±«Óãtv

I'm of the opinion that now is the time for all out ISPs to come together and admit that they made a mistake. Admit that there is a last mile problem and start working out what we can do about it, a solution that is great value for customers and good value for ISPs.

Without such an admission, all this technical innovation is in vane as without the appropriate infrastructure, none of the current innovations will be properly enjoyed.

And if we do nothing, the problem will only get worse. The landscape of media consumption is changing and there is now or soon to be a generation of consumers who turn to IP based broadcast networks before they'll look towards the more traditional broadcast channels.

Looking back over the last seven or so days, only around 20% of my TV viewing has been done sat in front of the television. With iPlayer et al and my SlingBox I really don't see much need for the television set anymore.

As for Bill's set up - I love it. I've been thinking about a similar set up and now that the projectors and other hardware is inexpensive I doubt I'll be delaying much longer.

The important common denominator for either option to work is the sixteen-year-old son!

Connected home is where it's at. I have a PS3 (much better at streaming and DLNA than the 360), and a couple of Terratec Noxon2 audio recievers.

It's all served up by PacketVideo TwonkyMedia server.


Totally flawless playback of any content I throw at it, including HD streams.

The ±«Óãtv is a publicly funded organisation. A significant proportion of the country are not provided by BT with a sufficient quality service to be able to use this service. Neither is there any legal obligation on BT to do so, as they like to point out. Neither is it inevitable that without proper planning, services such as this will not degrade other core Internet Services.

I agree with the ±«Óãtv looking to make a profit to subsidize itself, providing it does not take "corporate sides" with a private company ( for example the rumours about the telegraph ), however I do not agree with it providing free services which the government does not care about providing to all.

When the Government, BT, ISPs and broadcasters sit down and agree what they are going to do to provide a proper broadband solution then fine, until then let them concentrate on the broader manadate. Market forces do not ensure a good or efficient infrastucture on their own. If Mr Brown wants to spend on infastructure here is a chance for him to ensure that it boosts the Uk economy.

I really think when you talk about the issue of in home media, you really do look very out of date.

I mean, have you ever even hear of media portal and xbmc?

With media portal the infrastructure is there for an amazing piece of free software that has the structure to be a complete home entertainment system. It just lacks 2 things, a way for people to download media legally, and a few more developers to help clean up around the edges.

If you are happy to get your stuff by bit torrent (even if that means going out and buying the "legal" old fashioned dvd or cd), you can have all of your media on one box and some fairly cheap "players" dotted around the house linking up to the main server.

It seems that most mainstream journalists are out of touch on this subject, and so when these systems come out they make it sound like they are groundbreaking, when in fact they are not really at all.

I think the main problem with this concept has to be connectivity around your house. I know people that struggle to figure out how to connect their Sky box, DVD recorder and tele together correctly. Asking them to set subnet masks, gateway and network addresses is just ridiculous. is everyone going to need an N+ certificate before they can buy one of these new boxes?

What we need is a simpler method of setting up wi-fi that allows people to easily and securely pair devices, preferably with no more than 1-2 button presses.

If i read this correctly then starting from the home and working back....

The hardware exists and is probably already in a number of homes

Content exists in a format that may not suit (VHS,DVD,mp3, avi's etc)

Delivery infrastructure is sketchy. Perhaps large cities might have 20Mbps broadband but mine is 1Mbps at best and a fairly on/off relationship

New, emphasis on new content, has yet to be standardised into a format suitable for delivery.

To look at this simplistically commercial organisations are driving delivery of mainstream services which in essence already exist, albeit for enthusiasts. All at a very slow pace.

Seems that the problem lies squarely with the back end providers and not in peoples homes and until these things are sorted out I see a duck on it's deathbed and a continuation of pirated material being swapped in the usual manner.

ps. would love to use iplayer only I can't be bothered to wait 4 hours to download 30 minutes of low resolution repeats

Such a shame my last 800 metres is aluminium and barely supports the 512/256 ADSL I run ont it. I'll have to wait for BT to put the FIOS into my house before I'll get the bandwidth to run the whizz-bang new stuff.

So for TV I'm having to stick with Freeview from Hannington (which will be the last transmitter to go 100% digital) until BT get the go-ahead for fibre for the local loop.

