Archive for ‘Uncategorized’

March 18, 2010

Is internet TV the best use of bandwidth

I recently read 3 very interesting posts on the above topic. The debate between Mark Cuban and Avner Ronen at SXSW. Clearly very strong points of view.
These are Mark’s points of view:
Don’t waste the internet on TV
Internet TV vs Music vs Newspapers et al.

This is Avner’s point of view:
The future of TV

I agree with both of them. Now that might seem a bit odd given that they seem to be at opposite ends of the spectrum.

Here is what I believe.

For the foreseeable future both cable/broadcast and internet TV will co-exist. Both bring with them their inherent advantages.

Broadcast delivers video at the least cost per bit and is an efficient use of the medium whereas internet TV provides addressability, interactivity and personalization.

I believe that the most popular shows should and will be broadcast in all their glory – HD, 3D what not and the long tail of content will be delivered on demand. Now long tail has many different connotations these days. However I look at the long tail as video that does not have mass appeal. In addition there is a lot of video out there that will probably not be shown on your TV broadcast/cable – videos from the New York Times, Wall St. Journal, Funny or Die, Daily Mirror, Maxim, Cosmo, Stanford, MIT classes etc.

All of the above have built videos for the internet. However its ironical that funny or die is now going to TV. As Eric Schmidt mentioned in his Abu Dabhi media summit, this might be the way shows are created and distributed in the future. First create shows on the internet. Test with an audience with the least amount of production capital and if there is mass appeal move it to the broadcast medium.

The big problem with the internet (also its biggest advantage) is that it is 2-way. This means that the bandwidth has to be shared across users. More users, means more bandwidth split and more unpredictability. Quality of service on the internet is a big concern as you move from SD to HD and beyond.

So very soon you will find hybrid set top boxes that will give you both broadcast content as well as an internet connection for the back channel and video on demand capabilities (There is a new standard Hbb being proposed). I believe this hybrid setup will be the way forward for a while to come.

Now, that being said I have seen that broadband video is the norm in S.Korea. Very few people actually watch broadcast TV. So in theory it is possible to expand TV on internet to a larger population like in the US. However is it the best use of the medium?

That’s the question Mark is asking. And I don’t think using internet video for all video content is the best possible use. If you want to break the shackles of linear TV for that popular American Idol show use a DVR. You will get it in all its glory – full HD, sorround sound, 3D etc.

When people start appreciating bandwith as a limited commodity like water, fuel & electricity then some of these visions might begin to look like excesses. Especially when we realize that other deserving services are being starved of this precious resource.

January 28, 2010

iPad: disappointing


The iPhone was ground breaking. The iPad not so. I was always convinced that the iPad would not be as ground breaking as the iPhone. And even if it was, others would quickly catch up. No OEM was going to be caught sleeping on this one. Job’s claims netbooks are cheap notebooks. Maybe. But this is an expensive iPhone. The only thing nice about the iPad is that it is thin. But from what I read on engadget it isn’t even light.

The UI – Apple’s forte is not very ground breaking. Everything that you see here can be built on an Android device too.

Speaking of that, whats the deal with the lack of Flash support. If anyone noticed, when Job’s was demonstrating the browser…I think it was Time or NYT there was a missing plug-in. When 75% of internet videos are flash based, why go out of your way to un-support it. So, with the iPad you are pretty much restricted to YouTube streaming. No Hulu. I was smiling to myself when Job’s played a YouTube video – A dog surfing….in HD!! I mean what more could you ask for? That’s exactly the reason I want an iPad – to watch dogs on skateboards!!!

The TFT while supposedly brilliant is not the best for reading books. It is backlit. It may look pretty but its no e-book, especially if you are a serious reader. It will be a strain on your eyes.

No multitasking yet again…the Android folks must be thrilled.

What’s with the pricing? $700? Ridiculous if you ask me. An atom (1.6GHz) + ion netbook with full HD and graphics support is available for $350. $200 MIDs based on NVIDIA’s Tegra or Qualcomm’s Snapdragon with flash support would compete directly with the iPad

There are a lot of tablets in the pipeline from many OEMs. I was looking for the perfect one. I thought Apple would be the first one to get it right. Unfortunately they have got a lot of things wrong this time. I suspect there will be several new tablets that will be better and cheaper than the iPad. I for one would prefer to buy one of those than the iPad. But then I am not one for brands…so who knows, the iPad may still be very successful.

