What's next after DTV?

[kc0ltv]

How long do you think the current DTV standard (ATSC) will last? What will follow it as a terrestrial TV standard? Anything? NTSC color has been with us for over 50 years now; do you see WRAL or WNBC still cranking out DTV in 2050? Will the current "one transmitter covering a large radius" model be replaced with something else? I'm interested in hearing your musings on this subject.

Personally, I think the end of terrestrial TV as we currently know it is nearing every day, and within 30 years, stations will begin closing down their one-way, high-powered VHF (and UHF) DTV transmitters in favor of cellular broadband system. Cells will be smaller than present-day systems, in order to recycle bandwidth and be able to use higher-order modulation. These will bring TV, radio, and internet access not only to mobile devices, but also to homes. Also, I think that the "channel" model will be come increasingly obsolete; on-demand will be the rule even on large screens within a few decades. TV has already begun the shift from being a linear medium with pre-determined program schedules to one in which viewers watch what they want when they want. DVRs are a great example of this, as are network websites that allow on-demand show viewing. Perhaps by 2050 or 2060 the entire current TV spectrum will be auctioned off to provide the aforementioned wireless services.

 

[mjlarochelle]

And what about radio? Will WCBS still be on 880 kilocycles and be heard at night up in Canada? Will satellite radio even be around in its current form?

I can't see us moving to an entirely on-demand model. Emergency messages can't be on-demand, and although live programs can be archived for later on-demand viewing or listening, many will still want to see them as they happen, particularly news and sports. Public broadcasters also would have a tough time moving away from the current model, I think.

 

[KeithE4]

How long do you think the current DTV standard (ATSC) will last? What will follow it as a terrestrial TV standard?

Smellovision? ;D

Seriously, digital in one form or another is here to stay. In fact, I believe fully-analog transmissions in all services other than amateur radio will cease by 2025.

 

[notalkallstatic]

I believe that television will never go away, it will become like the train and the movie theatre. We still use them, but not as much as we did 30 years ago.

So, here is my opinion…

The next thing we will probably see is either HDHTV (High Definition Hologram Television) or HD3DTV (High Definition 3D Television…which is pretty much like HDHTV)

Analogue signals will be non-existent in 20-30 years.

On-Demand will become very popular (more popular than it is today,) but will never take over liner television (what we have now)

Watching shows on the internet will slowly decrease because they will hardly be available in HD due to bandwidth issues.

Stations will become more automated: production control will become almost non-existent, and master control will be done out of major hubs (for local television) … sidebar – this is actually happening now anyways.

That is my opinion, take it or leave it. ;D

 

[kenglish]

My predictions for 5-10 years out.......

Stations not affiliated with the major "networks" will be gone. If not gone, they will be snatched up by shopping and televangelist groups.

Stations we used to call "Network Affiliates" will be affiliated with the ownerships of the former "networks". Ex-NBC affiliates, for example, will be tied in with the "Universal" umbrella, broadcasting multiple subchannels, like "WeatherPlus", "NewsPlus", "SportsPlus", "BizNewsPlus", etc.
All will be set up with assistance from Universal, which will provide material in exchange for the promotional value of spots that advertise their latest downloads, or the upcoming "VOD" offerings that used to be broadcast in prime time.

Same thing with ex-affiliates of the ABC, CBS and FOX networks. All "entertainment" programming will be streamed via the internet, and available for purchase on DVD. Want to watch "Days of Our Lives"? Subscribe to an internet delivery package, and have it waiting for you every morning. Like watching "Law and Order"? "Here's the link to purchase a download". That sort of thing. Don't expect free downloads once they have you "hooked" on the new delivery methods, either.

What remains on broadcast stations will be "IINRV: Immediate Interest. No recurring Value" programming....things like news, weather, sports scores, stock market, etc, that are of interest now, but can't make money tomorrow morning.

 

[Markxxx]

Well already other countries have mpeg4 so the technology of DTV is outdated.

But Americans have proven they will accept less in technical perfection for convenience. This is why cell phones and mp3s are popular. Of course cell phones and mp3s don't sound as good as landlines and CDs but they quality isn't that much worse so that it isn't worth the trade off.

