|
|
Understanding
Interactive TV
By D.M.
Schwartz.
Draft dated
16 October 2000
Synopsis
What is "interactive television"? Ask that question to ten
industry participants, and the response will likely be ten different
answers. Presently, there is no general agreement on what constitutes
interactive TV. The wide range of possibilities for interactive
TV is part of what makes the concept so attractive, and so difficult
to implement. In this paper, the multiple definitions of interactive
TV are discussed, as are various scenarios for its commercialization.
A Brief History
The history of interactive TV contains a number of distinct threads
that have intertwined from time to time, but on the whole represent
separate sequences of development. Interaction within the context
of broadcast TV has had little to do with interactive video as
it has developed in the computer industry. Similarly, until the
past few years, interactivity based on closed circuit TV has been
a separate thread. The telephony industry independently developed
interactive video in the form of telephones with pictures. The
computer industry's form of interactive video consisted entirely
of graphical user interfaces to data processing applications,
until the recent addition of multimedia data types. Then, there
is the videogame industry, which over the course of 25 years has
added whole new dimensions to interactivity, including high fidelity
sound, force feedback, body motion input devices and 3-D imaging
headsets.
Ever since the
very first flickering of television about 70 years ago, the engineers
and promoters of TV have talked about 2-way video. Their vision
of bi-directional video communications was realized in closed
circuit and private wireless TV in the 1950s. In the 1960s, AT&T
attempted to commercialize 2-way video in the form of "videophones",
using an adaptation of their voice telephony system. Until recently,
the high cost of video cameras, the limited broadcast bandwidth
available, and the high cost of cable for 2-way TV limited its
application to proprietary systems used mainly for security within
or around a specific facility. In these systems, the interactivity
is that of people communicating with each other, and additionally
there can be a means to remotely control the cameras.
The utility
of video for surveillance made what is now referred to as "telepresence"
a major form of interactive closed-circuit TV. Telepresence systems
enable people to interact safely from a distance with objects
in a hostile or dangerous environment using remote-controlled
video cameras in combination with robotic devices such as manipulator
arms and grippers. From bomb handling and disposal to underwater
salvage, telepresence has proven itself to be an economically
viable form of interactive TV. Telepresence in the form of 2-way
video chat plus user-directed performance is now a profitable
segment of Internet e-commerce, mainly for the purpose of adult
entertainment.
Interaction
with the content of broadcast television began with the first
use of telephone call-ins by the host of the "Today Show" in the
late 1950s. Callers responded to questions broadcast over the
air by dialing the originating TV station's switchboard, and if
they were deemed suitable for going on-air, the phone on the host's
desk would ring. A 7-second broadcast delay was used to prevent
inappropriate material from being aired. The telephone call-in
form of interactive participation continues to this day on a variety
of TV programs, ranging from games to shopping.
In the 1960s,
interactive video took on an entirely different meaning within
the computer industry. Video in the computer industry meant "glass
teletype", as cathode ray tubes (CRTs) started to take over from
online printers as one of the primary output devices for mainframe
computers. Almost immediately, in university computing centers
everywhere, the text-based computer game, "Space War", previously
confined to a single or multiple users at teletype machines, became
a CRT and keyboard-based game. Within a few years, the text-only
video displays of space warfare encounters gained primitive character-based
graphics depicting ship and missile trajectories. Beginning in
the 1970s with Atari's "Pong", computer games made the leap from
mainframe computers to microcomputers that could use the home
TV screen as the video display.
Videogame hardware
morphed into home computers in the 1980s. Many of these early
systems used the home TV as the display device. True to their
heritage, games quickly became the second most popular use of
home PCs. And, since computers can use modems to communicate with
each other over telephone lines, interactivity extended to remote
multi-users, so games could be played among a group of people
at a distance from one another. Long before the rise of the Internet,
bulletin board-based games offered chat between players and game
downloading services. For a few years, a single architecture combined
a broadcast receiver color TV with a microcomputer in a keyboard
and a modem to deliver conventional TV, electronic messaging,
and videogames to the living room.
By 1996, when
the Internet and Web browsers became mainstream PC applications,
home computers no longer used the TV as the video display, simply
because TVs could not support SVGA, and then XVGA screen resolutions.
The Web developed into a powerful interactive media in its own
right, distinct from videogames, TV, and non-networked computers.