Even when the infrastructure is all in place I bet we still have a struggle to find the decent programmes that we'll want to watch (on demand programming may solve the schedule overlap problems we currently get). I'm convinced that more channels == lower quality.

Looks like RJBrad forgot that we'll have to upgrade to IPv6 and then the subnetting and routing becomes a lot easier (totally invisible if we do it right). For example, my phone number can become my network id (the full number with the +44 prefix is unique Worldwide).

For networked kit as a consumer product you can't expect folks to know what address range/subnet they're using. They'll want a plug'n'play (could be SIM based like a mobile phone) stuff that just works out of the box. (We don't have that today with IPv4 and NAT.)

Like DougieLawson, we struggle. We get a nominal 512, and the reality is less. And we can't get Freeview, so I'll have to wait for FreeSat PVRs to be widely available (I'm NOT going to get digital TV which I can't record) - and as I live in a National Park I'll probably have to get consent to put up a satellite dish.

What Bill can do with the content he can reach looks great, but I won't be holding my breath to put something similar in our house :-(

Im happy with my set up of PC, wireless internet, and PS3.

The PS3 connects to PC wirelessly, and uses free software such as TVersity to stream any content (music, video, images) from PC to PS3 on my TV.

It also supports various video content which can be downloaded from the web.

Youtube and other services are supported.

If I want iPlayer I can now use the built in PS3 browser to view it.

I prefer the all in one devices, dont want additional PC's, and projectors, its all too expensive.

Re: DougieLawson This is from 2001 - [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator] A more recent (and less academic) view from ICANN is available here - In 7 years we don;t seem to have gone very far as far as ipv6 is concerned. The reason is very simple - ISPs run on tiny margins. If they were to upgrade their gear to offer widespread ipv6 support they risk losing money. After all, how are they to recoup the expense? If they charge more for ipv6 connectivity then at best, customers stick with ip4, at worst they move to another ISP. Then there are the mass of customers that are happy to stick with what they've got until there is a reason to upgrade. To bring this back to home entertainment networks, no ipv6 = a nightmare for most people trying to set their gear up. Which means little take up. Which means no ipv6. Argh!

Surprised no-one's yet mentioned the Apple TV - I could never understand why Steve Jobs described it as a hobby cos it's probably the best bit of kit I've ever bought. Sure it ties me into the iTunes infrastructure, but that's not a problem as with Elgato's EyeTV and Turbo 264 encoder on the upstairs desktop, TV and (ahem) 'other sources of content' are easily available ...

The Apple TV user interface is a dream, it does optical sound out and hdmi, so tie it in with Arcam AV receiver, HDTV and Linn surround speakers .... and all I need now is a replacement sofa.

I have V+ for iPlayer ... and internet browsing via an old laptop ...

The problem is the content, once that is in a universal format that everything can play the rest will follow.

Broadband does need improving, but if you download stuff first - and don't stream then even a slowish connection will be fairly reasonable.

Is there any REAL reason I can download film X on a PS3 or film Y on a 360, but I can't do the opposite? Its all legalities and companies buying the rights to distribute. Imagine a world where a Samsung DVD player can play ±«Óãtv programmes, but a Sony one could play ITV and Channel 4.

Unfortunately for the media companies - the end user has decided that this isn't good enough. They want the content they want, now, on the devices they already have. They want to pay for it, quite often they can't because it hasn't been released here. So people go to the pirates.

The end user is moving at lightspeed compared with the media companies. In the world of technology they are very far behind, moving at a glacial pace.

iPlayer is already available on your home television... Virgin Media have provided this service for ages now! Take a look for yourselves :o)

re: archplanman

Also many modern LCD TVs (even cheap ones) come with PC Input sockets. All you need to do is connect the monitor cable and you're ready to go.

I use it for iPlayer (and other OnDemand services) on my cheap £280 quid netbook. I simply plug the cable in, press Fn+F3 to switch the display from the netbook's LCD to the TV and press play on iPlayer (or WMP, or WinDVD or whatever).

Simple, no fuss. No need for extra software to be installed. Just use the basic Windows display properties control panel. I'm sure its just as easy on Macs and Linux Boxes.

