Re: The future of television
 

I can tell the future, but I don’t want to scare you.

Re: The future of television
 

I knew you were going to say that…

"The future has not been written. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."

Re: The future of television
 

Very expensive if you need 4 of them (1 Living room, 3 Bedrooms).


Still cheaper to have a STB in most circumstances

Re: The future of television
 

Or you can just use common sense.

Re: The future of television
 

The challenge with "common sense" is that it often isn’t "common" or "sense", just someone using the phrase to give validation to their viewpoint.

Mark Twain famously once said,

Re: The future of television
 

Well, change is inevitable, which some of you don't want to hear.

Forget Sky Glass, I think people will see through that in the end....(:D).

This TV is more like it, and that is more what I had in mind when I spoke of the TV of the future. Hopefully, it will cross the Atlantic soon, and so far, this would be my next TV of choice.

I need to read more about it, though, but it looks good to me.

https://www.whathifi.com/news/amazon...sale-at-amazon

Re: The future of television
 

JVC released TVs with amazon fire tv ages ago.

Amazon is great if you have Prime and Netflix and know how to use Downloader . The lower end prices however seem reasonable but looking the 65 inch model is $1k. For £550 you can get a Hisense 65 inch with Prime Netflix and Freeview play and for £30 add an android box if you want one. Both Sky Glass and Amazon Omni can easily be beat on price and Hisense make great TVs

Re: The future of television
 

What’s so unique about it ?

Re: The future of television
 

I need to read more to answer that. But if it enables you to add watchlists across the streaming services, this is what I am really looking for. I have been unable to establish whether or not that is the case as yet.

My TV of choice will put the emphasis on streaming services rather than live TV (which Amazon TV does) while still making live TV an option through IPTV. I am not sure if an aerial is required for the Amazon TV, though, which although not ideal, is not a game-changer for me.

---------- Post added at 13:07 ---------- Previous post was at 13:04 ----------

This Guardian article points to the increasing number of people (not only the young) who are streaming now, and the fact that broadcasters are having to adapt quickly. It as published earlier this year, but I have only just noticed it.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-r...hannels-doomed

Re: The future of television
 

Betteridge’s Law of Headlines…

As Andrew Marr said

Re: The future of television
 

I’m all in with streaming I don’t use traditional pay TV any longer that said I’m still not sure what that TV would offer over what I already get with my Chromecast or Apple TV 4K ?

Re: The future of television
 

The Chinese (TCL, Hisense) and Turkey's Vestel have between them been knocking out Amazon and Roku TVs for a while now. The US market TVs in this article don't offer IPTV so don't seem as advanced as Sky Glass, just business as usual.

Re: The future of television
 

H’mmm…more research required?

http://www.climate.gov/news-features...global-warming

Re: The future of television
 

Well I have no idea about Hisense TV's but I can definitely agree with the rest of this.
I have two Android TV boxes, primarily used to watch all my downloaded episodes (via Kodi) but both also have Amazon Prime and Netflix set up on them (one daughter has Prime, another has Netflix). No need for expensive dedicated TVs.

Re: The future of television
 

However, Hugh's quote said vast majority of headline questions could be answered with a no, not every one.

Re: The future of television
 

Don’t tempt me! :D

Re: The future of television
 

:D

Re: The future of television
 

With the exception of Sky Glass and it’s Playlist feature and that’s got lots of issues currently I’m yet to come across any device that allows you to add watchlists across the streaming devices although I’m happy to be corrected.

Re: The future of television
 

you ever heard of Trakt

TBH this would only help if you steered away from regular options and went down the android box route

Re: The future of television
 

Well, the TiVo enables you to do this across live TV channels, Netflix, Prime and StarzPlay, and what I am looking for is a means of accomplishing this from a provider such as Amazon.

Once this happens, I will be looking to ditch VM TV.