Now, it is estimated that over 50% of American homes have both
a TV and a PC - and it's the PC that is connected to the Web.
Over the past
three years, interactivity has been added both to community-wide
cable television and satellite TV. It is possible to connect to
the Internet using a set-top box, a keyboard and the home TV for
the display device. Typically, a telephone line is used by the
set-top box to gain Internet access, but not in all cases. All
Satellite TV systems require a phone line to support interactivity.
Other interactive TV systems offer interactivity that enhances
TV with "click to purchase" capability, without a keyboard, using
only the remote control.
Levels of
Interactivity
Aside from the hardware, it is useful to consider interactive
TV on a purely functional basis. Acknowledging that some functions
are more difficult and costly to implement than others, levels
of interactivity can be defined, such as low, medium, and high.
These distinctions are somewhat arbitrary, as the levels blend
into one another and features that are easy to supply within one
community system may be next to impossible to deliver in another.
Low Interactivity
TV
One big step up from plain old TV, low interactivity TV offers
basic Internet services, gaming, and near video on demand:
- NTSC standard
images
- Scheduled-by-popular-demand video movies
- Stereo sound system
- Videogames at NTSC resolution
- Wired game controller
- Wired QWERTY Keyboard
- Access to email, Web pages and search engine
via a gateway server that pre-processes pages
for NTSC display.
Medium Interactivity
TV
With advanced gaming, 2-way video, video on demand and support
for all Internet services, the medium level of interactive TV
features:
- Mid-resolution
images at 800 by 600, non-interlaced, 30 frames per
second
- Picture-in-picture with two 320 by 240 window
capability
- True video on demand (start any cable movie,
any time)
- 2-way video chat
- 3-speaker sound system
- DVD player
- 3-D world games at 800 by 600 resolution with
single remote player support
- Wireless game controller with force feedback
- Wired QWERTY Keyboard
- USB port for still camera and Webcam video input
and optional output devices such
as a printer, scanner or disk drive
- Access to Web-based productivity suite,
including email, search engine, word processor,
spreadsheet, financial management tools
High Interactivity
TV
Capable of full-immersion gaming, personal video stream control,
video conferencing and support for all Internet services, the
highest level of interactive TV features:
- High-resolution
images at 1024 by 768, non-interlaced, 30 frames
per second
- Picture-in-picture with four 320 by 240 window
capability
- Tape-deck-like control of video on demand
- Real-time branching video (for example, click
to change scenes)
- 5-way video chat
- Theater-quality sound system
- DVD RAM-based video and data recording
- 3-D world games at 1024 by 768 resolution, multiple
remote player support
- Wireless game controller with force feedback
- Wireless QWERTY Keyboard
- Wireless headset for voice recognition
- Voice synthesis for user feedback
and text to speech
- Firewire port for digital video camera
input and other peripherals, like printers,
scanners and advanced game controllers
- Access to Web-based productivity suite,
including email, search engine, word processor,
spreadsheet, financial management tools
Commercialization
of Interactive TV
Widely perceived as a potentially huge revenue generator for providers
and consumer electronics companies, the implementation of interactive
TV is being approached from a number of directions. Arguably,
about 500,000 users already have interactive TV at the first level
described above. Those users own a Microsoft WebTV set top box,
a stereo TV, a stand-alone videogame system, and access a cable
TV service with subscription or pay-per-view movies. In the near
future, with some digital cable services, both the external videogame
system and the WebTV box will not be required. The cable company
will offer those features as options for digital cable, reducing
living room clutter substantially. Indeed, some hotels offer such
services, today.
The medium and
high interactivity TV systems may be costly to realize for both
the consumer and the provider, or not, depending on how it's done.
The beginnings of several implementations are now visible, as
are their unique business models. It is convenient to group these
interactive TV systems by type, without reference to specific
offerings. Broadly speaking, there are three types of interactive
TV systems in the process of being commercialized: head end digital
cable systems, broadband Internet systems, and hybrid satellite/dial-up
systems. Each faces its own set of challenges, and all of them
share some common barriers.
The barriers
to commercialization faced by proposed medium and highly interactive
TV systems include the slow rate of adoption of HDTV due to the
high price of digital TV sets, the high cost of provider-side
infrastructure, Internet bandwidth costs and Internet congestion.
