But will they make sure they have the capacity first?

[Rik]

El Reg reports that:

British Telecom will change the bulk of its broadband network to use multicast routers as from next year – this will mean that full IPTV services, using quality of service protocols, could then be launched for the first time on the BT network.

BT has always said that it didn't see the point of building out its network with multicast routers, which would have meant replacing its entire network, because of the strength of Freeview in the UK, the free-to-air DVB-T broadcast network. This is why it has no IPTV linear TV service, and instead relies on internet delivered VoD, offering mostly movies and catch up on its BT Vision service. BT Vision devices also have DVB-T tuners so they can receive Freeview on the same device.

But at the Connected TV Summit in London last week Steve White, head of information systems and technology for IPTV at BT, said that the BT network was being upgraded to multicast to allow full IPTV. When asked why, White said: "It's too expensive renting DVB-T multiplex space to deliver Sky Sports to BT Vision customers, so we want to send it multicast."

I can't help wondering, knowing BT's history of failing to provide capacity before launching new services, whether the upgrade will just be the routers, and whether we are all going to feel some pain as a result...

[Bill]

I can never see much point in IPTV... why would I sit in an office chair to watch a programme on even a 27" iMac, let alone an 11" MacBook, when I can sit in an armchair (with a beer and a bacon buttie!) and watch it on a 40" DTV?

If it's something that's on when I'm not around then I'll record it... it might occasionally get used for catch-up, but I can do that already.

[.Griff.]

You've missed out a key point of IPTV Bill.

If you're sitting in your lounge watching TV on your 40" DTV then you're obviously watching a set amount of channels showing pre-scheduled programming. The point, or one of the principles at least, of IPTV is content on demand.

Added to that IPTV isn't restricted to laptops or desktop PC's but it will be incorporated into TV's and set-top boxes.

[DorsetBoy]

BT Vision gets played on your TV surely? As for "on demand" that is available now with other services so they have nothing to gain with that.

I see that that article says the network IS being upgraded .......... perhaps that's why there are all these unannounced network issues?

[Bill]

If you're sitting in your lounge watching TV on your 40" DTV then you're obviously watching a set amount of channels showing pre-scheduled programming. The point, or one of the principles at least, of IPTV is content on demand.

True enough... but the first thing I'd demand is some programmes worth watching!

Added to that IPTV isn't restricted to laptops or desktop PC's but it will be incorporated into TV's and set-top boxes.

Also true, but my TV isn't scheduled to get upgraded for at least a year or two yet... which brings us round to Rik's point that I didn't address- bandwidth.

BT may get away with it- they recently addded enough to make Infinity unlimited, and they've confessed to being disappointed with the take-up. This may, in part, be a way of justifying that extra investment.

[pctech]

This will only affect BT Retail's dorect customers (those using BT Broadband, Plusnet have their own network still I think).

Multicast was developed to reduce the load on the external connections of a service provider's network when streaming live content by allowing a router to replicate the packets and send them to those customer routers/machines who have registered as part of a multicast group.

[pctech]

BT may get away with it- they recently addded enough to make Infinity unlimited, and they've confessed to being disappointed with the take-up. This may, in part, be a way of justifying that extra investment.

Take up has probably been low because:

1. We are in a recession and customers are looking for the cheapest deal.
2. People know that unlimited does not mean unlimited anymore and that, like with DSL which was not metered when it was introduced, it is only a matter of time before BT get tough on those that download a large amount and basically take the wotsit.

Technically they have to do as no amount of capacity is enough for these people as they have little comprehension of a shared resource and no technical understanding of how it works and why their behaviour is not acceptable.

I doubt that it will remain unlimited once the demand picks up.

[Bill]

Take up has probably been low because:

1. We are in a recession and customers are looking for the cheapest deal.

Not convinced about that... I don't think the public as a whole is particularly interested in very high speeds tbh. 8Mbps is fast enough for the browsing and email that is about all most people use the internet for.

I forget the exact number of VM users who've opted for the 50Meg product for example, but it's less than 5%.

It's just leechers and geeks who go for the fastest they can get their hands on

I'd agree with the rest of your post.

[pctech]

I do watch odd bits on Youtube and iPlayer and it would be good to have the capacity to watch the HD quality without buffering along with a bit of gaming here and there (which is why I expressed an interest in FTTP) but as you say, most of what I do doesn't really require that much.

If we were a nation of homeworkers than it would likely be a different story.

[zappaDPJ]

I'm continually hearing from a variety of sources that IPTV is likely to supersede terrestrial and satellite TV by 2005. I fully appreciate and understand the potential but there's no way BT's infrastructure could support it. Capacity aside, people simply wouldn't stand for the inevitable and regular outages that are part and parcel of BT.

[pctech]

2005? Obviously weren't correct were they Zap 

I think this is what Sky had in mind when they purchased Easynet.

Buy a well respected corporate business provider with its own pan european network (Sky operates in Europe too) which has undertaken an LLU programme in the UK and will require minimum upgrades, link the sky broadcast infratructure to it, adapt the boxes and then get rid of the Astra uplink requirement which will save them a fair packet I bet.

In the not too distant future to get sky you will probably have to have a sky phone line and broadband.

[Gary]

2005? Obviously weren't correct were they Zap 

In the not too distant future to get sky you will probably have to have a sky phone line and broadband.

I cant see that, Sky would loose so many customers, the point is you now have Sky anytime+ via sky LLU BB but its not even an HD service or just plain old anytime which is not a true VOD system for those who cannot get sky LLU. Sky reaches places where no LLU service is and people will pay for that to get more channels because its not available to them online. Sky are greedy, Freesat is not that great in my view, Freeview HD is still limited, so the market is there for Sky and most likely will be for years to come to use Satellites as the way to fill the market gap.

[pctech]

I suspect to see Sky revving up their roll out of LLU and probably looking at fibre.