Re: The future of television
 

I highly doubt it happening anytime soon , try the Fire TV stick search and you’ll notice not all the apps content is returned in the results. It certainly doesn’t return Now TV results when I’ve tried it.

The closest two to universal search I’ve tried so far are Apple TV and the newest Chromecast and neither offer a universal bookmark facility across all the streaming services.

Re: The future of television
 

Well, such a facility on a TV or app would be the killer solution, which would get a lot of attention. Surveys have been saying for a while that people want ‘everything on one box’ and the first company to put out a system containing all worthwhile apps with comprehensive content search and watchlist options will capture a fair chunk of the market.

Re: The future of television
 

I think we've discussed why this is unlikely to happen - streaming apps want to keep you in their walled garden. Once you have a cross-app search facility, viewers spend less time with the streamer and brand recognition for the streamer fades.

How many people used to talk about seeing something on a Sky channel when the channel in question was not owned by Sky? Streamers want to avoid identification with the platform in favour of identification with themselves.

Re: The future of television
 

Nice theory, but it already happens to some extent (eg Netflix, Amazon and StarzPlay are all searchable on the TiVo.

Re: The future of television
 

To some extent being the operative word. The power of aggregators like VM is being eroded every time a new streaming service is announced. Searching for content across multiple platforms at the same time is becoming harder, not easier.

Re: The future of television
 

Surely if you combine 'the future of television' with the global warming initiative to 'conserve energy', we should end up with 3 or 4 companies producing programs for viewing on the only 20 channels available on a TV set :D


oh hang on . . that won't go down well, screw energy saving eh :D

Things always get worse and its sad.................

Re: The future of television
 

Except for increasing life expectancy, fewer neo-natal & childhood deaths, better medicines and medical treatments, ability to access trillions of pieces of information through your phone, no imminent threat of world-wide nuclear war, increased equality for disabled, ethnic minority, & women, etc.

Re: The future of television
 

There’s only one person in these threads with the blinkers on OB.

Re: The future of television
 

Over population, longer waiting lists, soft on crime, dumbing down of society, Z list celebs, quick fixes that don't fix anything, internet the home of snowflakes criminals and misinformation, rising migration, erosion of public services & amenities, history being rewritten because it's offensive, desolate town centers with the remaining shops selling cheap tat . . .


still, always look on the bright side of life eh . . 200 channels of shite on the TV :D

Re: The future of television
 

Anyway, that’s enough about Scunthorpe…

Re: The future of television
 

Don't knock it . . gas lighting and a horse trough on every corner, living the dream :D

Re: The future of television
 

In which case I recommend you take them off, jfman and accept that change is inevitable. :D

---------- Post added at 16:51 ---------- Previous post was at 16:40 ----------

I think that is a very narrow way of looking at it. I started watching a programme on Netflix about a week ago and my wife referred to the storyline and neither of us could think of what it was from. Fortunately I came across the title just this afternoon - 'The Maid' on Netflix. It wasn't on the watchlist on my box because Netflix has not integrated their content to enable you to bookmark it on the 360.

Frankly, we have watched less on Netflix since we had the 360 box for that very reason. So I would disagree with the premise that by not integrating content from all streamers you are taking away viewers. The reverse is true. We've certainly watched a lot more from Prime since we swapped boxes. That's because Prime is integrated and so we can see the programmes we listed as worth watching as well as those we've started just by scrolling through the watchlist.

Re: The future of television
 

You've completely missed Andrew's point.

Apple want to push Apple
Netflix wants to push Netflix
Amazon wants to push Amazon.

None of them have any incentive to be this altruistic platform offering all of the content in a neutral manner. For the same reason your Sky EPG has all of the Sky channels near the top (with the exception of PSBs).

Re: The future of television
 

OB, as per, you’re arguing that black is white and up is down, on the basis of your own, extremely limited, experience and very personal preferences.