The high cost of digital TV sets is a function of low demand,
which in turn is caused by the lack of HDTV broadcasting, which
is slow to get online because there are not enough digital TV
viewers. This circular problem may be alleviated by the increasing
availability of other sources of high resolution content that
could drive HDTV sales.
High image resolution
content is becoming increasingly attractive in two separate venues,
DVD for home theater and on the Internet, in the form of Web pages.
The problem with these content sources as drivers for adoption
of digital TV sets is twofold. To date, consumers would rather
spend their money on very large NTSC screens than on smaller HDTV
screens, and PC video monitors are very inexpensive. Add the fact
that most HDTV sets don't accept input from a PC, and digital
TV becomes an unattractive alternative. This may change, as another
high definition video source becomes widely available: DVD-based
videogame machines. Consumers willingly spend hundreds of dollars
per year on videogames, after spending hundreds to buy the platform
itself. Couple a high bandwidth Internet connection and an HDTV
set to the videogame system and most of the functions of a medium
to highly interactive TV are there. Another way around the expensive
TV set problem is to use a PC monitor as the display for either
the cable interface box or the videogame platform.
Provider-side
infrastructure costs impact the different systems in various ways.
For the head end digital cable services, upgrading their plants
to support digital TV, video on demand, games and Internet access
is a quadruple burden that can cost millions of dollars per head
end. Cost recovery means persuading their subscribers to pay for
each new premium service. However, cable companies are already
encountering serious resistance above basic cable pricing. For
the interactive TV over broadband Internet contingent, infrastructure
is not as big a barrier, given that over 3 million high bandwidth
connections and the back-end support for them already exist. So
far, PC users seem willing to pay the freight to get the service.
For interactive TV, in the form of interactive video streaming
over the Internet, the lack of digital TV sets is not an issue,
as the PC already has its dedicated high-definition monitor right
out of the box.
On the down
side, interactive TV over the Internet is subject to "netlock",
traffic congestion that limits the number of high-quality video
streams within any given metro area. In addition, every video
stream on the Internet costs its provider about $0.50 per hour
per viewer. Although this cost is decreasing every few months,
it must be covered by advertising or pay per view fees. So far,
only pay per view of adult entertainment has been able to deliver
a profit margin. As more viewers gain access to broadband Internet,
and bandwidth costs go down, other pay per view content, such
as sports and concerts will become feasible. Obviously, these
two barriers do not exist for head end based cable TV delivery
of interactive TV.
The hybrid
of satellite digital video delivery and dialup modem back channel
for user data avoids many of the infrastructure costs, Internet
bandwidth and Internet costs issues associated with the digital
head end cable approach and broadband Internet systems. The digital
video servers can be concentrated cost-effectively at a few data
centers and the infrastructure/availability of dialup modem data
support is ubiquitous. The remaining problem for the hybrid satellite-modem
system is mainly performance. The performance issue centers on
latency. Network latency is the time it takes for the user's input
to affect the interactive video stream. With a low-bandwidth modem
as the control channel and a satellite up and down link gating
the video, shoot-em-up and racing video games are virtually impossible
to implement, leaving only card games and other lesser forms of
interaction.
Industry
Standards
Given that the whole point of standardization is common definitions,
it is no surprise that there are a number of proposed and effective
standards pertaining to interactive TV. It is beyond the scope
of this paper to examine them all. Instead, partial, non-representative
samples will be considered here. Note that the range of standards
covers hardware, signal transmission and software. The applicable
software standards include everything from video encoding formats
to on-screen object linking methods. Perhaps, at some point in
the future a de-facto working set of standards will emerge.
Starting with
the hardware, there is now a proposed digital TV hardware specification
circulating among national committees of manufacturers. Last minute
changes in the proposed standard have delayed shipments of digital
TVs from some manufacturers. Other manufacturers are now shipping
their best guess at compliant sets. On the PC hardware side, there
is general agreement on XVGA as the screen display format. Note
that both analog and digital TV have rectangular pixels and PCs
have square pixels. PCs do not interlace video frames and TVs,
including most of the proposed digital ones, do. On the other
hand, many digital camcorders are capable of recording and playing
non-interlaced video. DVD players generally support a range of
image formats, including HDTV.
