Why Mobile TV?
from the what's-the-benefit? dept
There are so many mobile TV efforts underway these days, that it seems odd that the real use case hasn't been outlined. A few months back, I wrote why it seemed unclear why mobile TV would be a very big market and now Mobile Pipeline has a similar article noting that mobile TV seems to fail on two criteria that seem to explain why mobile applications are successful. First, video isn't a mobile application. There doesn't seem to be a huge advantage to being mobile and watching video. This is especially true in an age of TiVo. Second, it doesn't fit with the device or the activity. Watching TV on a tiny screen doesn't seem all that appealing and it's difficult if not impossible to do while actually moving. The thing that has always struck me about mobile TV is that it really doesn't provide much that's new in a way that provides value. I don't need to watch TV now because my DVR is recording stuff back home. Also, if I'm out and about, I'm out and about doing something, not watching TV. Obviously, there are some cases where these faults don't necessarily apply -- such as commuting on public transportation, or viewing video in the backseat of a car. However, are those markets really so big as to justify some of the investments being made in mobile TV? Again, it always seems to come back to a single issue: mobile devices are primarily communications devices, not broadcast devices -- and most of the mobile TV efforts seem heavily focused on simply moving the TV broadcast experience to the phone -- which just doesn't seem that compelling.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
One Application
The difference with the new wireless mobile TV concept is that you would not be picking up over-the-air television signals, and I would guess that MLB, NFL etc will probably want to charge a fee for the ability to view the games.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
new usage patterns
Looked at from the viewpoint of "okay, so the tech has advanced enough so that the price has dropped" and "video is just another media type", combined with a smidgin of "service providers want you to pull traffic" and a heaping spoonful each of "recommendation systems let friends and agents shape your viewing" and "it's now trivially easy for individuals to create their own video content", and we're looking at totally different formats and packages for video content.
I want my pocket device smart enough to continually pull small content I might be interested in.
Regards,
John Dowdell
Macromedia Support
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mobile tv
Sports, news and weather. Porn when the screen
is bigger :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
watch where you're going
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Like some cheese whith that whine?
Me personally? If I had a cheap, and most importantly reliable mobile device I could watch TV on while on the bus I'd definitely use it, assuming it's not outrageously expensive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]