Of course we have seen the reverse, for example movies with wide screen can offer a better veiw than small TVs. So while TV ate into movies, it wasn't able to kill it.

Programming will get worse till it gets to a point of being on demand. I think this would already be the case but the cost of broadband is a factor. Unless we can level the playing field so anyone can offer broadband, this will be a factor in holding things back.

Remember how quickly AOL changed from charging by the hour to one set fee once smaller companies offered this.

So when you make predictions you have to consider the unequality of the playing fields

I think it's gonna be interesting to see how subchannels develop.

I can't see this DTV system lasting 20 years though, it's already behind so it'll have to be upgraded, hopefully it'll be done on a compatible system, but Americans are pretty used to buying something, then having to buy something else to upgrade it.

 

[TexasTom]

Unlike several others here, I don't see linear TV broadcast schedules that include entertainment programming as something that will go away.

Lots of people like to watch TV by sitting down and watching whatever happens to be on at the moment -- they don't want to plan by ordering a download or even recording a program in advance. As a result of this, while downloads (and streaming video) will gain market share, they're not going to replace the linear broadcast (or cable) networks. Actually, if Internet video continues to be saddled with oppressive DRM schemes, it may not prove to be more than neglible competition to broadcast and cable networks.

Our digital TV system will continue to evolve and improve as the technology is perfected, and I see it being around for awhile -- I wouldn't bet on 50 years from now, but I expect that it will still be around in 25. And more people will be receiving TV via digital OTA broadcasts than are currently receiving the analog OTA broadcasts.

Contrary to the predictions of some prognosticators, DVRs will also somehow fail to destroy the model of advertiser-supported television, whether delivered OTA, by satellite, or by cable. DVR penetration will peak out sometime in the next few years, and it will probably not go above 50% -- half the population just aren't going to be interested in technology to time shift programming because they are content to watch whatever is on when it is broadcast.

Meanwhile, advertisers will also discover that DVRs aren't the threat to their advertising that is now commonly believed to be the case. Already, a study has been released that shows that DVR viewers are more likely to skip ads that aren't relevant to them (ie, those without children tend to skip ads for toys) and to watch ads that are relevant (ie, older viewers are likely to stop and pay attention to ads for investment products). At some point, advertisers will take this information to heart and realize that when you're selling diapers it really doesn't matter if viewers in a childless household zip past your commercial...

 

[stationi]

I agree with what TexasTom has said.

A few of my own points...

Like Mark said, the current dtv standard in the United States uses MPEG 2 while several other countries are using MPEG 4. The next logical step in dtv broadcasting is that they will need to update the encoding technology. With an updated encoding technology they can squeeze more channels into the existing space. I could see stations moving to MPEG 4 or the latest technology while keeping one SDTV feed for MPEG 2 and forcing high-definition users to switch to latest encoding technology.

In terms of over the air viewers, I think that it will drop off to as low as 5% after the February 2009 transition. But once people see their neighbors with 30+ free digital channels (many large markets already have 30+ channels) the amount could rise to over 20%. In the UK free over the air digital television (called Freeview) broadcast 45 channels and 35% of television use Freeview.

 

[Markxxx]

Lots of people like to watch TV by sitting down and watching whatever happens to be on at the moment -- they don't want to plan by ordering a download or even recording a program in advance. ds for investment products).

I agree wholeheartedly with this point, but I think this is a type of programing. Like when I wake up I like WGN news or Regis and Kelly something that will provide background noise and catch my attention if it's interesting to me.

But one annoying trend I noticed is TV stations and nets have started to contract with businesses for a captive audiene. Like Bally's used to have all these TV stations and I could go to my gym and watch. Now all but two stations are tuned to the same channel cause Bally's signed an agreement to broadcast this sports channel.

To me it's dumb to have 32 TVs and 30 of them on the same channel, but I can see it as a way to get a captive audience and Bally's to make money

 

[1069_KIFR]

The next transition/evolution in television will be hologram. The 'TV' will be similiar to a flat coffe table. The image will rise and we will be able to walk around the picture and see it from every available angle/view point. It is still in the planning stage but will not be ready for consumers until around simetime by 2023. The biggest hurdle, besides the price of the 'TV', seems to be is viewing it in a dust free room. Let alone the production side of the shows.