November 24, 2009

The rise of Qualcomm

I read an article on EETimes this morning about Qualcomm’s new display technology. This is very similar to E-Ink’s display in that it needs no external backlight. If you have had a chance to see any of these displays you will notice how
similar it is to reading a newspaper. Up until now, there was a lot of buzz about Amazon’s Kindle (seen above). However the limitation of this technology was that it could only display black & white. While this is sufficient for reading books, I believe the future still belongs to a web pad that can do more than display static content.
With Qualcomm’s announcement of the miraSol technology it appears colour displays with XGA resolutions, capable of 30fps video are on their way. This can potentially be a game changer.

If there is one silicon vendor that is well poised to take on the might of Intel it would be Qualcomm. They seem to have invested in the right technologies and more importantly seem to have come up with products at the right time.
Qualcomm’s wireless (3G) prowess needs little discussion. However their foray into mobile TV (MediaFlo) appears to be getting a new lease of life after a bad start a few years ago (riding the online video wave). They seem to have cracked the mobile SOC solution with a 1GHz processor capable of rendering Flash 10 content. The Gobi (SDR) 3G broadband solution for notebooks will pay off since it can handle multiple new technologies. And now this – the display.

The display will enable thin & light mobile designs that will stay powered on battery for weeks. Moreover, a 30fps display will reduce the motion artifacts on videos. The lack of a backlight will significantly reduce eye fatigue. All good news for this segment.

With the above solutions Qualcomm seems to be well placed to cover every aspect of a mobile device save the case & keyboard. They have a solution for the processor, wireless access & the display. All of which are cutting edge.

I am a admirer of 3 companies in the semiconductor business – Broadcom, nVidia & Qualcomm. While Broadcom has the  processor and the wireless capabilities to match Qualcomm, I believe Qualcomm with this display technology has an edge. nVidia still has not been able to break away from its graphics niche, but will soon need to, to stay in the race.

Lets see how this plays out in the months to come.

Stay tuned…

November 14, 2009

Geo restrictions on internet TV

Its time content owners woke up to bit-torrent. People are torrenting their way out of Hulu’s restrictions. With tools like Miro and now TVTrigger it makes little sense. I am aware of content syndication deals that make content owners money for overseas rights….but they could make much more money by opening up their content to hundreds of millions of viewers across the globe.
We know that internet video CPMs are much higher. CPMs like $75 and most recently $50 for Wall St. Journal can only mean more money.
I dont get to see most of these shows on HULU and BBC on TV here and that would only imply that the TV networks here dont have content deals for those shows. Hence no money to the content owners. However if I could watch these shows on Hulu the ads would pay the content owners.
Remember that most satellite TV networks have limited bandwidth for content. The carriage fee would not justify the ROI to cater to niche audiences. Hence they wouldn’t bother to do a deal for much of Hulu content in places like India and Russia. However there is a niche audience for these shows there. This is where the power of the internet can be leveraged. Tap the long tail to make your millions!

November 14, 2009

Intel, ARM and the Netbook

I have been gung-ho about the new application areas that the Atom processor managed to penetrate/create – low power, “low cost” and pentium strength processing capability in the embedded domain. Most important was x86 compatibility, which meant I could write code on my regular notebook and instantly deploy it on an Atom device. Smart segmentation of the market by Intel.

Netbooks that are based on the atom processor have undoubtedly been the surprise segment for almost everyone in the industry. Asus needs to be commended for being the first to push this in the market and have been deservedly rewarded. According to Forward Conepts – ” The 3G Netbook category is going to demonstrate 124 percent compound annual growth rate (CAGR) reaching 34 million units in 2014 and a 45 percent 3G/LTE attachment rate” . There is little doubt (save in Steve Job’s mind) that this is going to be a huge opportunity.

Its not just netbooks but other devices that have begun to use the Atom processor – nettops like the Asus eee box and the Acer Aspire Revo have appeared on the scene. With internet video being the next  frontier there is a glut of devices trying to bring this video from the internet to television. Imagine the speed with which you can now build the app and deploy it on one of these boxes.

ARM devices about a year back were still underpowered and were confined to either smart phones or other embedded tasks. It was not that some of these ARM based SOCs couldn’t decode HD video. In fact many of them could. It was a problem of internet compatibility. The internet has grown on Wintel platforms – websites, browsers and applications were all built to cater to this segment. Adobe’s Flash had also grown to be the platform of choice for graphics and video on the net. When intel launched the atom this was their big differentiator- compatibility with the web. Over 75% of all internet video is built on Flash.

