1 / 72

The Past, Present, and Future of Video Telecommunication or, The 3% Solution

The Past, Present, and Future of Video Telecommunication or, The 3% Solution. Dave Lindbergh IMTC Fall Forum November 2008. Contents. Hooke Labs & how we use video Past How we got to this point Present Successful niches for video Why no mass-market adoption of video? False reasons

kamin
Download Presentation

The Past, Present, and Future of Video Telecommunication or, The 3% Solution

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. The Past, Present, and Future of Video Telecommunicationor,The 3% Solution Dave Lindbergh IMTC Fall Forum November 2008

  2. Contents • Hooke Labs & how we use video • Past • How we got to this point • Present • Successful niches for video • Why no mass-market adoption of video? • False reasons • User expectations  Correct reasons (my opinion) • Future • How to succeed: The 3% Solution

  3. Thesis • Video telecom is in < 1% of conference rooms • ~ 0% of homes • Mass acceptance has never occurred • Despite huge consumer enthusiasm for video • Despite good solutions to traditional problems • Because the quality of experience falls short • The “sense of being there” is disappointing • This will change • Telepresence market is the lever • Gradual improvements will lead to the mass-market

  4. Hooke’s use of video

  5. Hooke Laboratories • Start-up biotech CRO & manufacturer • Typical CRO contract $5000 to $50,000 • Customers all over the world • USA, Canada • Europe • Asia • South America

  6. Hooke is well-equipped for video • Co-founder w/14 years in video conferencing • Broadband Internet connection • Skype + webcams • Polycom VSX 7000 (H.323, SIP, H.320)

  7. How often does Hooke use video? • Never • Not once • Why not? And what can be done about that? • That is what this talk is about

  8. How we got here

  9. Video telephony system • 18 frames/second • Progressive scan • Plasma display • Pixel aspect ratio 3:2 • Image quality described as “excellent” • End-to-end latency 1 millisecond (great!)

  10. 7 April 1927 – Bell Labs

  11. New York – Washington DC Walter Gifford Herbert Hoover President, AT&T US Sec’y of Commerce New York Washington DC

  12. “Television” = Telephone + Vision • 50x50 pixel display, neon bulbs • Camera: Arc lamp beam, mechanical scanning • Optional projection to 2x3 feet • But “results were not so good” Edna Mae Horner Operator Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company

  13. AT&T Picturephone 1957 “Experimental Model”

  14. Early 1960s Mirror

  15. AT&T was very serious • Plenty of smart business people! 1964

  16. Framing

  17. AT&T was not alone Lots of investment, market research, usability studies… NTT, 1968 Philips, 1974

  18. AT&T quietly gave up in the early 1970s • Did it “cost too much”?

  19. 1980s – Still image picture phones • Mid-1980s: Japanese consumer electronic firms introduced still-image picture phones • Used existing regular analog phone line • POTS modem • ~ 5 seconds to send 1 black & white frame • No audio during picture transmission • ~$200 each • Very few takers

  20. 1992 – AT&T Videophone 2500 • “Predicting that 10 years from now video phones will be as popular as cordless phones and fax machines, last week AT&T introduced the first full-color motion video phone that operates over regular phone lines…” • Newsweek, January 20, 1992 • 10 frames/second, $1500 • Marconi, others, had similar products

  21. Many more videophones since then • They all worked • Their makers all expected commercial success • And why not? • Consumers are consistently excited at the idea of video telecommunication Siemens T-View (H.320 ISDN) ~ 1997

  22. Maybe the technology wasn’t ready • Too expensive • Poor video quality • Not enough bandwidth • Maybe the time is finally right • Maybe your company is thinking about introducing a video phone • Maybe you think now is the time • If so…

  23. …you are not alone

  24. Others have thought so, too

  25. Really, more than you might think

  26. ...a lot more

  27. …and more…

  28. …and more.

  29. Today: • Video phones are in every home and every office • Well, no • Why not???

  30. People want video communication • Witness all the attempts • Just talk to potential users – lots of excitement • But they don’t buy or use video when offered • Except for narrow niche applications • For some reason people are disappointed • We need to understand why before we can fix this

  31. Progress so far

  32. A successful, but small, industry • Video conferencing • ~$2B/year (generously) • Doesn’t seem to be growing much • Telepresence • ~$100M/year(?), growing fast • Expense limits market size (Wainhouse says < $1B)

  33. Video telecommunication today • Video conferencing offered since mid-1980s • More than 20 years • More successful than video phones • Why? • High-value application • Relatively big picture, high resolution • Less restriction on where people are in the frame • More “like being there” than video phones • At work – people are paid to use it • But…

  34. After 20+ years, video is in < 1% of conference rooms Lots of room for growth  Similar problems as stopped video telephony  Source: http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?id=1006610 October 14, 2008

  35. People want visual communicationSo – Why?

  36. Challenges today – are these the problem? • Connectivity issues • Incompatible protocols & standards • NATs and firewalls • Network fragmentation • IP, ISDN, POTS, 3G, 4G… • No public/automatic gateways and bridges • Too much latency • And lots of denial about it; doesn’t help

  37. Videophones didn’t have connectivity problems (mostly) • Early videophones solved connectivity • Offered & operated by carriers • Simple analog devices • Many videophones were utterly reliable • POTS models used voice network (w/modems) • Reliability was not the problem • Connectivity was not the problem

  38. Why no mass adoption – is it cost? • AT&T spent $billions – lots of market research • Best and brightest people in the world • They were sure it would sell • Many free services: PC + $15 webcam • Skype, AIM, Yahoo, MS Messenger, NetMeeting… • Many video phones were/are offered by carriers with subsidies • Phones under $300 common • Same usage fees as voice calls • Probably not cost

  39. Is it ease of use? • AT&T Picturephone was a telephone • Pick up phone, dial number • Most videophones are equally easy to use • Probably not ease of use

  40. Is it video quality? Latency? • Many products have very good video quality • Even bad pictures look good on small displays • 1960s analog phones had good quality • Modern VC systems have excellent video quality, large displays, but still haven’t enjoyed mass adoption • Phones of the 1960s and 1970s were analog • No extra latency • Probably not these, either • All these things are very important – necessary • But they don’t seem to be sufficient

  41. The mass adoption barrier • Video conferencing is a successful niche • But very far from mass adoption (< 1%) • Video telephony hasn’t succeeded yet • Yet, clearly there is a market desire! • Current issues do not explain past failures • Standards, connectivity were solved for videophones • Latency was not a problem in the analog world • Then what is required for success? • Why have users not yet embraced video telephony?

  42. Fiction creates expectations Metropolis (Fritz Lang, 1926)

  43. Fiction reflects expectations • Where are the cameras? • This is impossible with today’s video • But it is expected The Jetsons (Hanna-Barbera, 1962) The Jetsons (Hanna-Barbera, 1962)

  44. Perfect framing, perfect lighting Star Trek (Paramount, 1967)

  45. Nobody is nervous “on camera” • Actors look straight into the camera • Professional cinematography / videography • Multiple camera positions & zooms • Directors choose the best shots 2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick, 1968)

  46. Real video is not like fictional video

  47. What will it take for mass adoption? • More than just: • Cost • Latency • Reliability • Connectivity • Resolution • Picture size • Ease of use • These are all necessary, but not sufficient

  48. What is the problem, then?

  49. Quality of Experience • The “sense of being there” is disappointing • At least, weaker than people expect & want • VC is not enough like being in the same place • Eye contact • Peripheral vision • Depth perception • Awareness of framing • Perceived distance to other people • Ability to interrupt • Certainly other things, too

More Related