How many U.S. homes can use Cisco ūmi™ telepresence?

I had discussed some initial thoughts about Cisco ūmi™ telepresence in an earlier post, and I had mentioned that the high price of the equipment and monthly fee would be a large deterrent to mass-market acceptance. However, what about the broadband infrastructure required? If you read the requirements that Cisco has, it's a broadband upload speed of at least 1.5 Mbps to accomodate a 720p resolution, and 3.5 Mbps for 1080p. That got us thinking about the number of homes in the U.S. that could even be eligible today. Cisco says that 31 million homes have the capabilities for ūmi today, and this figure will grow to 62 million, but we wondered if broadband upload speeds would be a constraint.

According to a report from the Communications Workers of America, the the average upload speed in the U.S. was only 1.1 Mbps. Also, as the Federal Communications Commission is advocating the nationwide availability of a 4 Mbps downstream/1 Mbps upstream service, it notes the limitations today of services that are somewhat comparable. The FCC says that the current advertised broadband packages that come closest to their Plan are those with 3 Mbps/6 Mbps downstream and 768 kbps/1.5 Mbps upstream. The FCC reports that only 39% of cable broadband subscribers choose to subscribe to at least a 3 Mbps down/768 kbps upstream.

I’ve got FiOS 15 Mbps downstream service, and it only gives me 1.7-1.8 Mbps upstream, so I wonder how many consumers would really be able to enjoy the full benefit of ūmi.

FCC opens up "white space" to promote "super-Wi-Fi" development

On September 23, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) took steps to free up vacant airwaves between TV channels - called “white spaces” - to unleash a host of new technologies, such as “super Wi-Fi.”

According to Fierce Cable, the spectrum will be most available in rural and suburban areas where there are fewer TV stations and more spectrum. Larger cities such as New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, with already crowded airwaves, are expected to feel less impact, although super WiFi, with its ability to penetrate buildings, is an attractive technology there.

The commission's decision was made over broadcaster protests that using that spectrum--freed up as part of the analog-to-digital transition--might interfere with their signals.

FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell went so far as to suggest that using white spaces could negate the need for net neutrality broadband regulations because super WiFi devices running in the new spectrum will offer a "competitive alternative to existing broadband providers."

FCC and the Thin Line of Net Neutrality

A federal appeals court has determined that the FCC does not have the authority to enforce net neutrality. Who wins and who loses? In theory, the broadband communications service providers are the big winners here – enabling them to adopt tiered pricing such that heavy video or media users will likely pay more for broadband than grandma, who typically uses broadband to check email, perform some light surfing, or occasionally download a few photos. Tiered pricing will cause the big users to pay more when they receive more and will provide incentives for communications providers to build larger pipes to feed the big users. It seems that this will create more profits, more competition and eventually more tax revenues. To me it sounds like the ”invisible hand” fast at work.

The downside, of course, is that grandma’s YouTube or Hulu usage experience may be compromised, causing her to think poorly of media rich sites which may jitter, download slowly, or be simply off limits unless she is willing to pay a premium fee. Looming larger, however, is the increasing digital divide, limiting access to markets, information, research and entertainment by those without the means to buy higher speed broadband.

Free markets, most of us agree, require some degree of regulation. The FCC must have some power to require subsidized service to rural markets or to provide basic, low-cost broadband access to the economically disadvantaged or to those that simply don’t want more. Perhaps this week’s court ruling is merely just a redrawing of the fine line between free enterprise and limited regulation. Proposing a re-classification of broadband as "telecommunications" under Title II of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 is simply gerrymandering.

We the People have determined that it is the inalienable right of every U.S. citizen to vote, to have a public education and now health insurance. Is it every American’s right to have low-cost access to high-speed, high-quality Internet video?

Cable Europe Parties Like its 1999

Remember the lavish, luxurious corporate functions frequently hosted by technology companies in the roaring 90’s? Tonight the European cable industry celebrated a solid year of nearly 10% growth (at least Telenet enjoyed nearly 10% growth) in an otherwise lackluster economy. The party, hosted by Telenet for delegates of the European Cable Congress in Brussels, felt more like a coming out party. The IT industry’s fascination with IPTV has finally quieted as IPTV growth has slowed over the past year and cable, evidently, has decided it is time to come out and celebrate. Perhaps the byline of the event should have been “the demise of the cable industry in Europe has been greatly exaggerated.” Telenet spared no expense, renting out the Belgian Bourse, an elegant Palladian style building – quite possibly symbolic of the solid returns the company is providing its shareholders. In cocktail conversation, a member of the Cable Europe trade association stated that ICT has become one of the most significant contributors to the EUs GDP. That would explain the guest appearance of Belgium’s Prime Minister, Yves Leterme.

The distinguished guests at the event included one of the FCC’s lead economists working on the U.S. Broadband Plan which will be presented to Congress this month. Other notables were the Multimedia over Coax Alliance (MoCA) team, the sales team of the steadily growing digital rights company Irdeto, some familiar faces from OpenTV, Broadcom, management of Liberty Global and subsidiary UPC as well as the majority of European cable providers.

To further celebrate not only cable-pride but also Belgian-pride, Telenet served not only the gamut of Belgian champagnes and beers, but trotted out cuisine from two of the country’s most famous chefs, top chocolatier, and award winning latte artist (he creates images in the milk floating atop your espresso). Later in the evening the party featured fashion models sporting outfits from Belgium’s top clothing designers, and finally the pulsating sounds of Belgium’s top DJ.

When IPTV World Forum opens in London on the 23^rd of this month, will we see the industry hosting such a bold celebration of success?

Hollywood & The FCC: Plugging dams with Tissue

Protecting digital content flows to the home is easy enough but once it's delivered, there are numerous ways it can be copied. DVD-Rs, DVRs, PC TV tuners, etc. all open the door to having a DRM free copy.

A recent Wall Street Journal article is calling attention to Hollywood's efforts to block the broadcast of video to unsecured devices. "Selectable output control", as it is technically referred to, is currently prohibited for standard definition broadcasts. Hollywood has said that SOC for high definition will allow it to distribute movies to homes shortly after their theatrical release. The FCC is currently considering the proposal and has invited comments from the public.

Somehow I suspect this ideal won't get very far. For starters, it doesn't sit well with the consumer electronics industry. Piracy benefits the CE market (to put it bluntly) but even if it didn't, the last thing a manufacture wants is a group of studios telling it which technologies to deploy.

Then there's the DVD crowd. Wal-Mart accounts for a large portion of all DVD sales. If consumers could purchase an electronic copy of the movie at home before the DVD is available... well... it's just hard to see how that could be good for Wal-Mart's business. Somehow I don't think they'll be on board with this plan either.

Finally there are the theater owners. If you've never seen these guys discuss day-and-date release, you should. The discussion is well salted with statements like, "Over my dead body" and "When you pry it from my cold dead hand." Hollywood's plans for 'soon after theatrical' distribution could easily morph into day-and-date distribution. Probably going to get lukewarm support there.

Not that the theater owners are fans of piracy but let's admit it, this isn't really about that. The pirated copies of films floating around the Internet usually come from video cameras, ripped DVDs, or copies leaked from the studios themselves. "Selectable output control" isn't going to stop that any more than tissue can plug a dam. SOC is about control; controlling the way consumers use content in their home and controlling the market for CE devices. Control = Power = Money