Flash 10 is a MIPS hungry platform and requires OpenGL ES 2.0 and OpenVG 1.1 support. The ARM SOCs were not ready with this support. Intel rode the wave and reaped the benefits of the early mover advantage…with significantly high margins (Intel’s last earnings call pegged margins for 4th quarter this year to be in the high end of the normal range which intel defines as 50-60%). The flip side of this was that Atom based devices were priced much higher than ARM based ones. Many vendors didn’t have a choice and just went with the price or decided to go for sub-optimal implementations based on ARM.

Intel’s honeymoon may soon be over if the ARM based silicon vendors are to be believed. Adobe started the Open Screen Project to work with silicon vendors to port Flash 10 & Adobe’s AIR to their SOCs. This is beginning to come to fruition now with a few players announcing support for Flash.

Marvell, Broadcom, Sigma Designs, Freescale and most recently Qualcomm have announced Flash support. The most significant amongst these announcements seems to be Qualcomm’s see (Qualcomm demos Adobe Flash 10 on ARM-based netbook). Not only do they support full high definition flash but have also upped the processor clock to 1GHz. ARM parts have the big advantage of being very miserly on their power consumption and this can be a significant differentiator in the mobile space. This includes smart phones, netbooks, smart books, tablets and the like.
More importantly companies like Qualcomm have longer standing relationships with operators who are a crucial piece of the value chain when it come to mobile broadband delivery. The fastest way for mobile broadband to grow is to subsidize the device in exchange for guaranteed monthly subscription fees.
Qualcomm announced it is sampling its first chipsets for dual-carrier HSPA+ and multi-mode 3G/LTE recently. According to Qualcomm its smarphone chipset dubbed MSM7x30, supports high-definition video recording and playback, has dedicated 2D and 3D graphics cores and is optimized for Web usage. Qualcomm can hence become a formidable rival to Intel in this next generation of devices that go beyond the PC.

Of course Intel is not going to take this challenge lying down. On June 23rd of this year Nokia and Intel announced a deal where Nokia will license 3G and HSPA technology to Intel (see Intel, Nokia exchange wedding vows). And in October this year there was this announcement – AT&T Nokia booklet 3G pricing & release date confirmed. This netbook is powered by an Atom Z530 and has a 3G modem. Its available for $299 if you sign up for a $60 per month data plan or $599 unsubsidized.

The last chapter in this saga is far from over. Exciting times ahead for this space and it can only be good for the consumer.

As always, stay tuned….

August 26, 2009

It’s Tablet TV Time

Apple Tablet from the Telegraph.co.uk

Apple Tablet from the Telegraph.co.uk

Ever since Microsoft demonstrated the Mira portable tablet concept I have been fascinated by the idea. This was during the early part of this decade. Clearly, it was ahead of its time – wi-fi was in its infancy, broadband was not as broad as we know it today, power consumption was too high, LCDs were still pricey and storage was expensive…but most importantly content was limited to photos and some music stored on your PC hard disk.
We have come a long way since then.

  • 802.11n claims speeds of 100mbps and above, which means I can stream HD movies from my hard disk or home server into the tablet without a glitch.
  • A 1TB hard drive now costs about $80
  • HD movies can be streamed. downloaded on torrents and ripped from DVDs
  • Broadband speeds are up to about 2Mb at least in most countries
  • 3G is getting more ubiquitous and affordable
  • LCDs panel prices are only dropping further
  • Multimedia SOCs are getting cheaper by the day and more powerful in both graphics & multimedia functionality
  • LED backlights and low power SOCs are driving up battery life
  • Online video market is exploding

All of the above point to the fact that the time is ripe for a handheld tablet that I can take to bed, place on the kitchen counter, on the dining table while having breakfast or in a coffee shop.

I believe video will drive adoption of these devices. Up until now the TV was the only big CE device not threatened by a notebook or a smart phone.
Camera functionality, picture viewing, radio & music were all absorbed into a notebook and a smartphone either as standalone device or with the help of web services like Flickr & Last.FM. Video has always been the last function to get absorbed into a device given the MIPS & bandwidth requirements. While notebooks, smart phones, Wi-Fi and 3G have bridged the technology gap to bring video to these devices in the last few years, all that was required was content.

