# In Demand / Video on Demand



## vector1701 (Nov 15, 2004)

Love him or hate him, Howard Stern announced that he will have a daily tv show through the "In-Demand" service on most cable systems throughout the county. 
http://www.indemand.com/HSOD/ (It is interesting that the press release says "...will be available from multiple television service providers" not cable providers.

However, this at current time, does not include DTV or Dish users since there in so Video-on-Demand for Sat.

Question 1...Is Video on Demand possible via satellite?

Q2 - Will the Series 2 support it?

Q3 - Will the R15 support it?

Q4 - Does the In Demand service (http://www.indemand.com/) have any deals with DTV?

Also, which makes things more interesting is JMOAK's post today about the latest DTV conf call today.

Quoting him
"The DIRECTV Group, Inc. Earnings Conference Call (Q2 2005)
Thu, Aug 4, 2005, 11:00 am Eastern

Interesting tidbits:

"Early October" release date for the R15. Sounds like a big push on vod."

Q5 - Any verification of this?

I searched the In Demand site and found nothing refferring to Satellite.


----------



## 23goober23 (Jan 19, 2005)

http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/aboutus/headline.dsp?id=06_29_2005B this will maybe help a lil bit....


----------



## vector1701 (Nov 15, 2004)

Looks like DTV wants to be a partner, but wants a better deal.....so I would think In Demand would be available in the future....

Thoughts?


----------



## SurfPine (Dec 3, 2004)

vector1701 said:


> Question 1...Is Video on Demand possible via satellite?


No, not with the current satellite technology. There is no "reasonable" backward communication path for VCR type functionality on satellite. Creating a dial-up session for backwards communication is unreasonable and slow.

This technology set is what cable MSO's have been counting on to lead them into the future. Cable knows it will cost satellite a lot of money to update their current technology to have bi-directional communication.

Now, will InDemand sell content to satellite for broadcast style delivery? Unknown but I bet they fight it all the way.


----------



## cmtar (Jan 26, 2005)

VOD is going to Directv. I thought I read somewhere that the harddrive on the R15 will be 160gb or something like that and 100gb for the user and 60gb for VOD. Did i read this on this forum or dream it lol...


----------



## SurfPine (Dec 3, 2004)

cmtar said:


> VOD is going to Directv. I thought I read somewhere that the harddrive on the R15 will be 160gb or something like that and 100gb for the user and 60gb for VOD. Did i read this on this forum or dream it lol...


What does a harddrive have to do with VOD? A harddrive allows for PVR type functionality. VOD allows a user to browse content, start it when THEY want, pause, fast forward, rewind, stop, choose another piece of content. All content for VOD is maintained on a Headend server, not your STB or PVR device. With PVR, you have to wait until the content has been broadcast via a time based event.


----------



## cmtar (Jan 26, 2005)

SurfPine said:


> What does a harddrive have to do with VOD? A harddrive allows for PVR type functionality. VOD allows a user to browse content, start it when THEY want, pause, fast forward, rewind, stop, choose another piece of content. All content for VOD is maintained on a Headend server, not your STB or PVR device. With PVR, you have to wait until the content has been broadcast via a time based event.


Im just going by what I read


----------



## SurfPine (Dec 3, 2004)

cmtar said:


> Im just going by what I read


Understood. I work in the industry and have dealt with this type of technology for the last 5 years. Companies always try to undermine their competitors by using catchy phrases. For instance, On Demand was catchy but it was just pay per view model used on a time based event. There was nothing demand about it.


----------



## FlWingNut (Mar 4, 2005)

SurfPine said:


> What does a harddrive have to do with VOD? A harddrive allows for PVR type functionality. VOD allows a user to browse content, start it when THEY want, pause, fast forward, rewind, stop, choose another piece of content. All content for VOD is maintained on a Headend server, not your STB or PVR device. With PVR, you have to wait until the content has been broadcast via a time based event.


