UPDATE 7/10: See bottom of this post for a short video discussion on this topic.
=======================================================
The New York Times has a fascinating article on how video on the web has changed. In a nutshell, the article points out that even just a couple of years ago, most videos were very short and often of low quality. Now, some sites report that they are seeing videos uploaded that exceed 30 minutes in length and sometimes even are movie length according to an official of Blip TV.
What caused such a dramatic change?
As with most developments in the information and communications technology sectors, there a number of factors at play. Technology mavens, like Pip Coburn, would argue that it takes time for humans to adapt to new technologies and it often involves changes in living habits that are not always easy. But if the new technologies help solve a problem – or do needed work as Clayton Christiansen of “Innovators’ Dilemma” fame would put it – the often see rapid adoption at some stage.
I think key contributors to this recent change are related to three factors: changes in how people use some technologies; changes in the capabilities of the information technologies themselves; and changes in the broadband platforms that video rides on.
With regard to the first factor – changes in how people use the technology – I remember it was not too long ago that I repeated heard that people will “never watch videos on the PCs” and that “TVs will always be the key technology for video watching”. What appears to be happening to be happening though is that people appear be getting more comfortable in using their PCs and handheld smart phones for video. Laptops are lighter, desk top PCs have “TV sized” screens, and younger folks in particular are simply more comfortable “doing it all on their PCs.”
I think too that the convenience and control factors are a big reason people watch more videos online than they ever have before – and longer video segments as well. While reading traditional media such as newspapers is clearly suffering, people aren’t necessarily getting less news. They are getting more and more of it online according to the Pew Center and other sources. And once you start reading news online or watching video news segments, it is just another step to slip on over to Hulu or some other video entertainment site to entertain yourself. And you can now Twitter with friends or use Instant Messaging to chat about other things or about the programming you are watching. The control and versatility of online viewing of videos is certainly a factor in why people like watching video online.
But what about the technologies and their capabilities? Pew had an interesting slide deck from Lee Rainie a couple of years back showing the typical house going from seven or eight analog devices twenty years ago while today they may have 30 or more devices, all of them digital and virtually all of them capable of communicating with many other devices. These devices often can not only use data or make it useful to consumers, such as through video displays, they can also be used to create data, presentations and videos. Many of these devices are networked, many have media, like memory chips, that can be loaded into PCs and edited or shared, and it would seem that the existence of these many new digital devices has increased the demand for access to content on line.
Further, many devices now are incorporating similar functionalities from different directions. So, cameras increasingly have removable memory chips but also WiFi built into or integrated in the chips themselves. iPods are reportedly going to incorporate cameras and clearly can store lots of video and audio information. The iPod Touch has built in WiFi too. Many cameras now can do video as well as pictures and many have editing features built in. In short, PCs are no longer the only way to create content or communicate.
Clearly, the huge increase in digital devices in the home has driven more usage of all kinds of digital information, including video. What has really helped reinforce all of these trends is the rise of higher capacity, widely available broadband connections. I have written before about how rapidly these networks have spread and how much more capacity there is today than even just a couple of years ago. In some states, like California, half the population can get 10 meg or higher broadband service. Our CTO, D ick Lynch, announced in Barcelona, Spain not too long ago that we would be deploying fourth generation mobile broadband service soon and have it available to 285 million PoPs in just three years (2013). Speeds? Eight megs down, and that is being on the conservative side.
So am I saying that online video viewing will take over for traditional television? Well, despite the fact that we have had television for decades, we still have radio and movies at the theater. So, no I am not saying that. But I am saying that online video, video viewing that is more under the control of and at the time demanded by consumers, has real value and is not just a fad. And with the rapid changes in technology, broadband capacity and consumer creativity and adaptability, online video will grow in importance. It is already proving to be much more of a phenomenon than many pundits thought and evolving in ways that were not anticipated.
While we are adding more capacity and capability to handle video – and while real time streaming is not the only means of viewing video clips and shows – I also believe that the rise of more intensive use of video suggests the networks will need to continue to evolve. The traditional video network was not designed for two-way use. The impact of the trends towards intensive video use will go well beyond the edges of the network (the consumer electronics and the content). In my view, it will require changes in network design too. Today’s video networks are optimized for broadcast. Unicast (e.g., video on demand) is treated as an add-on or overlay. The emerging TV consumption model will render these networks very inefficient. Network designs optimized for extremely high scale unicast traffic will serve this new world much more efficiently.
Networks will need to do more in this new world than what has traditionally been needed for linear TV services. This is because the network will experience much more bursty, random traffic demand than in today’s well-scheduled broadcast environment.
All of this change demonstrates yet again the continuing evolution in our industry and the benefits it provides for consumers. It also demonstrates how hard it is to predict where this change will lead. I have been in the technology business for many years and have frequently heard “That will never overtake this” or “That will never catch on.” We should have learned by now that predicting how the interface between human adaptation and need, technology advancement, and network growth will work is virtually impossible.
=================================================