There will be TV-HD and TV-Holo, maybe even TV-3D

 

[Markxxx]

The next transition/evolution in television will be hologram. The 'TV' will be similiar to a flat coffe table. The image will rise and we will be able to walk around the picture and see it from every available angle/view point. It is still in the planning stage but will not be ready for consumers until around simetime by 2023. The biggest hurdle, besides the price of the 'TV', seems to be is viewing it in a dust free room. Let alone the production side of the shows.

There will be TV-HD and TV-Holo, maybe even TV-3D

Wasn't this from like Futurama or some other show, maybe the Jetsons

 

[1069_KIFR]

Weren't GPS and Cell Phone/Walkie Talkies from Star Trek?

 

[EricStein]

Seriously, digital in one form or another is here to stay. In fact, I believe fully-analog transmissions in all services other than amateur radio will cease by 2025.

Given the nonexistent growth of HD Radio, I don't think terrestrial radio will make the jump to full digital even by 2025. Unless the industry starts to lobby the FCC to reserve 54-88 mHz (currently TV channels 2-6) for an all-digital system (that would most likely be based on the IBOC standard, but not be "hybrid," to save R&D dollars) that would replace the AM band. 88-108 mHz will still be analog for years to come, and "hybrid" analog/digital broacasts will disappear.

 

[markwooldridge]

In terms of over the air viewers, I think that it will drop off to as low as 5% after the February 2009 transition. But once people see their neighbors with 30+ free digital channels (many large markets already have 30+ channels) the amount could rise to over 20%. In the UK free over the air digital television (called Freeview) broadcast 45 channels and 35% of television use Freeview.

Even the UK is behind... the "45 channels" on Freeview in the UK is a lot of timeshared channels. The BBC's CBBC and CBeebies channels broadcast in the day, to give way to BBC Three and Four after 7pm - similar story with . In reality you get about 25-30 (can't remember exact number) channels at any one time to choose from - all in glorious standard definition. And it's all MPEG-2 using DVB. OFCOM is working on HDTV, though you can get some HDTV content by satellite and the cable company has a couple of channels in HD and some on-demand stuff. Terrestrial HDTV in the UK will involve switching to MPEG4, rendering all the current Freeview receivers obsolete. Because the UK government wants to do what the US government did and sell off some of the frequencies occupied for TV for something else like mobile phones, there's no new space for HDTV and there's already plans for one multiplex (transmitter network) to move from SDTV to HDTV, squeezing what's on there onto the remaining 5 SDTV multiplexes and having maybe 3, possibly 4 HDTV channels over the air. Meanwhile HDTV is being tested...

Mark.

 

[arnoldevns]

My prediction is that none of the predictions here will be right. ;D I think seeing 50 years into the future on technology like this is absolutely impossible. What do you think people would said about the next 50 years of TV or radio in 1958? (if someone has such an article, I'd love to see it!)

About TV: 50 years ago I doubt anyone would have mentioned something like a DVR. I don't think the idea of 500 channels would be discussed. HDTV or DTV probably wouldn't have come up.

About radio: I don't think the total collapse of AM radio would have been foreseen. I don't think the competition from casettes, 8-tracks, CDs, MP3s and satellites would have been mentioned.

Looking ahead at the future after DTV.. well that's hard to do. I think it's going to be 10 years before 90% of all homes have TVs with digital tuners instead of adapters. (in other words, the conversion will be somewhat incomplete for a long time)

I think the bigger changes in the next 10 years will come from the programming side of things - and I don't really know which way things will go. It's possible congress will tinker with cable rules and mandate a la carte programming choices. I believe this would cut the number of channels available and raise the price of cable. That could cause ratings and revenue for broadcast networks and local stations to go up. It could make DTV subchannels much more valuable.

Things could stay on the same course and broadcast networks and local stations will be even less competitive than they are now. I don't believe live TV broadcasts will go away. People like to watch sports and news live. They need live weather when there's severe weather in the area. On demand can't do that.

