For years people have been saying that they will watch things in HD, that they would never ordinarily watch. In the 12 years I have been involved in Internet Video in one form or another, I have yet to have anyone ever tell me they will watch something just because its on the internet.
Thats not to say people wont surf the net and sample something they otherwise would not watch. Thats what the internet video aggregation sites are all about. Sampling things you never would other wise watch.
One thing is becoming increasingly clear, while more people are “snacking on Internet video“, the real “meal” continues to be TV.
It appears like the Olympics are proving this out and presenting an interesting conclusion, people are starting to define the content they want to watch on each platform. The Platform is the Message to content creators.
Without question, people want to watch big events on their big HDTVs. There is a reason why 30pct of homes and quickly growing now have HDTVs…..they like to watch them. With a 73″ HDTV from Mitsubishi down to about $2200 bucks, its easy to see why and the pricing of all HDTVs continuing to fall, its a trend thats not going to end anytime soon. Watching an event like the Olympics, just about any sporting event and even big shows like American Idol and Dancing with the Stars benefit. ESPN has issued research saying their ratings across the board are up 47 to 50pct every month in HDTV households.
I think the real question of the Olympics isnt “whats the impact of the Internet”, its “whats the impact on viewing of HDTV ?”. If and when NBC releases numbers regarding ratings in HDTV households, I wouldnt be shocked if the numbers are 75pct higher. People with big, beautiful TVs that they spent a lot of money on, want a reason to watch them. This could go down as the year the Olympics reinvigorated TV.
if programmers understand that people will watch different programs on different platforms, we can stop playing the game of trying to replace TV.
Programmers will create content differently for every platform, from cellphone, even to movies. In the movie world , its pretty simple to see that big movies, with big special effects look great and sound great in theaters. Same with 3D. Thats an experience even a 73″ HDTV cant recreate fully
Events look great on HDTVs, whether they are sports, shows or movies.
Quick hits and short clips are great for the internet. Sure some people will watch shows that perform better on other platforms on the net. We all use what we have available when its our only choice. Which is why so much video consumption online is in the office. Its our only choice.
replays and breaking news and anything that helps us kill time are what we will use our MIDS, PDAs, and phones for.
The platform is the message from viewers to content providers.
With the Dems bashing Senator McCain for not being computer literate, the question is raised. Is it a good thing, bad thing or meaningless that the President is computer illiterate.?
I believe that Senator McCain could still be an effective leader and President without being computer literate, but he would be far less effective, and there could be real potential risk in future issues of national security.
If you don’t use computer technology, you have to communicate by phone, meeting or paper. All of which require multi step processes. What could be resolved with a quick Txt message or email, requires an intermediary. Multiplied by untold number of such events on a daily basis, and there is a question of productivity. Does a more productive candidate make for a better President ?
On the same subject, some would argue that by using any form of messaging, there is the opportunity for hacking. My response: If they can hack the President’s messaging, they can hack his phone and the devices of all of those around him who do use technology. Others would argue that it leaves a paper trail, which Presidents would prefer not to do. I would argue, that this issue has been addressed many times, making it a non issue.
My personal fear about a non computer literate President comes down to national security. I dont care whether or not he surfs the internet, uses social networking , reads blogs, listens to podcasts, prefers Mac or Windows or knows how to download. All of that is easy enough to grasp without actually doing it yourself.
National Security is something completely different.
No candidate is going to fully understand all the technology involved in protecting the country on our digital front. They aren’t going to understand the who, whats, hows and where of what is involved in protecting everything digital in this country. This country is already under continous attacks from hackers around the world. So its not a new issue.
However,I do think a candidate that has not adopted any level of digital lifestyle will have a harder time understanding the relative importance of protecting digital connectivity and assets vs physical assets.
It will be hard for him to understand what happens to US productivity when US connectivity assets are put at risk or not well protected.
It may be hard for him to understand the impact of doing the same to an opposing developed country we may find ourselves at odds with. That there may be more value in a digital assault than a traditional military one.
While our current conflicts are with those short of electricity, let alone technology, that will not always be the case. China and Russia have the power to pose a greater threat than anything we are fighting today.
It may be hard for him to understand the impact of the corruption of data on the viability of our financial system. That bad data being introduced into our banking system could create a far greater nightmare than a Russian warship off the coast of Alaska. That our ability to introduce misinformation into an enemy superpower financial system could hurt them worse than one more missile pointed their way.