There is a thread somewhere here about Rupert setting aside a portion of the hd for VOD. It would work this way -- all possible VOD material is sent overnight (like Showcases and Yellow Star stuff), then it appears on a menu. You choose what you want, access card records it -- like PPV. So VOD IS possible with D*


----------



## SurfPine (Dec 3, 2004)

FlWingNut said:


> You choose what you want, access card *records it* -- like PPV. So VOD IS possible with D*


You said it yourself. This is not Video On Demand. VOD is streaming video from a centralized server over a transport. I can choose a piece of content and then immediately fast forward through the entire content. If enabled, I could skip ahead to parts of the content. You do not have to wait for the content to be downloaded to your system to access it. See the difference. VOD enables the user to be in full control. The system you reference still requires a data dump. Once the content exists on your DVR, then you can do as you want with it. 60GB storage? Our servers currently carry TBs of storage.

Eventually, broadcast will slowly disappear and be replaced by the model of content being available for you to view when you want. The content libraries will become much larger than is currently available today. You will be able to watch what you want when you want it.


----------



## FlWingNut (Mar 4, 2005)

SurfPine said:


> You said it yourself. This is not Video On Demand. VOD is streaming video from a centralized server over a transport. I can choose a piece of content and then immediately fast forward through the entire content. If enabled, I could skip ahead to parts of the content. You do not have to wait for the content to be downloaded to your system to access it. See the difference. VOD enables the user to be in full control. The system you reference still requires a data dump. Once the content exists on your DVR, then you can do as you want with it. 60GB storage? Our servers currently carry TBs of storage.
> 
> Eventually, broadcast will slowly disappear and be replaced by the model of content being available for you to view when you want. The content libraries will become much larger than is currently available today. You will be able to watch what you want when you want it.


So how is my example not VOD? It's "Video" and you can access it "On Demand." right? Whether it comes from a central server or dumped on your hardrive -- what difference does it make? You still get the same content, and access it when you want it. From what I understand, the new system doesn't take any recording time from our recording area (like the current Showcases), but, no you can't "do as you want with it." It would, as I understand it, delete itself if not purchased by a certain date and be replaced with another offering. It's not that big a deal to do. And, sorry, but broadcast will not "slowly disappear." Not as long as Congress, the NAB and the big media companies are around. Broadcast may morph into something unlike its current model, but it will never disappear. Phone companies are a good example of this -- even with the explosion of wireless technology and broadband phone service, we still have land lines, right?


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

Two points:

1. FlWingNut is trying to say there will be terrabytes (and beyond) of shows, not a few gigabytes that D* puts on your hard drive. It will take a true 2-way communication for D* to compete with the cables for this service.

2. I think there is a second equally important part of that news release that you all are missing - the pricing structure. I believe there is some FCC reg that says anything broadcast using a satellite transmission as part of the delivery system must be offered to the satellite broadcasters as well as cable companies (i.e. a Comcast sporting event that is delivered via fiber does not have to be offered to D* or Echostar).

In this case, the cable companies need the subscribers to have certain equipment just like D* would. The cable requirement is that the customer have digital and HD. However, they changed their pricing model and said digital. So, that means they want to charge D* for all of their millions of customers since everyone meets that qualification instead of the few hundred thousand who have hd receivers.

This is a very significant issue for us as viewers because if this is allowed to stand, the cable companies could force us to pay more for some service we want to watch vs their own companies. 

This is exactly what Microsoft did when pc mfgs first delivered Windows with their computers. (If you'll recall when pc's first came out, you had to buy the OS and applications and install them yourself). The pricing structure was written so that a pc mfg had to pay a royalty of $40 to MS even if the pc didn't have Windows on it. Mfg's liked Windows, because there were lots of applications and the customer could start using the machine right out of the box. Only IBM with it's superior OS2 was able to keep marketing a pc with your choice of OS. But even they lost in the end and MS ended up controlling the market - not because of a superior product (far from it), but because of pricing.

