said by GhostDoggy :

Currently, all channels are being broadcasted simultaneously while the operators are still offering 5, 10, and even +15Mbps Internet connectivity. They are suggesting that the average number of 'watched' channels at any given time is actually lower than the total number of channels.

As a result and the new ability to selectively not simultaneously broadcast all channels to the home they can find more useful ways of using recycled bandwidth. While faster internet connectivity is one of them, this could also allow for more higher-bandwidth channels (e.g. HD).

For instance, let's say that a cable operator routines broadcasts 200 channels simultaneously, but at any given time in their network only 150 are being watched. Since Internet connectivity is 'best effort' then the variable performance is already allowed and afforded.

Personally, they all need a better approach (deploy GigE FTTH!).

said by moonpuppy :

Hmmmmm, how is this going to work? Are all programs are going to be On-Demand? Imagine the bandwidth when people get home or in the evening when everyone starts calling for shows.

Plus, who knows if those 20 or 30 shows are what people want to watch at any given time.

Is channel surfing going to be possible?

As for the major networks (FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS) will they allow their shows to be stored then transmitted?

Nice idea but there are issues.

said by RadioDoc :

Ameritech did advanced fiber-fed HFC cable TV fifteen years ago, well before any entrenched incumbent even had their first meeting about it..

said by hottboiinnc :

CBS already allows one of its networks to be stored and watched VoD- they own Showtime which is an On-Demand channel.

said by UofMiamiGrad :

CV is already testing this in NJ. I am sure other MSOs are testing it as well. So much for all the MSOs saying they have no bandwidth issues, when in fact they do.