I agree with archplanman. I get my telephone service from Virgin, which is normally priced, and for this I also get free cable tv, which includes the iPlayer and other tv highlights, such as archived series like Spooks, Life on Mars, Sopranos and loads of others.

I watch iPlayer content at home on my projector. I have an unusual setup, as in I connect my laptop to the projector and use an Airport Express to wirelessly stream the audio to my hi-fi system. This avoids me having to run wires around my room (either permanently or temporarily while watching).

The ±«Óãtv doesn't support this, because they insist on using DRM. As people keep saying, people want their content on any device, and although my setup is relatively unusual, it'd suit a lot of people who hate wires!

As it is, I have to download the iPhone versions and watch them, or download the content illegally.

So, there's more to it than just providing a box that streams the content, a 'black box' like Canvas won't do what i need...

Sorry, I think I did miss the point of the article a bit in my response.

The biggest problem is definitely not ways of viewing as the choices are many, but it is the greedy copyright holders who are trying to squeeze the most out of the previous generations (DVD and Blu-Ray) before moving onto downloads (which in all probability will be the last one for a good long time).

Canvas is definitely not a serious long term solution, but if it gets people to start thinking about changing their viewing habits, then it could be a step in the right direction.

On the subject of bandwidth, why don't the media delivery companies consider compression like what is often used by pirates?

I had an interesting exchange of emails with Bill T about this. I thought he had got a way of streaming the screen of his desktop computer to the projector, but he has not--it was the Mac Mini we saw with a wireless keyboard and mouse.

I'd love to be able to control my desktop over the network from a big screen--at the moment there has to be a computer of some type (laptop, Apple TV, PC) physically connected by a video cable of some type to the screen which acts as the intermediary. I assume this will come!

And as someone else says, all this fancy internet streaming of material is just pie in the sky for those of us out in the country with less than 1mbs connections about whom BT and the ISPs don't care!

I had an interesting exchange of emails with Bill T about this. I thought he had got a way of streaming the screen of his desktop computer to the projector, but he has not: it was the Mac Mini we saw with a wireless keyboard and mouse.

I'd love to be able to control my desktop over the network from a big screen: at the moment there has to be a computer of some type (laptop, Apple TV, PC) physically connected by a video cable of some type to the screen which acts as the intermediary. I assume this will come!

And as someone else says, all this fancy internet streaming of material is just pie in the sky for those of us out in the country with less than 1mbs connections about whom BT and the ISPs don't care!

@ nstrudwick

My home pc is connected to an Flat Screen TV, Monitor and a Projector through normal cables you will find in any store!!


Also just a 3Mbps line allows me to download video and audio content and program updates as well as play WoW while my brother is play his 360 online and my sister is on MSN and you can't tell the different between this and just one app on the internet.

So why are people complaining so much that they need a faster line speed! most family home wouldn't even need to do that!

I'm happy enough with Freeview and our tv/media is already as networked as far I want for now.

I use the free mythtv on Linux. The main server (masterbackend in myth) is connected to the tv in the lounge. There are 3 dvb-t tv cards in this box. Additionally, both my desktop PC and my parents PC have tv cards installed so if needed, we could record 5 stations simultaniously. Addtionally, these PCs can do live tv, without affecting any scheduled recordings on the master backend.

We can schedule and watch recording from any of these locations. Also, I can download CD's, DVD's, mp3s, jpegs, etc. onto the system and share the content between the 3 of us.

It's difficult for me at the moment to imagine I'll want more.

Why do we need a complicated system like Canvas anyway? In my previous accomodation we had Virgin Cable with the channel 4 on demand service - In practice all we ever watched was things on that service.

In my new flat we only have terrestrial and freeview but I have a portable DVD player that can also play divx from discs and from usb sticks. Thus I can watch tv shows that I own on dvd with ease as well as having the ability (by ripping them to divx) to carry large amounts easily around the country.

Whats more, downloaded content can be easily watched via the same method.

There seems to be a culture towards wireless-ness for wireless' sake and streaming, there are few advantages to wireless systems outside of the obvious lack of wires and streaming data sources routinely overwhelm the communications network in this country - anyone who has tried to check their email at 6pm on a friday night can vouch for that!