> > > I think that George's POV -- which is also mine -- is that as the > > world shifts, the percentage of video distribution which is > > amenable to multicast, and not well served by unicast, is likely > > to grow, and it would be a Good Idea to be ready for that > > situation already when it arrives. > > Really? If anything, I'd say quite the opposite. Watching media in > the time-slot that someone else has decided on is *so* 20th-century - I > can't remember the last time I sat down to actively watch a programme > in its original transmission slot. (As opposed to having the TV on as > background, e.g. 15 minutes of breakfast news in the morning). I guess > multicast to a recording application (or appliance) might work - but > essentially my requirement is strongly skewed towards video-on-demand.
Agreed, it seems the only demand really for this live viewing is sport, news and background programming like the mentioned breakfast television. But there is still the demand to just have something on in the background, whatever that may be. > I have absolutely zero interest in sport of any kind though - I'm given > to understand there's quite a high demand for live viewing of that. Apparently so.. -- Leigh Porter ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________