As with most aspects of this topic, we have been here before, at some point, though frankly I lack the will to go and search for it. What’s at issue here is commoditisation. What service are you actually buying? A load of streamed TV shows from Virgin Media or a streaming experience provided by Netflix, or Apple, or whoever?

What you’re demanding is commoditisation of content in favour of a single, Virgin Media branded experience. But streamers that have invested a fortune in their brand awareness have absolutely no incentive at all to sacrifice that to the Virgin Media EPG. Each streamer has a unique character, driven by its app functionality and its content acquisition strategy. Netflix, in my opinion, is particularly strong on this point.

Amazon Prime can overcome this to a great extent as long as it’s the only streaming brand doing full integration. As Amazon commissions far less original content than Netflix, has a much smaller free-to-members back catalogue than Disney, and lacks the high-end reputation of Apple, there was a distinct commercial advantage in it going down the integration route. Certainly on our living room TV, which has all of the major streamers but no integration, Prime is the least accessed of the lot.

Commoditisation is what all brands fear and what they all expend a great deal of effort trying to avoid. This is why, for example, you will occasionally see a member of Walkers staff surveying the crisp aisle in your local supermarket. Walkers is a major brand and it has the clout, which many smaller player lack, to dictate even to the likes of Asda and Tesco, how their product is to be displayed. Many smaller brands get whatever placement they are given and often have to make sale-or-rebate promises to the supermarkets in order to get any shelf space at all.

Netflix has no incentive to surrender control of its brand to a search engine in your 360 box. The personal preferences of some random Old Boy are really irrelevant here. At the scale they are interested in (I.e. the entire viewing market, not your lounge) there is greater value in maintaining brand strength and awareness.

Re: The future of television
 

Yes, and if you recognise that many people have at least two or three streamers, you want your subscribers to be constantly reminded of their content that they want to see by being reminded of those programmes through their watchlists.

If two streamers are integrated but the third isn’t, who do you think is going to get less hits?

---------- Post added at 20:14 ---------- Previous post was at 20:10 ----------

I don’t buy that at all, Chris. As far as branding is concerned, when you pick a programme from the watchlist, the system takes you to the streamer’s logo, so it is very clear who it is providing the content.

This is not just me saying this - there have been a number of findings that viewers want everything in one box. Those streamers who don’t promote this will ultimately lose out on viewers.

Re: The future of television
 

It is just you saying this I'm afraid. You're conflating demand with supply.

We're not disputing that demand exists for a single search facility, as the surveys probably do indeed show. We're pointing out the commercial reasons as to why streamers aren't jumping up and down to become part of such a service.

Re: The future of television
 

I know you don’t buy it - the very essence of all this forum’s “future TV” threads is your inability to differentiate between your preferences and market trends. If you had some sense of how what you like is not necessarily what drives the industry, we’d have little to discuss.

In the real world beyond your sofa, businesses that have spent millions on bespoke search, watchlist and recommendation algorithms in order to create an end-to-end user experience, do not easily give that up and tell themselves a 5-second studio ident at the start of the reel is an adequate substitute. That you claim that is adequate really only demonstrates how blinkered your personal preferences have made you here.

Re: The future of television
 

A sign of the future as Google are threatening to remove YouTube from Roku? Rumours Amazon could go too.

Re: The future of television
 

It would be a sad development but not a shocking one. As several of us have repeatedly stated in this and other threads, big streaming brands are primarily interested in defending and promoting their brand. It leads the likes of Google to leverage its brand awareness in order to try to get preferential treatment and it leads Amazon to use its powerful brand to promote one of its less well-known properties. Roku, meanwhile, will resist, hoping the wide adoption of its devices in homes will make the streamers think twice about removing themselves from the platform.

They will most likely achieve a compromise of sorts, however this does clearly demonstrate just how important leveraging the brand really is. None of them will surrender it easily.

Re: The future of television
 

John Skipper (formerly President of ESPN and who oversaw DAZN entering the US market) has been lamenting their failure in the US market to Sports Business Journal.