More importantly, it may be more difficult for him to grasp that hacking supremecy could instill a greater fear in a developed country than more potent weaponry. Taking down, and keeping down a financial system by a hacker can revert a country from developed to barbaric in weeks.
The Commander in Chief of our great country will have to make choices on where to deploy and invest in weapons, hard assets and most importantly, intellectual capital. If heaven forbid, a decision has to be made as to which is more important, protecting a data center or a factory. Will Senator McCain fully understand the importance of one vs the other ? Should investments be made in bombers or software ?
In our current conflicts we have been short of intellectual capital in the form of, among other things, language translators. Could we find ourselves in future conflicts short of the technological intellectual property needed ?
Will either candidate understand the need to build digital infrastructure around the world that can give us pre emptive and reactive support for the digital battles that will inevitably be fought ? That a inpenetrable NATO datacenter fully peered and connected can be more important than an airstrip ? That protecting fiber can be as important as protecting a pipeline ? That a batallions of hackers, platooned around the world, can create the ultimate Shock and Awe ?
I’m not saying that Senator McCain can’t overcome these issues. Hiring the right technical advisors won’t be easy, but its certainly attainable. Hopefully, in response to the democrats assertations, he will let us know who his advisors are and how they feel about these issues.
Only then will I personally be able to overcome the base issue. If he personally feels that technology is not important to his way of life, he may assign the same relative importance to it in his decision making as Commander in Chief. That could impact our national security.
(Cross-posted from ChatterBox blog)
I have used a Palm for a number of years: Palm IIIe, Zire 71, Treo 600, Treo 650, and currently my Treo 700p -- and love smartphones.
But I have used Apple computers for even longer -- Apple IIe, IIGS, Mac Powerbook G3 and most recently my 24" iMac -- so I was naturally intrigued by the iPhone.
Three factors made this a relevant time for me to consider switching to the iPhone: 1) the new iPhone 3G release, 2) my wife's mobile phone was falling slowly towards its demise and my Treo 700p is on the older side, and 3) we have both fulfilled our contract so there's no penalty fee for switching.
And if you know your research on word of mouth you know that conditions of higher risk and uncertainty are fertile grounds for WOM and information-seeking behavior. This was true for me. Everyone I see who has an iPhone I've talked to and I've asked about their experiences with it. I watched the Steve Jobs keynote when the new iPhone was released, and have read a number of online ratings and reviews from lay and professional reviewers.
So, why haven't I switched?
First of all, let's pause for a second because most research on persuasion and influence focuses on change, not maintenance, of existing behaviors.(A point I learned especially well in grad school with my advisor, Dr. Steve Duck, who often noted that research on personal relationship tended to focus more on relationship change rather than sustaining or maintaining relationships).
But there's a lot of insight we can learn by focusing on why things DON'T change, just as much as why things DO change (and perhaps more so).
Why I'm tempted to switch to the iPhone:
1) Sleek interface
2) The promise (but not necessarily reality) of a seamless experience with my Mac via MobileMe
3) App Store
4) Larger screen
5) Better music, video, and photo experience
But why didn't I switch?
1) Mobile phone network. I don't like being forced to switch from Verizon to AT&T.
2) I have a lot of money invested in software and peripherals for my Treo. Dictionaries, eReader Pro, Agendus, Clock Wireless, Docs to Go, PDA Net, Volume Care, Missing Sync, and games like Scrabble and Monopoly, expansion cards, sync cables, chargers, extra battery, etc.
3) Replaceable battery. It bothers me that you can't replace the battery in the iPhone.
4) I can use my Treo to tether to my laptop to get an internet connection (using PDA Net).
5) Developers are still programming for Treo, such as the TypePad and Facebook apps, so I feel I'm still current.
6) I use iTunes but I don't like being bound to it. I like that I can load my own MP3s (I still buy old school CDs so I can rip them and use them in both iTunes and on my Treo).
7) Identity reasons. I like to think I make autonomous decisions (though I know this is often a pleasant fiction I tell myself) and am not interested in switching just because something is shiny and new. Plus, my Treo 700p still works great and there's some pride in using it until it dies (though note this is near last on my list and didn't stop me in anyway from switching from the 600 and 650, both of which I sold on eBay in order to upgrade).
8) It seemed a lot of money for both me and my wife to switch to new iPhones. We save money being on the same network so our decision is going to be a mutual one.
So my wife and I decided to stay put -- for relational reasons having to do with the fact that we are in it together, functional reasons, identity, and financial reasons. And she just ended up buying a Palm Centro.
More reason to stay put, for now!