This extra fee the cable companies would get could stifle competition (and innovation) much the same that MS did is the OS marketplace.


----------



## SurfPine (Dec 3, 2004)

I will agree that D* does have an ingenious method they seem to want to invoke that will allow them to create a mock-up version of VOD. I am curious though on how the backwards communication will work to get the preferred content uploaded to the DVR device. I was wrong when I stated 60GB because I saw something that actually said 80GB to begin with. I do understand that this will come from a larger library that will hold TB+ of content.

Like it or not, Demand Media will be the wave of the future and yes, Broadcast will be dieing out. Not completely though because of Sporting and other live event broadcasts. It is all about maximizing bandwidth and putting the user in control.

But, believe me when I say that I hope satellite gets true 2-way communication because that will open the door for a lot of opportunities. Our systems currently can only go where true 2-way communication exists. So we are in the cable MSO's and Telco space. Now, if satellite would just require DSL, then...


----------



## jmoak (Jun 20, 2000)

The new dtv dvrs are reported to have 40 to 60 gig of space reserved for vod.

Over time, a number of movies, specials, concerts and the like are downloaded to this reserved space.

Once each video has completed downloading to the reserved space, it appears in the "VOD Menu".

The video downloads occur in the background or when your not using your dvr and do not appear in the "VOD Menu" until they have completely downloaded and are ready to purchase.

They should be able to store from 30 to 40 videos in the reported 60gig of reserved space. You most likely won't get to choose what's delivered in the directv model. It'll be what they think will be the most popular. (not exactly "TV Your Way", is it?)

Granted, it's not "Terrabytes" of content, but allbeit limited, it _is_ vod.


----------



## Hodaka (Mar 12, 2005)

VOD doesn't necessarily mean unlimited choices.. as jmoak said, you'll be limited to what DirecTV pushes out. This is basically VOD with push technology. Your DVR becomes the VOD server..


----------



## smark (Nov 20, 2002)

But you are still waiting. So it's not "on demand". It's nice that they try and confuse the rubes though.


----------



## jmoak (Jun 20, 2000)

So if my cable company does not have the movie I want to see available today are they mistakenly calling their service "on demand" as well? Are they also guilty of confusing the rubes?

Maybe the perceived definition of "on demand" is where the fault is.


----------



## SurfPine (Dec 3, 2004)

Curious about D* and the standard they use for content. Does D* use mpeg2 or are they using mpeg4 for SD and HD content?

Also, does anyone know what bit rate is being used for SD and HD?

Will this new DVR allow for HD "VOD"


----------



## SurfPine (Dec 3, 2004)

jmoak said:


> So if my cable company does not have the movie I want to see available today are they mistakenly calling their service "on demand" as well? Are they also guilty of confusing the rubes?


You are talking about a VAST difference in storage capacity. TB+ vers. < 100GB.

Now throw HD into that mix at 19.2mbps and you have some huge files on mpeg2. Good luck with lots of content. There is a difference between the two technologies.


----------



## jmoak (Jun 20, 2000)

SurfPine said:


> You are talking about a VAST difference in storage capacity. TB+ vers. < 100GB.
> 
> Now throw HD into that mix at 19.2mbps and you have some huge files on mpeg2. Good luck with lots of content. There is a difference between the two technologies.


A "VAST" difference is an understatement! It's more like the difference between a cup of water and the atlantic ocean.

In today's directv vod model, there will be no where near "lots of content". Not by a long shot. Luck has nothing to do with it.

The storage capacity *IS* the difference.

Don't get me wrong here, guys. I'm not a big fan of "On Demand". It's just simply that cable has a much better offering in this model.

If your tastes are exactly the same as the guys that choose what content is on the cable servers, or pushed quietly to your dvr, it can truly be seen as "On Demand". .... as long as your tastes never vary from what's offered.

The cable offering has a better chance of actually being "On Demand" for more customers due to the sheer storage space they can take advantage of.

But for those who's tastes vary from the norm, they're "still waiting".

The sheer number of those "still waiting" is going to quite high for those trying to use the directv vod model. Cable will have their "still waiting" customers as well, but _no where near_ as many.

One thing is true though, cable is light years closer than directv to actually being "On Demand".


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Hodaka said:


> ...This is basically VOD with push technology. Your DVR becomes the VOD server..


Right.

There are two models for VOD. One of them is a real-time (and possibly faster than real time) individual stream from headend/uplink to individual STBs. In most cases this also records to a local HD for Tivo-like trick play features (pause, rewind, etc.). There are VOD servers that can output up to 3000 separate streams at a time.

The other model pushes content to a local HD, and choices are limited to whatever has been push-downloaded before the fact. It can be enhanced by using Tivo-like fuzzy logic (the same way "suggestions" learns your preferences) so that it can make educated guesses about what you might want to watch. Obviously, this is not quite as VOD-like as true VOD, but they still call it VOD, just like cable calls a certain service that carries 85% analog channels "digital cable". It's a quasi-VOD, actually, and not much of a step up from the basic PVR model of "VOD", except that the content is predicted by the vendor and delivered, rather than recorded by the sub from a fixed schedule. Obviously the more bandwidth and drive capacity, the more this can mirror true VOD.

DBS needs to go to MPEG-4 before they can do either of these approaches, or a mix of the two, successfully, and is probably more of the reason they are moving there than the need to carry HD channels. Tivo is great, but whether you accept this or not, it is only a stopgap between watching TV live on the networks' schedule and VOD.

I've been watching this trend for a while (I lost 34 grand in stocks betting on a company who was trying to push movies overnight to a STB recorder back in 1987.  ). The lesson there was that a good idea is actually a bad idea if the timing isn't right.


----------



## Hodaka (Mar 12, 2005)

smark said:


> But you are still waiting. So it's not "on demand". It's nice that they try and confuse the rubes though.


You're not waiting, because the content won't even show as available until it arrives on your DVR.. so you can't pick something that isn't even there.. at least that's my understanding of how such a service will work..

in it's purest form, VOD is simply you being able to pick from a list of movies at any time. That's it. There are no guarantees on how many items you'll have to pick from or that if you're suddenly craving xxxxxx that it will be one of your choices.

In an ideal situation, every movie ever made would be available at any time.. but while a nice idea, I doubt any company has the ability to provide such a service now. Some companies, like cable services, may be able to offer localized servers with more content than satellite, and satellite may have to push to a "server" in your house (your DVR), but they're still both VOD... you select it and you get it immediately (no waiting for select showtimes) and you can generally pause, rw, ff, etc.


----------



## SurfPine (Dec 3, 2004)

jmoak said:


> The storage capacity *IS* the difference.


Not quite. Although this is the difference end users will notice the most, there is still the difference between actual streaming video and a data dump approach that is left to limited storage capacity. My opinion is that streaming media data is an approach that will outlast media data dump technology. It allows for access to much larger library stores. Again, my opinion but this is why I believe satellite will have to build affordable true two-way communication into their systems.

At what is considered an industry standard in the cable world, SD content is delivered at 3.75mbps, HD at 19.2mbps (and may be dropped to 15mbps in certain locals). For a 90 minute movie, that can equate to somewhere around 3GB for 3.75mbps encoded content to mpeg2. You can do the math for <100GB storage.



TyroneShoes said:


> One of them is a real-time (and possibly faster than real time) individual stream from headend/uplink to individual STBs. In most cases this also records to a local HD for Tivo-like trick play features (pause, rewind, etc.). There are VOD servers that can output up to 3000 separate streams at a time.


Real time, yes. The trick play, FF, FFF, RW, FRW, Pause, Stop, Jump, come from creating additional files that identify I-frames within the mpg and allow for "trick play".

Server based VOD is 100% independent of DVR capability. It does work on SA and Moto STB that have DVR capability but is not required. DVR is also not required for trick play hence the reason I keep mentioning true two-way communication. Two-way communication is the method trick play is achieved.

Our servers can dwarf 3000 simultaneous streams. They are capable of numbers well beyond the equipment you may be referring to and our servers have had this capability for at least 3 years. Besides, the 3000 number you are referring to is not the complete way to calculate independent sessions for a server. You need to account for the bit rate of the content played to come up with the amount of streams available from the server.


----------



## akaye (Jan 3, 2004)

Dish Network already claims to offer Video On Demand, AS LONG AS YOU HAVE THEIR DVR, so I assume it is the same push model as described. You folk who are claiming that is it is "not really video on demand" are simply holding your definition in your mind and claiming that this is not what you think it should be to be worthy of the name. It's not the same kind of video on demand that cable offers, and it clearly offers less content then the cable-type system, but local caching of content does not change the basic functionality. Until there is some court case establishing that this locally cached content model can't be called "Video on Demand", then it can be.


----------



## Hodaka (Mar 12, 2005)

With all the VOD cached locally, you'd think they'd worry hackers would figure out how to get access to it all without paying.. then again, directv has learned more than they've probably ever wanted to know about people stealing service and probably have a few tricks up their sleeves..


----------



## SurfPine (Dec 3, 2004)

akaye said:


> Dish Network already claims to offer Video On Demand, AS LONG AS YOU HAVE THEIR DVR, so I assume it is the same push model as described. You folk who are claiming that is it is "not really video on demand" are simply holding your definition in your mind and claiming that this is not what you think it should be to be worthy of the name. It's not the same kind of video on demand that cable offers, and it clearly offers less content then the cable-type system, but local caching of content does not change the basic functionality. Until there is some court case establishing that this locally cached content model can't be called "Video on Demand", then it can be.


Thank you for your opinion


----------



## beanpoppa (Jan 7, 2004)

Everyone is focusing on the storage required and available at the receiving end and at the central library. But what about the bandwidth required and and available for the transmission? With each node (copper system downstream of a fiber termination node) on a cable network having been 50-2000 customers, that's a lot of people sharing the bandwidth. At 8pm, when 25% of those customers sit down to pull up the VoD movie that they want to watch at 3mbps (SD) or 15mbps (HD). For 200 homes, that's 600mbps on a single coax line. I think that's outside the capability. Add to that all of the people using their broadband Internet, and homes where Billy is upstairs watching as separate program on his TV in his room...

I think the VoD is working ok today, with what amounts to a limited usage base. But I don't see how it could scale well without a DRASTIC change in the physical plant. (fiber to the home, etc) Broadcast will be around for a long time to come.


----------



## Hodaka (Mar 12, 2005)

SurfPine said:


> Thank you for your opinion


no, he's right and saying what I said. The amount of data available does not define VOD. VOD is exactly what it is named.. you request video at any time and it's there. This is true whether it is a single show that is available or 5000 shows available. If you request a video and have to wait for some reason, it's not VOD. If you have to pick a video on the broadcaster's schedule, it's not VOD..

now, no one said that a VOD service that only offers one show is going to be good or be something people pay for, but I believe directv will offer something that is acceptable to many even if it can't offer an unlimited choice of showings..


----------



## SurfPine (Dec 3, 2004)

Hodaka said:


> no, he's right and saying what I said. The amount of data available does not define VOD. VOD is exactly what it is named..


I don't care.

First off, I find it rather rude that someone posts "information" that is clearly intended to put other people down. I was only responding to mis-information as I know it. I do work in the industry. [MyRudeRant]If un-named poster would have taken the time to read the entire thread, un-named poster would have read that I do think the satellite method is very ingenious given their current infrastructure of not having true two-way communication.[/MyRudeRant]

Done!


----------



## cmtar (Jan 26, 2005)

SurfPine said:


> Done!


Or is it......................


----------



## mulscully (May 31, 2003)

if you want 2 way communication, enable the usb ports, and utilize a broadband connection to directv. I had in-demand with comcast. It "seems" (I am careful here 'cause I really don't know) that once I selected a show, it dumped it to the local machine 'cause it would show up in saved shows. 

Indemand with sat could work similar to when you dump from 1 tivo to another only get the data faster with sat.

Oh BTW I tried getting a show using in-demand and I got a please wait a minute sign that lasted from about 30-40 seconds (while it dl'ed maybe??)


----------



## DallasFlier (Jan 23, 2003)

Hodaka said:


> no, he's right and saying what I said. The amount of data available does not define VOD. VOD is exactly what it is named..





SurfPine said:


> I don't care.


That has become obvious.



SurfPine said:


> First off, I find it rather rude that someone posts "information" that is clearly intended to put other people down. I was only responding to mis-information as I know it.


No, you were responding and *providing* misinformation. Rather, or to be more specific, you were providing and parroting the cable industry's marketing line for THEIR VOD.

If someone disagrees with you and refuses to accept your subjective position, they're rude? I think not.



SurfPine said:


> I do work in the industry.


Yep, and just as someone at Ford works in the automotive industry, their position on Ford vs GM would not be objective, nor does working at Ford give them the right to call anyone who disagrees with their assertions about GM "wrong" and "rude."

If "Video on Demand" or "VOD" were trademarks of the cable industry, then the cable industry's (and your) definition would rule. They're not - I checked several cable company websites and they don't even refer to the service as "Video on Demand", let alone trademark the term. Therefore, the words "video on demand" mean exactly what they say - video - on demand. Which is exactly what the other posters that you've labeled "rude" have been trying to say. Your opinion notwithstanding, they are NOT supplying "misinformation."


----------



## beanpoppa (Jan 7, 2004)

Two-way communication is only half of the problem. The second problem is getting the individualized content to the user. DirecTV has a limited number of transponders- They can offer on the order of hundreds of simultaneous video streams. They have 15 million customers. How could they deliver a unique stream to even a small percentage of their customers simultaneously? If you're talking about using the USB/Internet connection to do the streaming as well, then there isn't enough bandwidth there. DSL/Broadband gives the end user between 768k and 3Mbps. That's not enough for even an SDTV stream. And that's only the connection between the user and the ISP. It doesn't take into account bottlenecks within the ISP's network, or through the Internet.



mulscully said:


> if you want 2 way communication, enable the usb ports, and utilize a broadband connection to directv. I had in-demand with comcast. It "seems" (I am careful here 'cause I really don't know) that once I selected a show, it dumped it to the local machine 'cause it would show up in saved shows.
> 
> Indemand with sat could work similar to when you dump from 1 tivo to another only get the data faster with sat.
> 
> Oh BTW I tried getting a show using in-demand and I got a please wait a minute sign that lasted from about 30-40 seconds (while it dl'ed maybe??)


----------



## Hodaka (Mar 12, 2005)

beanpoppa said:


> Two-way communication is only half of the problem. The second problem is getting the individualized content to the user. DirecTV has a limited number of transponders- They can offer on the order of hundreds of simultaneous video streams. They have 15 million customers. How could they deliver a unique stream to even a small percentage of their customers simultaneously? If you're talking about using the USB/Internet connection to do the streaming as well, then there isn't enough bandwidth there. DSL/Broadband gives the end user between 768k and 3Mbps. That's not enough for even an SDTV stream. And that's only the connection between the user and the ISP. It doesn't take into account bottlenecks within the ISP's network, or through the Internet.


and that's why i don't see things going too far beyond the localized approach from satellite providers. It's a problem we won't see worked out for a long, long time, if ever..

local cable companies can throw out new servers to balance load as needed. The same can't be said for satellites.


----------



## mulscully (May 31, 2003)

i really didn't meadn use the usb port for dl, only up'ling of data.. And I don't mean to be promoting in-demand on sat... I really think that in-demand is crap... I had both in-demand (comcast) and dtivo.. give me dtivo any day.....

Give me a 24 hour channel that runs the indemand content and I will choose my own stuff to record...


----------



## vector1701 (Nov 15, 2004)

It would be nice for DTV to offer an "In Demand" channel on a loop just like regular PPV. I just want to see Howard Stern without getting cable.


----------



## DallasFlier (Jan 23, 2003)

Hodaka said:


> local cable companies can throw out new servers to balance load as needed. The same can't be said for satellites.


True - but as beanpoppa pointed out before, there are bandwidth problems not just for satellite, but for cable too. Its easy to throw out more servers, its not easy to figure out what to do when 200 people in a neighborhood on the same shared cable line are trying to use VOD, along with the load from high speed internet which is also carried on that same cable, not to mention the basic cable channels themselves.


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

DirecTv has a plan to deliver VOD via the Ka satellite platform (the Spaceway satellites). They will dedicate one or two transponders to delivery of VOD content. That, combined with the frequency hopping abilities of the Ka satellites, would allow them to download a full length motion picture in HD in about 10 minutes. With some judicious bandwidth allocation and transmitting the content in pieces, they could offer about 100 VOD offerings and deliver them to viewers nearly instantaneously.


----------



## craigo (Apr 6, 2004)

Any updated news if DTV will be carrying iN Demand any time soon?


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

vector1701 said:


> Quoting him
> "The DIRECTV Group, Inc. Earnings Conference Call (Q2 2005)
> Thu, Aug 4, 2005, 11:00 am Eastern
> 
> ...


The OTHER DVR was released but not in early October and now in March it is still very buggy and the VOD part of "My VOD" has not been activated.

And the VOD function on the OTHER DVR is currently all SMOKE AND MIRRORS, because true VOD is like having a huge DVR somewhere else with thousands of video selections that you can choose to play instantly, pause, fast forward, and reverse.

Currently the plan for the VOD part of the OTHER DVR is to have it record video selections that have been made by someone else to a 60GB part of the hard drive so you can come along later and select them for viewing. Most of those selections are currently planned to be PPV selections or movies. It functions like the SHOWCASES part of a TiVo, but with a larger amount of video that you might want to watch.

In the case of digital cable, even with just a standard $1.95 per month digital STB, I have currently have thousands of hours of VOD selections I can choose from, with about 200 hundred hours of free VOD selections that change from month to month. They play just like a recording on a DVR, with all of the standard functions, like pause, FF, and REV, etc.

True VOD is never going to be available via a satellite only connection, which is one reason Murdoch is current and has been buying up broadband like crazy this past year.

Again, true VOD is never going to be available via a satellite only connection, because it will never have the bandwidth, never, it is a physics problem.

Additional Edit:

I added this information because of the post just added below.

Murdoch plans on doing a somewhat better VOD via a broadband connection in the future, which is why he is investing about a billion in broadband.


----------



## goony (Nov 20, 2003)

akaye said:


> Dish Network already claims to offer Video On Demand, AS LONG AS YOU HAVE THEIR DVR, so I assume it is the same push model as described. You folk who are claiming that is it is "not really video on demand" are simply holding your definition in your mind and claiming that this is not what you think it should be to be worthy of the name.


AFAIK, Dish Network were the goons that hijacked this term... it now has a double meaning.

Think of it as a restaurant - you can 'demand' (and immediately receive) anything you want as long as it is already made. The cableco will have a much bigger menu of items ready (giant storage), the satellite DVR will have a tiny menu (a portion of your hard drive) in comparison.

As a satellite DVR owner, someday you may get to request something that's not on the menu but it will take a l-o-n-g time to get it to your box. (This is assuming that they someday do a 'tricklecast' to get shows to your DVR, but it doesn't seem feasable to me - if everyone that had a satellite DVR requested a show it might be weeks before the requested download would finish, so it's very impractical.)

I have no interest in the DBS version of VOD and resent their taking up a portion of a hard drive to implement.


----------