Some of the boxing they were trying to charge for nobody was watching for free* on ESPN never mind being willing to pay for an over the top subscription service. Aggregating secondary rights hasn’t worked out and the absence of first tier rights (like the NFL) is costing them.

On streaming services replacing cable bundles:

*by free I assume he means on a basic cable package.

On this side of the Atlantic the farce in Italy continues with supporters threatening a boycott as DAZN seek to reduce piracy by limiting users to viewing on one device at one time. Certainly with Sky, BT and Virgin users currently get to enjoy premium content at home and “on the go” on multiple devices.

https://sport.periodicodaily.com/daz...-e-andata-giu/

Apologies but you can use Chrome to translate. One social media campaign is pushing the idea that three months would be long enough to boycott for the service to fail.

Re: The future of television
 

This may be the answer to the difficulty in bringing broadband to remote areas.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2021/return-of-the-squarial

Re: The future of television
 

It'll certainly bring broadband to remote areas however the problem satellite faces is that there is finite bandwidth shared among users - similar to a 4G mast.

Existing "affordable" satellite broadband packages come with bandwidth caps for this very reason. While th average internet user may not hit these caps a few hours of 4K will.

It's also somewhat counterintuitive to replace satellite television with... satellite television.

Re: The future of television
 

Speeds are not too bad, if you get them.
20 ms isnt bad either, thats always been a problem with satellite based stuff.

No mention of price that I could see.

Re: The future of television
 

It’s certainly better than nothing.

Re: The future of television
 

It is better than nothing for internet connectivity. What’s less clear is why it would be better than the unlimited, high bandwidth satellite tv broadcasts people in these locations are receiving already. The extra cost and complexity might be worth it for the additional utility of on demand IP-TV for some people, but it just isn’t a simpler, cheaper or more robust solution for delivering mass-audience entertainment.

Re: The future of television
 

There's an article here that explains more and includes the present price (August 2021) but it doesn't mention the new square dish which is said to double (or almost) the speeds.

https://www.uswitch.com/broadband/gu...t-is-starlink/

Plus the new satellites have laser interconnect which again will increase speeds and reduce latancy. ATM it is still a BETA project.

Re: The future of television
 

So its not nearly as good as it initially looked ;
.. and the price :Yikes:
You would need to be pretty desperate for internet at those prices, you can probably get better from 4G or 5G.

Re: The future of television
 

Yes, that’s pretty steep!

Re: The future of television
 

This is an interesting development. My assertion that TV channels as they are presented now will disappear by 2035 was based on terrestrial TV being provided by way of IPTV.

Now it seems that 5G broadcasting is being considered. There is no guarantee we will pursue that route, but if it happens, clearly TV channels will carry on as they are now. That is, provided the TV channels decide that it is still worthwhile to do so given the streaming alternative.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2022/how-5g-bro...terrestrial-tv

Re: The future of television
 

Predicting the future is not easy.
Having said that, I was talking to a friend yesterday who gave a talk to some bankers at the Barbican in 1992 and told them that MP3s and digital photography were going to be the future.
I can’t predict what I did yesterday though…

Re: The future of television
 

Do I sense the 2022 edition of the OB goal post shift?

Re: The future of television
 

Wait ..... so ... they propose to hand over the existing TV frequencies to 5G, and then broadcast TV on those same frequencies, just called 5G now ...

LOL, you could not make this nonsense up.

Re: The future of television
 

Broadcast based on 5g offers a lot more data capacity than DVB-T2, lower latency and (I think) the possibility of building in a return path. If it were to take off (and the BBC is heavily involved in the drafting of standards for it, so it’s a distinct possibility) then the debate around linear versus on-demand becomes moot; what we end up with is a sort of convergence where the same broadcast system you use to receive linear TV immediately takes over the business of handling on-demand requests, like pressing green to wind a live programme back to the start. This approach also potentially saves a ton of data as you only get a dedicated stream as long as you’re viewing something on demand.

