It is good to see Mike Masnick and I are thinking along the same lines about watching television content on our handsets. Our opinions are slightly different, but still I like this point of view - “Even if you can tie entertainment functions to a mobile device, it doesn’t mean you can do it very well. While it may be a nifty conversation piece to be able to do mobile television, the first time something goes wrong, people will remember that consumer electronics products tend to work somewhat reliably, while computing devices don’t.” I had brought up these very same issues in my recent Business 2.0 Converge Sense column, The Three Screen Problem. “Most companies are trying to impose the PC on the other two screens. But altering the form and function of these devices is just not going to work.”
6 comments so far
5:59 PM PT
You mean the same crap on TV gets to show up on your mobile phone? No way. In Spain, they call all the junk shows (Idols and other kinds of reality TV) - Tele Basura (television garbage). So now the mobile phone operators get to send us Tele Basura and charge a premium for it.
5:59 PM PT
Amen to that Esme. Trust me - 250 channels of TV on my cable, and I still can’t find anything I want to see. when LA hucksters get culture and taste, perhaps we can then let them send it to our phone. What i truly want - the baseball season to resume
5:59 PM PT
You guys are looking at these services too literally. Right now the dance is to determine who pays who, and how much etc. Content providers want these initial efforts to fail, so they can use this ‘real-world’ experience to discredit and minimize the future role of 3rd party aggregators and distribution.
Whenever I think about these issues, I always like to ask myself, “What would John Malone do?”. He was the last guy to really capture value for distribution services.
Lastly, why does Viacom need MobileTV to package their stuff? They don’t, and frankly they don’t need any input from the carriers, other than nearterm work arounds for the crappy state of the technology.
2-3 years hence, the content guys will be in full control, just like every other channel.
The wireless carriers are playing themselves for fools, the content guys are just waiting.
5:59 PM PT
The issue here, Charlie is what is good mobile content, and what is not good mobile content. some short snippets from Viacom’s Spike TV sure make sense on the phone but the idea of sending soaps etc over mobile networks is not going to work. i think you are right about the content providers playing it smart by letting others take the risk. if something catches fire, then they can buy those players.
5:59 PM PT
The issue here is what is good mobile content, and what is not good mobile content.
———
Om, we disagree right out of the gate then.
The modern cellphone is a lifestyle ‘remote-control’. For the time being the game is to use it as a promotional channel.
Some kid raised on Comedy Channel SouthPark Marathons will create (fuse) a new storytelling format for this platform. But that’s sometime in the future.
Distribution players should be looking to dilute the major content players, because the notion of getting a good deal is just nuts to anybody thats seen VH1’s Behind the Music. It aint gonna happen.
I view the issue as what makes the most money, with the least risk.
5:59 PM PT
I don’t think we are necessarily that far apart. i think watching full length videos don’t make sense on a cell phone. however, bursts or clips make perfect sense on a cell phone. i would love to get video updates of news and sports, a south park video trimmed down to three-to-five seconds is great. i think it is going to boil down to one little thing - ease of use.
by the way, i totally missed your thought about VH1. Maybe you explain to me a wee bit more
Leave a Comment