Exploring the impact of broadband and technology on our lives, our businesses, and our communities.
This new study shows Internet use has entered most households in the U.S., with 78% online. And 92% of those households have some kind of broadband...typically "little broadband" from DSL or cable providers. The most interesting statistic is that growth in households dropping traditional TV has increased about 13% in the past two years, from 8% of household to 9% of households. If that percentage does not increase (which seems unlikely), in ten years, OTT and other IP-TV services will have about half the market. If the rate of change increases to around 20% or 25% per year, the draws near much more quickly for the cable TV companies.
Apple and Roku are dominating the IP set top box market, with Apple owning 56% of this still small market segment. I'm not convinced that Apple or Roku will ultimately end up with a major portion of this market, as the total number of households that have converted to OTT is still very small. Rapid market growth in the next several years could let a yet unidentified firm capture a big portion of this. As Blackberry has demonstrated so aptly, having a big marketshare early does not automatically lead to market dominance.
But I've been saying for years that traditional cable TV, and to a lesser extent, satellite TV, is dead, dead, dead. It is an antiquated business model predicated on sixty year old coax technology. And satellite TV uses the same business model over a similarly bandwidth-constrained medium.
But Apple certainly has an early lead, and Google's Chromecast seems to be off to a slow start, but Google can play the long game. And startups like SimulTV may tear off an interesting piece of the market because they have changed the interaction model completely. If companies like SimulTV can master the content license problems, a lot of people will use their services.
This article in readwrite confirms something I have suspected for a long time: that most successful entrepreneurs are not twenty-three and worth a billion dollars. In fact, according to the article, "...twice as many successful entrepreneurs are over 50 as under 25. A whopping 75% have more than six years of industry experience and 50% have more than 10 years when they create their startup."
And get this datum: "...the highest rate of entrepreneurship in America has shifted to the 55–64 age group, with people over 55 almost twice as likely to found successful companies than those between 20 and 34. Indeed, Kauffman highlights that the 20-34 age bracket has the lowest rate of entrepreneurial activity."
What does this mean for broadband? I see a lot of communities trying to leverage broadband with an economic development strategy of trying to attract twenty-something entrepreneurs. And it turns out, according to the data above, that this is not likely to turn out well.
For a client located in Canada, we're assisting with the design, specification, and procurement of a very large regional DWDM backbone network that will bring Gigabit services to more than twenty rural and remote communities.
For one of our clients located in the Caribbean, we designed, engineered, built, configured, and lit a 10Gig backbone network in just six weeks. Working under a very tight deadline to get the first customer on the network, Design Nine staff developed the network architecture, coordinated the fiber construction, ordered and shipped equipment, procured pre-fab shelters, had the shelters shipped by boat, got all the network equipment shipped, racked and configured the equipment, and brought the network up in time to meet the customer deadline.
When you need a network designed and built on time and within budget, give us a call.
An FAA advisory committee has said it is safe to use smaller electronic devices during taxiing, takeoff, and landing. It is about time, since flight crews have been using iPads in the cockpit for years. Larger items like laptops will have to remain stowed because in the event of sudden stops or change in direction, a laptop could become a missile in cabin because of its heavier weight. The FAA still has to issue a formal ruling before I'll be able to use my Kindle during takeoff.
Amazon has announced new Kindle tablets ahead of Apple's expected announcement of new and upgraded iPad tablets in October. As I have noted previously, the Kindle tablets, especially the Kindle HD, are really good devices and are very affordable. It is great that Amazon is providing strong competition to Apple. The new Kindle features include higher resolution screens and lighter weight, similar to what is expected from Apple. The flagship model is the Kindle HDX, which is priced lower than a comparable iPad. What is really striking is that the Kindle HD has been repackaged and now sells for a paltry $139--an amazing value.
Tablet sales are very nearly outpacing traditional PC laptop and desktop sales, and with prices well below $200 for very capable tablets, these devices are beginning to drive broadband demand. In a household of four people, we might be looking at as many as eight or ten Internet-connected devices, including tablets, smartphones, and traditional computers. And so you could easily have four or five devices using bandwidth at the same time. Amazon's low price points is part of a deliberate strategy to make money by selling content--books, TV shows, movies, and everything that is available in Amazon's online store.
