disruptive devices that were to change the broadcast experience forever (Kerbango was one of the most expected ones). Then the bubble…. Today, iPods and Co. show that we’re back on track.

Link (via pulverblog)

Telecom Italia and Samsung will demonstrate the WiBro system (the Corean flavor of WiMax) at the 2006 winter olympics in Turin, Italy. After that, we will have the DMB system in demonstration in Germany, presenting the FiFa Worldcup 2006. We have an interesting year for broadcasting ahead of us.
 
I’m a little bit late on the news but I just noticed that the IEEE 802.16e has been finalized two weeks ago. As Om Malik puts it, that was the easiest part:
 
… now companies have to get onboard with the concept, start developing silicon and equipment. But more than that, money has to be found, to essentially (and eventually) replicate the cellular mobile infrastructure. It is going to be a very costly and long drawn out process. It might be easy to get caught in the euphoria surrounding the news, but we all need to take a deep breath and get prepared for a long haul.
 
The Register has a short story about this announcement.
 
I have not had the time to look into the specification but WiMAX could be seen as a threat to mobile broadcasting systems such as DMB, DVB-H or MediaFLO. And since WiMAX’s mother tongue is “Internet”,  it could be seen as the long awaited and open platform for disruptive mobile applications. Broadcasting 2.0 believers will have to dig into WiMAX broadcasting capabilities.
 
I’m quite impressed to see that this becomes real so quickly. I went shopping tonight and took this shot:
 

bestbuysat19dec2005.jpg

 
It’s not just available. It’s on the storefront in big letters. The marketing forces behind XM and Sirius will give them a lead over DAB for a while… maybe a very long while!
 
Satellite Radio is Broadcasting 2.0. It’s pay radio. DAB is also Broadcasting 2.0. It’s free digital broadcasting.
The BBC iMP is a great Broadcasting 2.0 software application. Since September, some lucky folks in the UK are actually testing it.
 
The software builds a peer to peer (P2P) network to support the distribution of BBC content. Each file is DRM protected and stays accessible for 7 days after its “transmission”. In other words, it’s a BBC only PVR with a one week memory. That’s quite limitative but hey, that’s just a trial. Let’s hope they get positive feedback from their community.
 
And in the meantime, the trial period has been extended until the end of February 2006.
 

Tony Ageh, BBC Controller, Internet says: “We really want to understand the benefits that iMP can bring to our audiences.

We know that there is likely to be a ‘honeymoon’ period of a few weeks, when our participants are likely to use iMP more often than normal. The data from the extra two months should really help us to comprehend what users want from the service and how they are using it.

“This will be invaluable for us in making our case to the BBC Board of Governors for a full roll out of iMP.”

 

Link

A popular radio show goes to Sirius then cable tv and now, video streaming on the Internet. 50% of its 100.000 audience listens to it through podcasting. That’s Broadcasting 2.0.