YouTube started the trend with short user generated clips, followed by HULU that brought full length TV shows to the web. This according to me was the turning point when people actually believed they can be weaned away from their TVs.

TV viewing has consequently also slowly moved away from being a family experience to one that is more personal and social (friends). It is also more participative, with users tweeting and commenting on videos and TV shows. Hence the need for a device that acts as a personal TV.

Now portable TVs have been around for a while. But for a generation born in the internet age used to interactivity, broadcast TV just doesn’t cut it. Users are trying to use their mobile phones, notebooks and photo frames to access TV content.

Notebooks are too cumbersome to take to bed with the keyboard and all. It also occupies a lot of space on a coffee table. Moreover it is still considered a compute device. The mobile phone screen is too small for long form TV content.
Netbooks are trying to address this with smaller notebooks with longer battery life. However it is still a compute platform.

I don’t need yet another small computer. I need a portable CE device. Portable media players like Archos & iTouch have been trying to serve this need as well. I still believe they are poor alternatives. They haven’t got the screen size right, work with an ARM or MIPS based embedded processor that are not fully compatible with the web (as opposed to an X86 based device) as yet and have limited or no support for flash video. Flash is the default standard for over 80% of online video. I don’t want a device with crippled access to the web that limits me to local videos stored on my hard disk.

A tablet on the other hand serves exactly this market. It is portable, has a large screen and battery life and fulfills all my entertainment needs well. It’s my picture viewer (photo frame), my internet radio & my TV. Note that I use the term “MY” which also implies personalized content. Here is what I would like to see in a tablet:
– A 10″ LCD. This should also be the size of the device.
– At least 8 hours of battery life
– An x86 based SOC capable of delivering HD video and 3D graphics
– Slim & light (like the iTouch)
– Support for Flash is a must
– 802.11n Wi-Fi support
– USB OTG
– 2 headset jacks
– Multi-Touch screen
– Optional 3G support

I can easily see it as a kitchen TV, coffee table TV & my travel infotainment device. Something I can slip in to my “Man Purse” 🙂

The time is ripe and I can see that Apple smells the moolah….

June 18, 2009

The disruption is beginning…

Time Warner faces backlash on broadband caps: Time Warner Cable’s plans to cap broadband speeds and charge $150 a month for unlimited broadband downloads has caused quite a stir among consumers and politicians.cnet news

The BBC reports that subscribers to BT’s lowest-tier broadband plan should be getting speeds of 8 megabits per second, but that speed is being cut to as low as less than 1 megabyte per second between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and midnight (prime video watching time!).newteevee.com

A spat has emerged in recent days between BT (BT) and the BBC. The telecoms group broke cover this week to say it could no longer afford to subsidise the cost of sending huge media files from the online video on demand service as its network was suffering. A spokesman for BT said yesterday: “We can’t give these companies a free ride any more.” – businessweek.com

As we all know, carriage fees, subscription fees and advertisements are sources of revenue for all players in the broadcast delivery value chain. With online video, the mantra has so far been -no subscription fee only advertising revenue.
The traditional carriage fee no longer applies as the internet pipes are not built exclusively for video. Hence ISPs (who map to cable networks) will find it hard to charge a carriage fee from content owners (who map to broadcasters). The reverse carriage fee (fees that certain premium content owners charge to allow cable operators to carry their content) will also not be applicable.
There are 2 additional players in the online video scene, the CDN (content delivery networks) and the amateur and proteur (between amateur and professional) producers.

Content Delivery Networks are a system of computers networked together across the Internet that caches content closer to end users, to improve performance and scalability. The CDNs charges the content owners to host content.

Today anyone with a camcorder and video editing tools on the PC can become a producer. The internet is used as a delivery platform

With content consumption, production and delivery becoming available to all, the role of the studios and networks are beginning to be questioned. While they are not going to go away in a hurry, it is an eventuality they are going to have to come to terms with. Studios and networks will have to find a way to adapt themselves to this new 2-way interactive, internet delivery and production.
Hulu, YouTube, revision3, Blip.tv etc. exemplify the transition. Hulu comes from the TV world, Epix from the movie studios, Youtube is the channel for user generated content, ,revision3 and Blip.tv are the channels that are creating content exclusively for the internet and Vevo comes from the music industry.

BT has been accused by BBC of throttling its iPlayer service and is looking to ask content owners to share the transit costs. This is probably one option for them to recover money as its going to be hard to charge the user. We have already seen the customer backlash from Time Warner trying to do the same.