It’s worth noting that this knocks the “death” of linear TV way into the long grass. Whatever its interactive potential, for broadcasters the main attraction of this is that it allows them to keep broadcasting in the viewing mix for the long run.

Re: The future of television
 

People often ask why we need 5G when 4G is far enough, as they did when 4G came in WRT 3G.

It may be fast enough for what we have now but that is only because they can’t imagine what we will have in the future.

Who was it that said, when he first saw a telephone, “I can see a time when every town will have one”?

Re: The future of television
 

I don’t think anyone doubts 5G and eventual successor technologies 6G.

The scepticism comes from trying to resolve a problem that - arguably - doesn’t exist. How to efficiently broadcast linear television into the future.

This technology - if adopted - could. However there’s a number of issues - not least the transition would take years. 5G coverage isn’t at the levels of DTT and will not be for some time. In addition the high bandwidth 5G spectrum there is most demand for is up in the GHz range not the sub 700mhz range.

That said money talks but whether the MNOs are about to put their hands in their pockets to pay the eye-watering amounts seen in the 3G auctions or not remains to be seen.

Re: The future of television
 

Well, I was surprised, because I thought they’d need the bandwidth for other purposes, but what do I know?!! :erm:

Re: The future of television
 

(A reply to a post Hugh since deleted, but I’m not deleting this as it took ages to write)

First thing is, what’s being proposed is a *version* of 5g, not actual 5g as currently being rolled out for cellular data. At its most basic it would replace the current DVB-T2 standard used by Freeview. More channels in less bandwidth and lower latency, bringing the digital delay down to almost real-time.

Such a system would be delivered over the existing transmitter infrastructure, but it has the potential to be integrated with 5g cellular networks and seamlessly integrate the return path you need for interactive services.

A major benefit for our national data infrastructure is that at present, if I access BBC1 as broadcast via the iPlayer, the BBC has to send a dedicated data stream to me. If the IPTV nirvana OB believes in were to come to pass, there could potentially be several million people at a time, each receiving a dedicated stream, utilising terabytes of data, on those occasions when we do all actually want to watch linear to at the same time. Today, of course, millions of us access the same broadcast signal and the power requirement at the transmitter doesn’t change no matter how many of us there are. In a Freeview system operating on 5g broadcast, if I access the iPlayer and select a programme presently being broadcast live, the system provides me the broadcast signal, not a dedicated stream.

None of which is set in stone as things stand - the standards are not agreed and it would take a while to get hardware manufacturers on board for yet another change to the broadcast standard. But the ability to force a user onto a high-bandwidth broadcast signal, where one is available, and when they don’t actually need a dedicated IP data stream, is I suspect part of the potential prize here.

Re: The future of television
 

Thank you, Chris.

Re: The future of television
 

I suppose the question is why go to all this effort to preserve linear television in a 5G envelope if there’s no demand?

Re: The future of television
 

It will be interesting to se whether that demand still exists in 10 years' time. Habits change, sometimes over a very short period.

Re: The future of television
 

Further evidence hereof the need to aggregate content of VOD providers. Sky do seem to get it, whereas Virgin still has a long way to go. If it’s much slower, it will miss the boat altogether.

Virgin needs to become a kind of Roku with added TV channels. Hopefully also, Netflix is listening.

https://advanced-television.com/2022...nt-navigation/

[EXTRACT]

Accenture’s research also indicates that while consumers care more about the content delivered by streaming services, they find the navigation experience with the growing number of services to be increasingly frustrating. Content aggregators can address this concern by unifying access across streaming services through application software, services and data-sharing agreements. Aggregators can also foster flexibility and personalisation for viewers by serving as a single platform with curated content that enables them to select exactly what they want to watch.

Re: The future of television
 

I'm not sure I follow you OB.

