republican-creole
Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Game Consoles Vs. the Cable Box
Search Topic:
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

Comments on news posted 2006-04-11 14:10:22: A panel this morning at the cable industry's National Show in Atlanta focused on broadband gaming consoles, and their threat to the cable industry's set-top dominance. ..

page: 1 · 2 · 3
AuthorAll Replies

moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL

This should be a lesson.....

Don't try and compete with something already established UNLESS you are willing to spend a ton of money.

Game consoles have been around for a while so why compete with them?

Plus, they go out of style and obsolete in a few years.

Partnerships are win-win for companies.


Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
Blech!

Viva La PC Gaming!


dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast

said by Cheese See Profile :

Viva La PC Gaming!
AGREED!
I can take this laptop with me where ever I go and play games.
Console? NOT!
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera


Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:

said by dadkins See Profile :

said by Cheese See Profile :

Viva La PC Gaming!
AGREED!
I can take this laptop with me where ever I go and play games.
Console? NOT!
Yep

amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
clubs:

who would want...

to play some cheezy excuse for a game through their cable box. ..this sounds like a rehash of the sega saga.

so if anyone wants a simple game, available through the net, on their tv, they are going to most probably think Nintendo, and they would be right.. I guess the 360 has old-school games available, but I imagine the big N drawing a bigger crowd for a lot of games. besides, the new controller looks like a remote that belongs right next to the tv remote

don't care to turn a tv box into a poker box, but could you imagine the tons of people who would probably waste their lives (and monies) away?

..really don't get the idea of a game console being any sort of threat here.. it is a complementary thing.


mbernste
Boosted
Premium,MVM
join:2001-06-30
Piscataway, NJ
·Comcast
·Optimum Online

Study your history

Those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it.


said by Intellivision Lives Web Site :
Introduced in 1981, PlayCable: The All Game Channel enabled local cable operators to send Intellivision games over the wire with the TV signal. Subscribers used a special converter -- the PlayCable Adapter -- to download the games to play on their Intellivision Master Components. While reportedly popular in the areas in which it was available, PlayCable was discontinued in 1983.

The PlayCable Company was a joint venture of Mattel and General Instrument, the company that designed the Intellivision chip set. The units themselves were manufactured by General Instrument's Jerrold Division, which supplies cable TV converter boxes.

The PlayCable matched the original Intellivision Master Component in design. It plugged into the Master Component's cartridge slot and hooked up to the TV cable. Switching on the Intellivision brought up several pages of on-screen menus, displaying the available games. Twenty titles were available at a time, rotated monthly. The object code for these games was being continuously broadcast over the cable; when one was chosen, its code would be "tuned in" and fed into the PlayCable's memory (taking about 10 seconds). The Intellivision would then read the PlayCable's memory as if it were a game cartridge.

Several factors contributed to the systems demise:

The PlayCable Adapter contained insufficient memory to download the larger (8K and above) games introduced in 1983. The converter boxes would either have to be upgraded or the system limited to older games.
With the growing number of channels that subscribers were demanding ("I want my MTV!"), most cable operators felt reserving bandwidth for PlayCable wasn't worth it (especially considering the hardware investment needed to provide the service).
At least two people figured out that a PlayCable could make a dandy Intellivision development system. By hooking up a personal computer to a PlayCable and poking around by trial and error, they quickly decoded the EXEC software and started writing their own games. While these two were kept from competing with Mattel by hiring them to program the Intellivision Bump 'N' Jump arcade conversion, management was afraid PlayCable would make it too easy for small companies to get into the Intellivision-compatible business.
Subscribers rented the PlayCable Adapters from the cable companies. When the system was discontinued in 1983, the adapters had to be returned.

Source: »www.intellivisionlives.com/blues···ech.html


gheezer
Compooters R Us
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Henrietta, NY

Not quite sure how this can be interpreted as a threat...

Set top boxes aren't serious revenue gerators anyways.

Microsoft, Nintendo, et al...those crafting gaming consoles, are more of a threat to the likes of Motorola and Scientific Atlanta...the better question form this entry should be...why aren't SA and Moto involved in developing the Cable Game console?

What this actually represents, is an evolving potential revenue stream...the technology which, is not quite mature enough for reliable billable delivery.

Seems like a smart move to allow the technology to mature before attempting to deliver it....then again, it's not that far of a stretch to view a content delivery method similar to that of VOD.
--
Join the NAVY, see the world....It's mostly water!

ajschmitt

join:2005-11-30

Set Top Box Makers, not cable, are threatened

I think the point is being missed here.

Consoles are a direct threat to the incumbent makers of set top boxes - Scientific Atlanta (Cisco) and Moto. Take an Xbox 360, add cablecard, perhaps reduce the graphics capability and you have all the hardware required for a competitive set top box.

Consoles are serious long term threat to the cablecos because the broadband capability of these boxes provides an alternative path to deliver content, particularly IPTV and Netflix style business models.

»www.nyquistcapital.com/2006/01/1···60-iptv/


Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02

Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
reply to gheezer
Re: Not quite sure how this can be interpreted as a threat...

quote:
Not quite sure how this can be interpreted as a threat...
An alternate platform for delivery of HD content, TV programs, films, and other content? Over the cable industry's pipes but not via their TV delivery mechanism? There's some interesting dynamics to play out there....

Brigrat

join:2003-09-01
Lovington, NM
reply to ajschmitt
Re: Set Top Box Makers, not cable, are threatened

You guys need to read the friggin article. The threat is not Games over direct TV, the threat is DVR, and TV ala carte via the XBox 360.


gheezer
Compooters R Us
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Henrietta, NY

reply to Karl Bode
Re: Not quite sure how this can be interpreted as a threat...

