Streaming media is going portable in Europe, and is sure to follow here in North America. AT&T and Verizon will get major heartburn about the load it will inevitably place on their underpowered wireless networks. The Apple i-this and i-that media monoculture will be facing a formidible assault by cheap Andriod devices that do the streaming trick the fruit cult won’t allow.
This week, European streaming music serviceSpotify demonstrated its Android app, which features on-demand streams of songs the user doesn’t own, as well as an offline synchronization and caching function that allows a listener to enjoy a song on the go, regardless of whether the phone is connected to a data network at that moment. That’s dangerously close to owning a song, and speculation is already rife that Apple won’t accept Spotify’splanned iPhone app because it’s too much of a threat to Apple’s iTunes music store.
Spotify, whose free desktop service is popular in Europe, doesn’t offer anything in the U.S. yet, and the Stockholm-based company has hinted that it may charge users in all geographies for premium accounts in order to use the mobile service. But it seems inevitable that consumers everywhere will eventually demand ubiquitous on-demand mobile streams, whether from Spotify or someone else, making ownership of music less popular and iTunes therefore less important. And in that respect, Apple’s decade of investment in music and current domination of the online music world may become an Achilles’ heel, as Android’s openness and neutrality give it greater flexibility than Apple’s closed system to offer consumers what they want as alternatives arise.
Apple will probably try to do a competing service within its monoculture. AT&T and Verizon will have to invest in their networks after thier investment in the Washington lobby fails to stop progress. Broadcasters who do not hear the wireless IP threat drawing closer will seal their own fates. Broadcast media’s obsolescence could be looming just over the horizon.
6. Special Provisions Regarding HSD Service(ii) I agree that TWC or ISP may change the Maximum Throughput Rate of any tier by amending the price list or Terms of Use. My continued use of the HSD Service following such a change will constitute my acceptance of any new Maximum Throughput Rate. If the level or tier of HSD Service to which I subscribe has a specified limit on the amount of bytes that I can use in a given billing cycle, I also agree that TWC may use technical means, including but not limited to suspending or reducing the speed of my HSD Service, to ensure compliance with these limits, and that TWC or ISP may move me to a higher tier of HSD Service (which may result in higher monthly charges) or impose other charges and fees if my use exceeds these limits.
(iii) I agree that TWC may use Network Management Tools as it determines appropriate and/or that it may use technical means, including but not limited to suspending or reducing the Throughput Rate of my HSD Service, to ensure compliance with its Terms of Use and to ensure that its service operates efficiently. I further agree that TWC and ISP have the right to monitor my bandwidth usage patterns to facilitate the provision of the HSD Service and to ensure my compliance with the Terms of Use and to efficiently manage their networks and their provision of services. TWC or ISP may take such steps as each may determine appropriate in the event my usage of the HSD Service does not comply with the Terms of Use. I acknowledge that HSD Service does not include other services managed by TWC and delivered over TWC’s shared infrastructure, including Video Service and Digital Phone Service.
That ladies and gentlemen is the modification that will appear in a TWC bill at your domicile sometime soon. The jest of this legalize is to prepare YOU for metered service. Without the change TWC could lose in court in a challenge under the old contract.
Metered service is nigh!
Generally Fox has their act together. But a Bill O’Reilly flap has generated some controversy —
Due to violations of the Terms and Conditions of BillOReilly.com attributed to your account, your Premium Membership is hereby terminated effective as of the date of this notice. The termination is final and any attempt to use the site or to renew membership either directly or indirectly will similarly result in termination and/or blocking use of the site.
I’m not sure what terms and conditions I supposedly violated. I never posted any comments (or “blog postings”) on O’Reilly’s site. All I did was quote (and screencap) two embarrassing comments from the message boards.
Oh, wait. I just reviewed the Terms and Conditions again, and I believe I have found the relevant language: “4. Do not expose Bill O’Reilly as a rank hypocrite.”
This all started when BOR accused the blog HotAir with not policing their website. Problem is what HotAir was accused of came from a commenter not one of the site authors. BOR then went on to say his site does not engage in this kind of mongering. Which brings us to the irony portion of this post. The blog Patterico Pontifications paid the entry fee and found — the very same mongering that BOR accused HotAir of! Then BOR had the tumidity to then ban him for reading comment entries.
Now all of this is mildly amusing. But quite honestly both sites lose in a tit for tat battle of words. It leads one down the same journalistic rat hole that is killing the pulp press. At this point both sides just ought to call an armistice and cool it.
For me Google’s new Wave is an intriguing rethink of communications and collaboration and the open API’s could be the beginning of an ecosystem that would make it much more interesting. If Google can better integrate it’s calandar, voice and online office suite, Wave could be an Exchange killer. That would hit Microsoft hard where it hurts. Outlook is one of MS’s most adopted products in the corporate world. If adoption of Wave catches fire, it could literally burn one of the cornerstones of Microsoft’s corporate stranglehold in effigy.
A wave is equal parts conversation and document.People can communicate and work together with richly formatted text, photos, videos, maps, and more.
A wave is shared. Any participant can reply anywhere in the message, edit the content and add participants at any point in the process. Then playback lets anyone rewind the wave to see who said what and when.
A wave is live. With live transmission as you type, participants on a wave can have faster conversations, see edits and interact with extensions in real-time.l (Google Wave)
We have delved into this in many forms. Even had a heated discussion with what we presume was a J-School grad a couple weeks back. We have also noted the continued outsourcing of jobs to parts other than America. Well if you meld the two observations together here’s what you get —
Last year, a news Web site in Pasadena, Calif., made headlines when they started outsourcing city hall coverage to reporters in India. Using simple webcams and e-mail, Pasadena Now would put journalists half a world away inside city council chambers to observe and file stories on local government. The site fired its staff, and replaced them with Indians who’d crank out 1,000-word stories for the rock-bottom rate of $7.50.
The media world was abuzz: American news outfit outsources local reporting to the subcontinent. Could we all be next?
We wondered too about the limits of outsourcing local news, particularly alternative journalism. Covering city council meetings via webcam is one thing. Producing entire issues of a local news and arts weekly is quite another. What started as a joke — “I’ve got an idea. Let’s outsource an entire issue to India just to see if it can be done” — has culminated in what you see here.
They cover city council meetings from Bangalore! And the papers are still failing? Think about it. If it is possible to do everything in a paper other than Section A at Indian rates these business should be making money out the ying-yang. Of course what is described above was done on a lark as an experiment. But still. Somebody might run with this full time.
The Columbia School of Journalism might as well close up shop or remorph itself as a international studies program.
Recent Comments