So network operators want to run streaming radio over their networks!?! Mon dieu! This is so wrong, it’s hard to know where to start.
Firstly, there’s a free alternative called, um, radio. And then there’s this popular little device which I believe is called an iPod that lets you listen to music you actually like without any adverts. Remarkable what technology can do!
So you’re burning up your spectrum on value-less content. The user, on the other hand, is massacring her battery life, and possibly running up a huge bill — which will cause her to churn.
Does anyone at the operators know how to read?
Posted by Martin Geddes at 09:20 PMTrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telepocalypse.net/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/mgeddes/MT/mt-tb.cgi/414.
Re: Saumil Nanavati, president of Sydus, said, "This radio player is what the 3G network was built for..."
I disagree with Mr. Nanavati. 3G networks do not currently support broadcast transmission. Each user will use a unicast connection [over the air]. With the long holding times associated with radio listening, the user population of the networks that Virgin rides on will be severely degraded. The end result, not only will the Virgin listener that tries this service churn for the reasons you stated, but other users will most likely churn as well, when the network performance is degraded. This type of content will erode the quality of the connections.
Do not be so quick to put down the whole service. Seems that at least some people love it: http://www.russellbeattie.com/notebook/1008339.html
While I agree with most of Odlyzko's ideas, the fact that content is not king does not mean content has no role to play.
I am sorry Martin, but I dont think you have understood the product.
Most people listen to radio in their cars, they do not bring CDs to their cars even though they have CD players. The reason for this is that they are too lazy to do an active choise of what music to listen to. The consumer wishes to be fed with a steady stream of enjoyable sound, without having to go through the trouble of buying CDs / downloading content.
Your argument that iPod is better then streaming radio is no more valid then that CD would kill off FM Radio.
Instead, you should view streaming radio as an improved version of FM.
1. You could have gazillion different channels to select from, just as I have more internet stations then FM stations.
2. You could have "pay-radio", quality, non-pirated, music streams without ads.
3. The selection of stations is not limited to big-budget companies that can afford to buy a FM frequency.
As for battery, the handset does not have to transmit nearly as much data as it is receiving, so the battery life is not affected that much.
I've heard recently that usability testing at mobile operators showed that people just dont listen to audio content on their mobiles. Voice yes, but radio - not really. So 'sounds' like a nice service but audio may turn out to be a bit of a red herring.
Posted by: at March 8, 2005 02:11 PMViktor, people bring CDs, cassettes, etc., into their cars. Depending on the usability of your car audio equipment, the cost of changing stations or media may be too high: a tragic accident. But if the equipment is usable, then, hey, we'll switch around all day. As soon as the NPR fund-raiser comes on, poof! off we go to the next channel. Ads? See ya!
But, frankly, we don't listen to radio in the car unless the kids aren't around, and we barely listen to radio at home at all. We prefer to control what's coming out of the speakers. The "consumer" does not wish to be "fed" anything.
As far as network impact goes, Martin, sounds like an easy way to maximize use of the infrastructure. Whether or not it's a good business decision to maximize use with this particular service remains to be seen. However, I expect that demand for both this and Verizon's V-cast will be less than expected.
Posted by: at March 8, 2005 04:14 PMFlorian, I believe that there is room for audio content in mobile phones just as there are rooms for Ipods, Walkmans, and portable CD players. I have not seen the usability test that you are reffering to but it is my guess that it focuses too much on audio content in the the phones that you can buy today, not to mention the current data transfer rates.
My _personal_ experience from having a FM reciever in my phone is that I used to listen to it quite a lot.
And Will, maybe you are right about CDs and Cassettes being more used then Radio in Cars. I have been trying to find some numbers about it on the net, but no luck.
But my basic point of view is unchanged: Radio over 3G network is just an improved version of Radio over FM networks. And since there are obviously a healthy FM industry, there will be a healthy "3G Radio" industry; IF, and only if, the operators can be satisfied with a few cents per transmitted megabyte.
Posted by: at March 9, 2005 07:47 AM