Are you saying VM should do some kind of deal with Netflix, Amazon or whoever, to get their streaming services onto/into the VM packages?

Would they (VM) price this new service higher, lower or equivalent to the standard Netflix (or whoever) pricing?

Wouldn't current Netflix (etc) subscribers simply stay as they are instead of entering a new 18 month contract with VM?

Apologies if I'm way out :dunce:

Re: The future of television
 

The basic objection to that proposition hasn’t changed since the last time you brought it up. Allowing their content to be subsumed in a programme guide they don’t control represents a risk to brand recognition for companies like Netflix, and dilutes any added value they may get from operating their own distinct menu structure.

I have to say I have no issues at all with the app layout on my TV (and I don’t have a subscription with sky or VM). I know where the stuff I want to watch is and I know how each streamer goes about showcasing their new content. Netflix in particular is extremely good at pushing content it knows I’ll like into the promoted spot at the top of my menu. There’s at least a 50/50 chance that anything new appearing there is going to go onto my watch list. It’s hard to see what’s in it for Netflix if they simply allow all their material to be funnelled into a Virgin Media or Sky branded programme guide alongside their rivals.

Re: The future of television
 

I was really thinking about content aggregation as opposed to one subscription for all the streamers.

---------- Post added at 15:52 ---------- Previous post was at 15:44 ----------

The advantage of permitting viewers to bookmark all their content in one place, which was my point, is that it enables you to keep track of your viewing and it reminds you of what you have on your watchlist.

Since getting the 360 software, I have not been able to add Netflix programmes to the Virgin watchlist. This has resulted in our house watching fewer Netflix shows - not deliberately, but because out of sight is out of mind. Accessing different watchlists for different streamers is a pain for the viewer. We have watched a lot more Prime of late.

It’s not about the layout of the apps or whether you subscribe once to the whole lot - it’s about ease of access to content.

Re: The future of television
 

I’m still at a loss as to who is the net beneficiary from such a proposition. Not the aggregator - they’re not making any money from the end user and not the streaming services that don’t get promoted.

---------- Post added at 16:08 ---------- Previous post was at 16:07 ----------

Join the queue.

Re: The future of television
 

You’re just repeating the same point you already made. I get why it’s convenient for you, but it is commercially inconvenient for the streamers, who don’t want their highly branded products to be lost on a shelf alongside all the others, in a tv supermarket run by an “aggregator”.

There are lots of things that would be convenient for customers, but which businesses don’t do because it doesn’t make commercial sense. You repeatedly saying “but I want this” doesn’t cut it.

Re: The future of television
 

The aggregator wins because such a service will be likely to attract users of streaming services.

It’s good for the streaming service because it keeps viewers interested in the service they provide as the viewer is reminded of programmes from that streamer that the viewer has already selected. As I said, the absence of Netflix from the 360 watchlist has resulted in us watching Netflix content less.

And of course the viewer wins because navigation between the services is improved. All your selected content is in one place.

---------- Post added at 17:34 ---------- Previous post was at 17:27 ----------

I think you are missing the point Inam making, with respect. I don’t see how you think the products are ‘lost on a shelf alongside all the others’. The apps can be made separate as they are now - I am merely referring to an integrated wish list, as it works for Netflix, Prime and StarzPlay on the V6 already.

I would remind you that most people would still go to the apps themselves to find out what programmes to add to the watchlist in the first place.

Re: The future of television
 

But it can’t simultaneously promote every streaming service - there’s only a limited amount of prominent space. To that end you’re asking some streamers to accept lower prominence than others based on paying a third party or giving them a cut.

Re: The future of television
 

Well I certainly wouldn't. Is it even possible?

Re: The future of television
 

I didn’t say they should promote it, did I, jfman? I am simply saying it should be possible to have one wish list rather than multiple wish lists.

You have it already on the V6! You’re reading too much into it.