For transmission
of NTSC digital TV, which can range from the same effective screen
resolution as analog NTSC, right up to high-end HDTV, the proposed
standard only covers the downstream side. This is because the
user's back channel to the transmitter can not be within the allocated
spectrum of the main signal. A variety of proprietary formats
for user upstream data intended for use on cable or fiber are
presently in trial deployments. The competing satellite TV systems
each use their own downstream transmission format, with a fully
standardized back channel of data via modem. Digital video on
the Internet is transmitted via either HTTP or UDP, which are
not compatible server data protocols. However, underlying both
of those is a common data packet format, TCP/IP. For interactive
TV on the Web, HTTP is more common because it handles both the
downstream and upstream data with verification, even though UDP
is more efficient for downstream-only video, which can be sent
without any receiver verification.
On the software
side, the three main standardization issues are video encoding/decoding
( the "codec"), stream format, and the user interface. Digital
video must be encoded to make both storage and transmission practical.
Digital broadcast, cable and satellite TV have all agreed on a
type of codec, MPEG, that is used in different, sometimes compatible
ways, by each segment. A version of MPEG 1 is used by satellite
TV, digital cable and minimum standard broadcast digital TV. MPEG
2 is used by HDTV broadcasters and DVD-standard devices. On the
Internet, MPEG 4 is used by about half of all streaming video
providers. The other half is split between two other codecs, RealNetworks
and Sorenson.
Then, there
are the competing video stream formats. RealNetworks has their
own stream format. Apple has QuickTime. And, Microsoft has MediaPlayer.
Video streams contain additional information about the encoded
video within the stream, as well as a method for controlling the
behavior of the stream. None of these stream formats are compatible.
Each one needs its own software playback method. The playback
methods are available to users of PCs and Macs both as standalone
applications and plug-ins for browsers.
For user interfaces,
the standard face of plain old TV is changing as digital TV enters
the frame. Each broadcast network, cable company and satellite
TV provider has taken the opportunity of digital and added features
to TV. Each of these features needs a way for users to take advantage
of it, and this has resulted a variety of new buttons on remote
controls, new icons in the corner of the TV screen and menu screens
of all flavors: pop-up, pull-down, and side-scrolling under the
picture. There are no standards in this arena. For interactive
TV on the Internet, standardization on the Web browser as the
main user interface may seem inevitable, as most video is now
delivered this way. But, a number of Internet TV channels have
opted for proprietary software applications that open their own
user interfaces on the desktop.
TV and PCs
- Convergence or Divergence?
This author, among many others, has written that the convergence
of TVs, PCs and the Internet seems likely within 10 years. A number
of trends point in this direction, including the decreasing cost
of PCs, the increasing image quality of TV, smart digital TVs,
the number of homes with PCs wired to the Internet, increasing
Internet usage per household, pay per view on the Internet, video
chat, and on and on. Those trends are supported by plenty of surveys
and statistics. On the other hand, there are trends in the opposite
direction, that indicate TVs and their audience will remain separated
and distinct. Perhaps the two most important trends that point
to divergence are the popularity of home theater and proprietary
videogame platforms.
Big screen home
theaters with multi-channel sound are increasingly popular with
consumers. As broadcast and cable signals improve in quality with
digital TV and HDTV, the visual benefits of shear size will become
even more obvious and attractive. It seems clear that without
the additional cost and complexity burden of computer electronics,
big TVs will always be less expensive than big-screen PCs. Not
to mention the fact that TVs don't "crash" the way computers do.
More reliability further enhances the visual entertainment bang
for the buck advantage of TV over PCs.
The new generation
of videogame platforms now on the market are supercomputers in
their own right, complete with high-speed network connectivity,
at the user's option. Compared head to head with PCs of similar
game graphics capability, the proprietary platforms perform as
well, if not better, at a fraction of the price, which is typically
one-sixth that of a PC. And again, the game machines are more
reliable and have virtually no maintenance, compared to a PC.
Conclusion
Interactive TV is already on the market in a variety of forms,
ranging from PCs with Internet-based video, to digital set top
boxes on cable TV, to videogame systems. At this point in time,
in appears unlikely that any single flavor or configuration will
dominate the consumer space in the foreseeable future. Instead,
interactive TV will continue to gain popularity in a multitude
of forms, serving its users within their budgetary constraints
both at work and at home.
|
|