said by 88615298:
A) none of that is LIVE
B) requires and actual internet connection. Considering how many RURAL customers DirecTV has I'm not sure how feasible streaming their content over the internet is.
C) Most with internet have caps. most people will only be able to stream 5 hours day max. And that going by a bitrate near 5 Mbps. To offer something close to DirecTv current HD you'll need to have at least 8 Mbps. Now you talking maybe 3 hours a day. Once again not practical
I can assure you MILLIONS of rural people do NOT have HSI form anyone. I know many right in the county where I live. They have satellite TV because it's the only choice. So offering TV via stream is NOT an option for them.
Sure it's not an option for them, but it's an option for MILLIONS (BILLIONS?) of others.
There are many, many companies offering IPTV/streaming video (Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Vimeo, Google, Apple, TWC, Comcast, Cox, Dish, Verizon, AT&T, Virgin, Sky Digital, etc.), a growing percentage is live. Lack of broadband to those rural customers you're concerned with isn't stopping anyone. 10 years ago, probably 5% had the bandwidth in the U.S. to stream video reliably, now it's more than 70%. If anything the expansion of IPTV services is one reason behind a bigger push for rural broadband expansion.
IPTV's availability will just expand as the distribution system becomes more standardized, accepted, and in demand. It won't replace satellite distribution everywhere, but it can certainly supplement it and supplant in in many situations.
People want more competition between video providers and the possibility of ala carte, this can provide both.--
If it's important, back it up... twice. Even 99.999% availability isn't enough sometimes.