---------- Post added at 23:32 ---------- Previous post was at 23:25 ----------

Look at the V6. Search for a programme that’s on Netflix. Bookmark it. Search for one on Amazon. Bookmark it. Search for one on StarzPlay. Bookmark it. Now you have three programmes from three different streamers on your V6 watchlist. When you select that programme, it takes you into the app and into the programme.

Netflix and Amazon also have their own watchlists, but obviously only programmes on their own apps can be selected from there.

Are you with me yet?

Unfortunately, you cannot do this with the 360 software with Netflix - only the other two.

Re: The future of television
 

Exactly. Which is not "go[oing] to the apps themselves to find out what programmes to add to the watchlist"

Re: The future of television
 

One advantage on the V6 is that you search and it finds programmes on different services so you don't need to go to the app to find the programme. You don't even need subscription to search so if you now find that a programme of interest is on "searchable service" you could be tempted to subscribe. This can even happen where say season 1 is "broadcast" - you record/watch it - then find that later seasons are on subscription service - also tempting you to join.


Further if you do subscribe you can play from whatever source on on device and not really care where the content comes from. Content owner still gets their money and the broadcaster can attract customers in that the services are all available on their platform, some within a single interface at least for initial search. Even playing "directly" on V6 opens the app and plays the content so after playing you are in the content owners app being tempted with more content there.

Re: The future of television
 

I merely said you could do that, not that it was the only way. What I am advocating is that all streamers should be capable of offering the same service as is on the V6. It's not exactly revolutionary.

Sky have already gone for the full integration idea as well, which some on here are saying is not viable!

---------- Post added at 09:39 ---------- Previous post was at 09:38 ----------

Exactly, tweetiepooh. I'm not sure why some posters on here cannot see that.

Re: The future of television
 

Has it? Can't see it on our Sky Q - you can search Sky or Netflix but there's no option to bookmark anything in a big combined all seeing list. If you select a Netflix result from the the Sky Q search then you just go to the result in the Netflix App.

Sky Q also has lots of other apps - iPlayer, Prime, peacock, discovery+, Disney+, Apple TV+ etc but the search only works on the Sky tv guide/on demand OR Netflix. The other apps don't get a look in! Also, I'm not sure if the Sky on demand is a full or partial offering - eg are all the iPlayer episodes of Eastenders part of Sky on demand?

Re: The future of television
 

When I referred to Sky, I was referring to the inclusion of Netflix programmes on their home page. This was something that some posters were saying wouldn’t happen.

Re: The future of television
 

I think in a few more years, the television (TV) will be consigned to the same dusty history cupboard as the VCR, Plasma TV, One Megapixel Cameras, 4 Gig HDD's and DDR2 RAM.

Technology, what a ride eh. :D

Head sets is where the future lies, everyone sitting at home (or the bus, train, plane etc) wearing something like the 'oculus rift' head set with films/programs/music streamed straight in.
No more arguing what to watch or how loud/quiet it is, no more scrabbling down the back of the sofa for the remote, in fact the only problem I can see is people missing their stop on a journey because they were too focused on the latest Spiderman movie . . . or Coronation Street :D

Would be very surprised if the patents aren't already sorted ;)

Re: The future of television
 

So an advert?

Re: The future of television
 

It’s a display of content both on Sky and on Netflix.

---------- Post added at 20:59 ---------- Previous post was at 20:58 ----------

I think that would go the same way as 3D. No, it’ll all be fed straight into your brain. :D

Re: The future of television
 

Some people may require the 'bum bag set' then :D

Re: The future of television
 

All of it integrated? Or is it just advertising?

Re: The future of television
 

Aggregated content, as you stated?

Re: The future of television
 

Must you pick holes in everything, Hugh?

This is how it is described in a Forbes article (just one example)..

