So much for the innovation...
Skype founders create online television service
Skype founders are Joost in time for online TV plan
Skype founders take TV to Net
Global Internet TV Service by Skype
Right now Google.news shows 278 articles (and counting) with these and similar headlines. All of them are dealing with the recent announcement of Skype founders, Niklas Zennstrm and Janus Friis, that they are going to lunch an internet based TV service they call "Joost". From my reading of a few news articles, what they are offering is to replace your TV screen with a computer screen and your decoder box provided by the cable company by software on their servers. The business model is based on advertisement (means you pay nothing exept for your time and privacy) until they offer a pay-per-view option, and they also promise the service to be piracy-proof (well, that one we'll have to wait and see).
As much as i love Skype and think it was breaking through idea at the time, right now i fail to see the great promise of Joost. Why would people like watching their TV on a computer screen? Does it mean they need to upgrade their computers to have at least 29 inch screen and a decent sound system? Does it mean the computer is moving from the office to the living room? What is the relative advantage of watching commercial based content online, vs. paying a relatively low fee and gaining full control over the content and the settings where one can view it? Today you can buy most of the content that Joost is going to offer on DVD or VoD and it doesn't cost that much (that is assuming you follow the legal way, otherwise it is even less) and you can choose where and when to watch it. One place where watching something in real time worth the effort is sports, but then again comes the question if the computer screen experience worth the $10 for the sports channel on cable? The cable companies start offering bundles of services including TV, phone and internet, so the relative part of paying for the content is probably diminishing even though it is hard to determine. Will people be willing to jeopardize their privacy even more and let also "Joost" follow what they are watching and where they are surfing? Well, the notions of privacy seems to be changing, so maybe the last question has a more obvious answer.
If Joost does go big however, one possible positive outcome from a consumers' point of view may be decrease in pricing of cable TV services. At the same, i think Microsoft's attempt to turn the x-box into a media center by connecting it to the web and actually offering the content, bares the similar, if not greater potential. Anyway, both of them are aiming at the Western, developed countries, which raises a series of additional questions about digital inclusion (divide), but that is for another post.
Even if i am mistaken in my skepticism, and Joost is going to be the next big thing (i.e. people value their privacy, time and limited ability to choose less than few dozens dollars or shekels), i still cannot get rid of the feeling that Joost is the same old thing we all know, just the cover is different (similar to the recent Google-Orange partenership). Unlike Skype that presented an innovative thinking about the technology and people's needs, Joost seems to replicate the old package and just shifting the platform. So much for the innovation...
------------------------
Update, 13:00 - Apparently i am not the only one asking these questions. Take a look here for example (and she has probably different incentives thinking about this things than i do).
3 comments:
I didn't read anything about this yet, but then I get my tech news from blogs :) so my immediate thoughts...
I find the "computer is moving from the office to the living room" comment to be a bit of a null point... You can transfer the skype TV software output to show on any display device in your house! I think the old construct of "computer belongs in office and TV belongs in loungeroom" is really weakening.
While the advantages of Joost in USA may be less obvious, for Australia (where digital TV still barely took off), cable TV is expensive and free-to-air television offers a grand choice of 5 channels (if you're close to civilisation little) I see it could be snapped up... Not to mention other countries/regions where broadband penetrates, but cable TV or broadcast TV signal is either non-existent or really limiting viewer choice...
Using the P2P approach to broadcast television is a cool innovation to my mind. Just because a two technologies existed for a long time and are "the same old thing we all know" -- and you're right P2P is not new and digital TV is passe everywhere except in Oz -- doesn't meant combining them in an innovative way won't have a big impact.
Let's see...
I can see one important advantage of being able to watch TV on your computer - you can get rid of one more thing that takes up space in your apartment, namely of your TV set. So, you know, Joost might be a success in Hong-Kong or become popular with American grad students who live in efficiency apartments :) Anyway, I'm going to try it out!
First, the computer has already moved from the office to the living room. There is TiVo, there is Windows MCE. Every normal set-top box, (including Yes and Hot, ones) is very much a computer with some happy little pinguins inside doing all the work.
Your reasoning about $10 sports channel pretty much applies to a Skype vs normal phone service. A clear trend is that everything goes IP. There is no real reason why phone or TV should have their own wires. And Skype guys want to be first to cut into the pie.
On the other hand, the advantages for a consumer are immense. (That is, if Skype manage to do it in a consumer-friendly way, which was never achieved by anyone but Google.) I would LOVE to have English and Italian sports channels on my computer. On the other hand, they can't have them shared.
I hate Skype and I truely hope they will fail.
Post a Comment