There are few other options ISPs have to mitigate this problem. One way is to improve their peering relationships and use internet exchange points (IXPs). Another way is for ISPs to become CDNs or find a way of sharing revenue with CDNs. Yet another way is to use bit torrent like technologies to ease traffic and transit costs .  Maybe a combination of the the above will be the way to go….

What is clear however is that the balance of power is slowly shifting from the media companies to the consumer. Will this mean the beginning of the end of  TV as we know it?

It’s a very interesting time to be playing in this area….I am, as always, tuned in

February 27, 2009

Hulu, Boxee and the disruptive cable TV model

In October 08, an up and coming internet TV start-up (Boxee) announced proudly that they now supported popular online video aggregation sites like Hulu, CBS and Comedy central. This was great news for all those looking to break the shackles of cable TV to watch their favorite shows streamed on demand via the internet to their TVs. (Though Boxee was not the only one supporting Hulu they brought public awareness to this concept)

Hulu, an online video website which hosts full length TV shows from many cable networks including Fox, NBC & Viacom has been growing in popularity since its launch. Hulu moved up from being 20th position amongst online video sites when it launched in March ‘08, to being 4th in Feb ’09 behind YouTube, Google video and MySpace video.

Just when things were looking exciting for consumers owing to a disruptive combination of a client and a service that brought TV on demand to the tube for free, Hulu on Feb 18th abruptly announced that it asked Boxee to pull down its Hulu support.

Why on earth would they want to do something like this, just when they were ramping up viewership?

To understand this, one has to look at the cable TV business model in the US. The book “Media Selling: by Charles Warner, Joseph Buchman” has a lot of insights into this and I reference content from it in the following paragraphs.

In the 70’s cable networks (that acquired and produced programming) would provide it to its affiliates the cable systems, which would distribute it to subscribers. The cable networks would make money from advertising and compensate the cable systems for their distribution costs. For example ESPN would pay the cable systems about 5 cents per subscriber per month. This was considered a carriage fee. Soon, they realized that their expectations on advertising revenue were exaggerated and started accumulating losses. This was when the cable operators/systems were charging their customers $15 per month as subscription fees. Cable operators thus not only made money from cable networks but also from their subscribers without any cost to them for programming

In 1982, ESPN decided that they would turn the tables around and ask the cable systems/MSOs to pay ESPN 10 cents a month for every subscriber. After intense negotiations they settled on a 5c per month per subscriber fee that the cable operators would pay ESPN as carriage fee. This was a disruptive model. It turned out to be a win-win situation though as the additional revenue that cable networks received was pumped back into programming. This resulted in better programs which in turn could be used to increase subscription fees and add new subscribers as it was delivering a better quality product.

The cable business model these days is a little more complicated with different cable networks& systems working with different business models – must carry rule, carriage fees paid to cable systems, carriage fees paid by cable systems.

Suffice it to say that many cable networks such as Viacom, Disney, etc. that have their shows up on Hulu get carriage fees from the cable system operators. The problem is cable system operators are concerned that subscribers will turn off their subscription if they can get the same content for free streamed over the internet right to their TV sets. This of course is a legitimate concern but far from being threatening.

If stats are to be believed then the number of hours people watched TV has actually increased since the coming of on demand TV shows. According to Neilson’s Three screen report – “Average time watching TV, online video and mobile video all increased in the fourth quarter, showing a robust market for video content, and that online video has not yet proven to be a viable substitute for TV consumption, but rather an additive medium

The average American watched 151 hours of TV a month for the quarter, or roughly three hours per day whereas the average online video watcher takes in about three hours per month.

The ability of CDNs to scale delivery of HD content to millions of TV viewers simultaneously is also questionable. Consumers who have paid upwards of $1000 for their high definition 42” LCD screens will hardly be satisfied by the low resolution fare being pumped out by the likes of Hulu. Moreover real time sporting events will for the foreseeable future continue to be watched on the HD broadcast network.

That being said the networks are not taking any chances.

Hulu carries content from several networks and makes available an RSS feed so that other aggregators like Yahoo TV, MSN video etc. can make them available on PCs. If this is the case then it seems odd that they block only those devices that connect to a TV. What’s to stop me from buying a PC that connects to Hulu via a web browser and connecting the same to my PC? I can build a custom browser that makes the content watchable and usable on the TV.