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarc...nd-tv-service/

[EXTRACT]

Where the Netflix/Sky partnership really gets interesting, though, is in the way Sky is integrating Netflix content into its onscreen user interface. Rather than having to open a separate Netflix app to find links to Netflix content, recommendations for both Sky’s broadcast and Netflix’s streamed shows will share the spotlight on Sky Q’s homepage. Choose a Netflix show from Sky’s menus and the stream will start playing right away; choose a Sky-hosted show and it will start to download to your receiver for playback.

Netflix content will also be included within Sky’s ‘search’ functionality, making it as easy for your Sky box to find Netflix’s Lost In Space as Sky’s live Premier League Football.

In fact, Netflix will in many ways function like just another channel on Sky’s platform - except that it won’t have a dedicated slot on Sky’s TV Guide, of course.

Re: The future of television
 

We’d not pick so many holes if there were not so many readily available, OB. Sky and Netflix have some kind of deal - the end user pays less. So one (or both) companies is getting less revenue than they ordinarily would. Netflix get some prominence.

It’s not the description of content aggregator you consistently provide.

Re: The future of television
 

Like Netflix and Amazon Prime do on VM?

Re "search functionality" when aggregating providers, Sky hasn’t progressed it the over three years since that article was issued - as GrimUpNorth previously posted

Re: The future of television
 

And on the Sky Go app Netflix doesn't get a mention (though they're a couple of things from Peacock).

Re: The future of television
 

I’m sure the more objective readers of this forum understand what I am advocating. Deliberate misinterpretation of posts is frustrating and unhelpful and deters people from posting at all.

Re: The future of television
 

To be fair you could say the more objective readers of this forum are just trying to correct your accidental (deliberate??) misinterpretation of the current state of affairs.

Re: The future of television
 

Well, if that suits your mindset. I’m moving on from this nonsense.

Re: The future of television
 

If we are certain if anything it’s that you won’t move on from this topic.

Re: The future of television
 

The longer this thread gets the less I understand it.

Re: The future of television
 

The Sky guide does aggregate content, I think the way OLDBOY means.
It carries viewing recommendations of new content from across all the streaming apps available on the platform and these links take you directly to the programe within the app. This menu updates each day. This is how Sky makes the case for "all in one place".
Virgin stated they were in the market to offer this at least two years before Sky decided to go this way. Yet Sky is now way ahead with streaming services wanting to be part of its service.
This is on Sky Q, I mean.
Sky Glass has similar menu but I haven't used it.

Re: The future of television
 

Some interesting info info in this article, worth reading in full. Includes
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60125013

Re: The future of television
 

Basically replicating the functionality of the Pluto app, which IIRC they already own?

Re: The future of television
 

Yes, sounds like the way Pluto works and yes they're owned by CBS Viacom.

Re: The future of television
 

Some useful information here about the way the government sees the future of TV.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/b...casters-thrive

Re: The future of television
 

Satellite TV is safe for a few more years.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2022/sky-commit...ing-until-2028

[EXTRACT]

Despite the recent launch of new internet-based TV services, Sky has committed to continue broadcasting services via satellite for several more years to come.

According to satellite operator SES, Sky has once again extended contracts to use a number of its satellite transponders. New agreements now run until the end of 2028. This builds on a separate contract between Sky and SES that was extended last year.

Re: The future of television
 

I hope all the decent stuff doesn't end up on a premium subscription channel like Di$ney has don to NCIS and The Orville.

Re: The future of television
 

Oh it’s safe much longer than that, OB.

https://www.ses.com/press-release/se...ng-118-million

https://www.eutelsat.com/satellites/...atellites.html

As for using the internet to deliver television on this scale for the whole of the UK I’m not sure we are best placed to lead this revolution.

https://hexus.net/business/news/telc...bottom-europe/

Re: The future of television
 

That seems to be the direction its going: Studio-based streaming services and away from the more cost-effective aggregation by Sky and VM.

The biggest test will be whether Warner Bros Discover renews its licence to Sky for entertainment content or launches these on its streaming service instead.