The bandwidth usage should be getting more attention than it is, and some analysts are buying into the incumbent belief that 10-20 meg of bandwidth is plenty. But we continue to meet business people trying to work from home who are extremely frustrated with their "infinite" bandwidth plans from the cable companies. The big problem is that lack of symmetric bandwidth on DSL and cable connections. An "up to 25 meg up, 5 meg down" plan simply won't support business applications like corporate VPNs and business videoconferencing in any meaningful way.
If you think you are going to attract those young, business-hungry entrepreneurs types with some mediocre broadband, a couple of bike paths, and a Starbucks, think again. A start up company called Happy Hubs has just ratcheted the whole entrepreneurial attraction game up several notches. Happy Hubs is renting out luxury workspaces in Costa Rica, and is offering five star amenities like massage therapy, gourmet food service, maid service, and access to a beach. Oh, and of course, lots of broadband. And the whole package compares favorably to what someone might spend in the U.S. on a lackluster place to live, food, and Internet--without all the amenities.
Economic development is global. And broadband is enabling the portable business. If your community can't deliver affordable, high performance broadband services, nothing else really matters.
The first step in overcoming a problem is to admit you have a problem. The national focus on "broadband adoption" is not likely to have much impact without a parallel track that increases the availability of high performance AFFORDABLE broadband infrastructure. I started doing broadband adoption in 1993, when the take rate for broadband was 0%. What I learned the hard way is that people and businesses "adopt" broadband services when the infrastructure to support them is available AND affordable. Both conditions have to exist.
Right now, in the business community, business VPNs and videoconferencing are rapidly becoming common, even for small businesses, but the most common complaint I hear--everywhere we are working in the U.S.--is that the incumbent DSL and cable offerings don't support those two services in any meaningful way.
So businesses can't "adopt" VPN and videoconference technology if they don't have access to affordable infrastructure.
The national emphasis on adoption also ignores the fact that broadband has been adopted faster than any other consumer/business technology in the past hundred years. The incumbents like to promote the idea that adoption is the problem because it essentially blames their customers for the problem, rather than their stubborn attachment to antiquated business models. In a sense, they are saying, "Our customers are stupid, and someone needs to teach them to buy our over-priced inadequate services."
Over on LinkedIn, someone wrote, "....Netflix and video-conferencing do not require more than 6 to 10 Mbps. Outside of IPTV, I have no idea how the target of 25 to 50 Mbps can be justified for the average household or business."
Let's not confuse the bandwidth needed for Internet access with the bandwidth needed for other services and applications. The incumbents do this intentionally all the time with sarcastic "Nobody needs a Gig of Internet" remarks that are designed to belittle anyone that criticizes them.
Here is a real life example to demonstrate my point. On one of our multi-service network construction projects, we met with a major local employer (5000+ employees) who was aggressively trying to offer as much as 20% of their workforce the chance to work from home, as a quality of life issue.
They wanted 50 megabit symmetric connections between each home-based worker and the local corporate network. The math for them was simple. They wanted every home-based worker to have HD video meetings with as many as three or four co-workers at a time, with each HD 1080p video stream using 8 to 10 megabits. So you very quickly get to 40 or 50 meg just to take part in the morning staff meeting. To make the video work, you also have to have symmetric circuits. And if those folks start doing some screen sharing with more video, you are quickly maxing out a 50 meg connection.
This was all going to be done on the local multi-service network that we have now built, so no IP (Internet) was needed.
But we also just had a conversation with a start up IP-TV provider, who told us that two major cable channels (I can't name them, but you would recognize them instantly) are already talking about wanting 15-18 meg PER CHANNEL for very high def live video and 3D movies. So you have four people in the house, and they are all watching a different channel using an average of 15 meg per channel...you are already at 60 meg. This is where we will be in just two or three years.
So I still hear, "But you haven't made the case for a Gig." The technology cost of provisioning Gig fiber connections is now just about the same as 100 meg connections. So it is simple economics to deploy Gig...it's just as cheap as 100 meg, and you don't have to worry about running out of bandwidth. Gig is not some exotic connection anymore...it's the industry standard for new active Ethernet connections for FTTH.
Again....let's not mix up the bandwidth requirements for Internet access with the bandwidth for local services...two different things entirely.