The Cable Company's content deliver network is privately owned and privately maintained. The Telco has no right to use private local infrastructure.

I still don't see the threat to the MSO, what I see is an untapped revenue source. Unless the various municipalities give up the franchise fee and the MSO's are compensated for building the local content delivery infrastructure.
--
Join the NAVY, see the world....It's mostly water!


gheezer
Compooters R Us
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Henrietta, NY

reply to Brigrat
Re: Set Top Box Makers, not cable, are threatened

said by Brigrat See Profile :

You guys need to read the friggin article. The threat is not Games over direct TV, the threat is DVR, and TV ala carte via the XBox 360.
Over who's infrastructure? A cable internet customer is still a cable internet customer...
--
Join the NAVY, see the world....It's mostly water!

RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest

reply to Karl Bode
Re: Not quite sure how this can be interpreted as a threat...

said by Karl Bode See Profile :

Over the cable industry's pipes but not via their TV delivery mechanism? There's some interesting dynamics to play out there....
That irony is not lost on me either. Unless the cablecos block ports of throttle certain kinds of traffic (oh, they would never do something like that!) they may be developing a little leak in their revenue boat.

On the one hand they're trying to take the PVR out of their customer's homes, while something like this is right around the corner waiting to occupy the same functional and physical space (without the $10/mo fee) plus add far more value.

On the other hand, they've invested so much in half-assed digital delivery they can't really back down now.

Then there is the short walk from cable to other delivery mechanisms for these multipurpose devices making cable's offerings irrelevant.

Interesting, indeed...
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.


Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02

Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
reply to gheezer
quote:
The Cable Company's content deliver network is privately owned and privately maintained. The Telco has no right to use private local infrastructure.

I still don't see the threat to the MSO, what I see is an untapped revenue source. Unless the various municipalities give up the franchise fee and the MSO's are compensated for building the local content delivery infrastructure.
Are we talking about the same thing? "Cable TV" channel bundles are about to be made irrelevant by 87 content providers offering a la carte video 37 different ways from Sunday.

An XBox 3 offering HBO programs a-la carte in HD over their own pipes, bypassing their dinosaur business model, not a threat? Are you kidding?


Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02

Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
reply to RadioDoc
quote:
That irony is not lost on me either. Unless the cablecos block ports of throttle certain kinds of traffic (oh, they would never do something like that!) they may be developing a little leak in their revenue boat.
With 87 different outfits soon to offer individual program downloads, that would be a lot of throttling and blocking. If they stop Xbox 360 owners from downloading HD copies of HBO shows, then they also need to blockade iTunes, Amazon, and everyone else.

The whole concept of paying $70 for 200 channels is about to be blown up, the very cornerstone of their bundling pipe-dream, and these guys are sitting around suggesting there's nothing to worry about....

The only way they'll win is to innovate and offer content nobody else can get (not going to happen). OR, hurry up and sign multi-billion dollar exclusive content distribution deals that cover entire swaths of content.

It's all going to get very messy.


gheezer
Compooters R Us
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Henrietta, NY

reply to Karl Bode
XBox doesn't OWN the pipe, that's the whole point.

Pay the MSO's the TENS to HUNDREDS of BILLIONS of private monies they've invested..and then others can have unfettered access.

No I am not kidding.

If the cost to deliver local content were small, someone OTHER than the MSO's WOULD HAVE Buit local deliver infrastructure nationwide by now.

Sure...FIOS is coming, but unless you own a bare minimum 1/4 million dollar house, it aint coming anytime soon.

Existing cable infrastructure passes over 100 million homes RIGHT NOW. And in 2 years, it will be capable of carrying 500mb/s of data and content. here's the key now, pay attention....this is impportant...IT WAS ALL BUILT WITH PRIVATE MONEY AND IS PRIVATELY OWNED.

And 2 years from now, it will STILL be privately owned, NOT subsidized by taxpayers, and NOT subject to open access laws that the TELCO's are.
--
Join the NAVY, see the world....It's mostly water!


gheezer
Compooters R Us
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Henrietta, NY
reply to RadioDoc
Name ONE ISP that PREVENTS people from downloading?
--
Join the NAVY, see the world....It's mostly water!


Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02

Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
reply to gheezer
quote:
XBox doesn't OWN the pipe, that's the whole point.
That is irrelevent to this discussion.

Likewise, I'm not even talking about TelcoTV. They have the same problem to face - worse, because they're not even built out yet. I think you're arguing a completely different point from what I'm discussing.

My point is that if users paying $50 for 10Mbps can still download a la carte content (just the shows they really like) from a growing number of other companies, networks, film houses at reasonable prices- it's very likely they will stop subscribing to Basic and expanded cable, eliminating a massive source of revenue.

That is a very real threat.


jslik
That just happened
Premium
join:2006-03-17
clubs:

reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode See Profile :

The whole concept of paying $70 for 200 channels is about to be blown up, the very cornerstone of their bundling pipe-dream, and these guys are sitting around suggesting there's nothing to worry about....
I see your point, but I just don't see people giving up the 200+ channels in favor of a few favorite shows/channels. I think channel surfing, for the sake of something to do, will be with us for awhile. I could be wrong, but people have been getting the expanded lineups as those lineups have increased. How many out there just have basic (or as Comcast calls it "limited basic") cable?

moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL

reply to gheezer
said by gheezer See Profile :

Name ONE ISP that PREVENTS people from downloading?
Maybe you missed the discussions where people get letters from Comcast over using too much bandwidth. This will be no different.
Forums » Game Consoles Vs. the Cable Boxpage: 1 · 2 · 3


Sunday, 06-Dec 08:49:48 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF