Could the Growth Of Internet TV Be Slowed By Bandwidth Capping?

bandwidth caps Could the Growth Of Internet TV Be Slowed By Bandwidth Capping? A leading market research company iSuppli, has said that AT&T’s recent decision to setup Capping Its Bandwidth and charge an extra fees for the heavy data usage on wireless devices could present a barrier to upcoming competition from Internet TV.

AT&T stopped its phone plan which has allowed subscribers unlimited Internet access. AT&T is seeking to limit the heavy data usage of smart phones such as Apple iPhone, and the iPad tablet. iSuppli has said that “The caps will make it difficult for any high-quality streaming application hoping to become a true TV substitute to get off the ground without the support of wireless operators”.

“By implementing caps now that don’t impinge on the way subscribers use the Internet today, cable and telco operators are able to create for themselves an advantageous situation,” William Kidd, director and principal analyst for financial services at iSuppli, said. “Under these circumstances, emerging media competitors must work more directly with the network owners before getting their services off the ground—as opposed to around them, as they may have previously hoped.”

New broadband subscribers around the world are expected to rise by 63.5 million in 2010, thats a rise of 8.4% when compared to a additional subscribers of around 58.5 million in 2009, this confirms the ongoing strengths of the broadband access market.

“Most of the emerging streaming Internet models are mistaken in postulating that they could displace, over time, traditional television and movie delivery mechanisms without paying for related network costs,” Kidd said. “However, such a theory is directly at odds with the ambitions of cable and satellite TV operators, which increasingly are unwilling to provide heavy data access through their networks for free especially if a way can be found to monetize ongoing data traffic into viable revenue streams.”

Although the broadband caps help to correctly price an access service for the small percentage of subscribers that take up a disproportionate share of network traffic usually through their heavy use of data streaming media presents unknown risks.

The vast majority of data subscribers on a broadband network, caps will only become relevant if users viewed low quality streaming media say, a 200kbps stream on a wireless device for three hours, or if a standard def TV signal on a wired network was streamed for approximately 25 hours. By the same token, streaming a high-definition TV signal could put a user in cap trouble in just 7 hours on the wired network of Comcast., the largest U.S. cable operator and Internet service provider for the home.

Additionally, consumers who consider the Internet as a true substitute for their big-screen TV, content would need to be comparable in both technical quality and entertainment value. And to achieve the same level of value, such content necessarily would be extremely high in bandwidth.

Incoming TV searches:

smart tv net bandwidth

Related posts:

  1. TV Broadcasters Rush To Launch Apps For The iPad
  2. BBC iPlayer Requests Gets A Big Boost From The World Cup
  3. Hulu Plus Makes Inital Steps To Move Away From The PC
  4. iRecord Pro Records TV Without A PC To iPad, iPhone 4 and iOS 4
  5. Orange Looking To Join Project Canvas

Line Break

Author: delboy (300 Articles) - See All Posts By

Web designer and movie watcher geek

6 Responses to “Could the Growth Of Internet TV Be Slowed By Bandwidth Capping?”

  1. Capping could possibly slow the adoption of internet TV, but it also presents a unique opportunity for independent ISP’s looking to make their mark.

    Independant ISP’s, such as Teksavvy in Canada can provide capped service with fairly higher caps than incumbent ISP’s for less cost, and unlimited (no caps) for reasonable cost.

    I want internet TV, and as soon as Teksavvy is serving in Ottawa, I’ll be switching away from Rogers, and taking a fair number of their customers with me. I’ve been pro-active in this. Everyone I know has expressed a hatred for their cable or DSL provider.

  2. “without paying for related network costs”. This person has it completely backwards. The customer pays their internet provider for the network costs. The customer expects to get something out of it. Google, Netflix, Hulu…all of these things provide content that drives people to pay for internet access. If anything, the ISPs should be paying Google for the services that drive customers in to ISPs greedy arms. The current argument that services like Google aren’t paying for their pipes is as bogus as complaining that HBO isn’t paying for the pipe.

  3. [...] AT&T stopped its phone plan which has allowed subscribers unlimited Internet access. AT&T is seeking to limit the heavy data usage of smart phones such as Apple iPhone, and the iPad tablet. iSuppli has said that “The caps will make it difficult for any high-quality streaming application hoping to become a true TV substitute to get off the ground without the support of wireless operators”. View the Original article [...]

  4. I found an article from Australia complaining about the caps…They have 250GB caps while I have a 60GB cap with Shaw using High Speed access. Why are our caps so low? Same reason our books and magazines are more expensive than American publications. We are just willing to pay more and suck it up.

  5. [...] how much data can be used by DSL and U-Verse customers, with a limit between 150-250GB per month. Similar measures have also been introduced by [...]

  6. [...] the ugly side of streaming cannot be ignored. Internet service providers are all introducing bandwidth capping as they struggle coping with the massive data demands that streaming brings. Can EyeIO answer [...]

Leave a Reply