On radio in the next 10 years I think HD will probably fade away like AM stereo did. It hasn't caught on, it's costing money and it's not generating revenue. Satellite radio will probably survive. Sirius & XM have proved that 18 million people will pay for radio. If they can figure out a way to make money and grow that a bit, they'll survive.

 

[Markxxx]

I think it will be interesting to see where TV will go.

For a historical perspective we can look at other media. When radio first came in print media adopted by being able to go to printing more indepth information. No longer did they rush to print the extras, but while radio was basically giving news, it was the magazines and newspapers that expanded to indepth and more controversial investigative reporting.

When TV was coming in, no one really knew what would happen. In 1945 (according to "Stay Tuned - a broacasting history" ) 95% of all radio stations were affiliate with one of the big four radio networks. Jack Benny was noted as saying something along the lines of Radio won't die because people would rather listen to a great radio show than watch a mediocre television show.

Well that didn't work out but radio shifted to a local medium. By 1955 half the radio station in America were no longer affiliated with a radio network, and the ratio continued to go down.

When FM came in it didn't kill AM it just took over music while AM went to news, talk, sports and niche formats.

One thing I think to remember is the overabunance of product. Not only do we have new shows for TV but we have vast libraries of old TV shows that could be shown or streamed online for a fee.

 

[pab]

About TV: 50 years ago I doubt anyone would have mentioned something like a DVR. I don't think the idea of 500 channels would be discussed. HDTV or DTV probably wouldn't have come up.

Actually, if you look at speculative fiction from about 50 years ago, the predictions were that television would either be 3D holographic or completely superseded by now. One great example I can think of off the top of my head was Heinlein's vision of "Stereovision" in "Stranger in a Strange Land," "complete with color and depth."

The general expectations were for large-screen 3D. The technological developments are nowhere near what was predicted 50 years ago. 50 years ago, no one would have predicted that it would take this long to replace our current television standard; indeed, the standards had already changed four times since Philo fooled around in his garage and CBS was talking about an all new standard for color UHF-only broadcasting. Everything we've done since then, prior to the development of ATSC, has been a series of kludges in the name of backward compatibility (RCA color, MTS stereo, closed captioning, teletext). We've been long overdue for a new standard.

PROGRAMMING is another story. I doubt anyone expected on-demand or DVR's because they're an outgrowth of the computer revolution of the 1960's and 1970's that largely went unpredicted. 500 channels would have been unthinkable because of the network mentality of the time; people wouldn't believe that companies that owned networks would want to compete with themselves, and narrowcasting was unheard of. Networks tried to be all things to all people and the idea of separate channels for all children's programming, women's programming, sports, and the like was unthinkable. Once business figured out that narrowcasting was complimentary and not competitive, then all bets were off.

As for the next 50 years, I think we're going to see ATSC superseded very, very quickly. Much like we did with the old standard, however, some sop is going to be made to backwards compatibility. An expandable standard (ATSC-2?) will be rolled out allowing new codecs to be delivered on demand much like they are with computers today. When a new standard for MPEG-4, for example, is devised, then subchannels of many MPEG-2 channels will deliver code to new expandable sets to allow them to decode the new signals. New header fields will identify the codec used by a signal stream, so that when a station "flips the switch" to a new format as it's approved, it will be relatively seamless to the viewer, and won't need to be as co-ordinated as the DTV switchover has been.

Expandable ATSC-2 sets will be in our homes within 10 years, and after that, we're going to see the TV standard continue to evolve very quickly, but we won't have to worry about it.

 

[MotoMuzak]

"When a new standard for MPEG-4, for example, is devised, then subchannels of many MPEG-2 channels will deliver code to new expandable sets to allow them to decode the new signals. New header fields will identify the codec used by a signal stream, so that when a station 'flips the switch' to a new format as it's approved, it will be relatively seamless to the viewer, and won't need to be as co-ordinated as the DTV switchover has been..."

And without asking the user/viewer prior to the code installing itself? Can we say, "impending class action litigation"??

(But then again, the same thing has been going on with Windows for years, and Micro$oft has remained disturbingly quiet about it...... ;o)