Chatter in media circles is that cable systems are planning on building a Hulu themselves. They will let consumers enjoy the pleasures of TV on demand provided they are already subscribers to cable TV. Maybe this will be at an additional cost or maybe not. However it doesn’t seem like a practical solution as consumers have already been exposed to what can be and anything less will not be as appealing. Technology will find a way to beat the system.

In the meanwhile TV.com, owned by rival CBS has announced that it will offer selected shows to its international audience, which Hulu has been unable to do so far. Clearly this is a move trying to differentiate from Hulu. Are the big boys beginning to take the battle to a new turf?

There is no doubt that Hulu and a networked media adapter is a disruptive business model that is bound to shake up the broadcast industry in much the same way as Kazaa and P2P networks shook up the music industry. While the music industry has to some extent come to terms with reality and changed its business models (iTunes, DRM etc.) the broadcast industry’s journey of realization is only starting.

An interesting time, if you are tuned in to this saga…

February 6, 2009

The unseating of Tivo

The Myka TV Torrent Box

The Myka TV Torrent Box

Every once in a while from the world of tech pops a ground breaking device. The Slingbox, the iPod and the iPhone immediately come to mind. But before all of these came Tivo. Tivo identified a pain point with analog cable and fixed it with a cool UI, intuitive program guide and most importantly recording features that not only allowed customers to watch programs when they wanted but also smartly skipped the annoying commercials. Before long, Tivo enjoyed a cult status.

Late 2006 saw Google taking over YouTube for $1.65B. While it didn’t seem obvious to some of us then, in hindsight it does seem like a fantastic move. Today more that 10% of all internet traffic is attributed to YouTube. Last year saw the birth of Hulu which stood out from YouTube by breaking away from the popular UGC (User Generated Content) and focusing on studio content from NBC and News Corp (Fox). They host all their popular TV shows (full length) on this site, to be streamed on demand. The personal video recorder on the web was suddenly born. This then led to the birth of set top boxes like VuDu, Roku and the likes that allowed you to watch the same streams on your large screen TV instead of on your PC. Tivo too has joined the bandwagon now by announcing support for NetFlix, Amazon Unbox and CinemaNow (Haven’t heard of Hulu support on TiVo yet).

There is still one fundamental problem with this approach. While the world is shifting to HD broadcasts, bandwidth limitations create a barrier to large scale adoption of streaming HD content. According to the Hulu website the minimum bandwidth requirement to view HD content is a 2.5mbps internet connection and this for a 720p resolution. Note that NBC’s regular broadcasts are at 1080i. Even with 720p there is 1.5mbps requirement. If streaming has to truly replace broadcast TV, the viewing experience has to be identical – no breaks, stutters, pixelization and ideally little or no latency.

However, increased bandwidth requirements imply increasing cost to the customer. In addition in countries like India where over 90% of  “broadband” is at 256kbps these shows are practically unwatchable. [Note that Hulu and many others still don’t allow you to view content outside of the US…but I believe (validated by text on the Hulu site) that its only a matter of time before they ink the legal agreements with the content owners to allow worldwide streaming.]

However there is a new model emerging that allows you to watch TV in HD without any of the breaks & stutters associated with a low bandwidth internet connection. Welcome to the world of video torrents. This when combined with TVRSS makes for a very powerful modern day PVR. Subscribing to a TVRSS feed allows you to get notified every time a new episode of your favourite program is uploaded. The RSS feedreader then picks up the torrent file associated with the program and the bit torrent client downloads the file from several seeds hosting the same file on their PCs/NAS boxes. Your show is downloaded  into your hard drive and will be ready for uninterrupted viewing at your convenience. TVRSS is not restricted to the 200 channels that your cable TV company broadcasts (which was Tivo’s forte) but in effect covers almost all media channels the world over. Here is an interesting article on how to set one up at home.

The recent announcement of the Myka box makes this setup a whole lot easier. I now see devices like Myka unseating Tivo (unless TiVo incorporates these features) and truly breaking the shackles imposed by cable and satllite TV companies.

The internet has changed media distribution forever and there will definitely be a fresh look at business models given the new distribution channel. Note that the internet is a very powerful distribution channel given its ability to target its viewers and collect metrics and viewing patterns when compared to one way broadcast channels.

Will Myka be the new Tivo? We’ll just have to wait and see.

Stay tuned….