Apple’s Bring-Your-Own-Streams OTT Hedge

ipad_remote_appAccording to a report by Recode’s Peter Kafka, which apparently is not a joke despite its April 1 dateline, Apple is asking the TV networks to provide their own streaming infrastructure and handle their own video delivery as part of Apple’s planned subscription OTT service.

The two leading theories for why Apple is looking to take such a hands-off approach are a) to avoid the costs involved in building out its own streaming infrastructure, and/or b) Apple thinks cable-based ISPs would be less likely to engage in f@ckery against the service if the networks are delivering the streams.

Neither theory is entirely persuasive.

The costs associated with streaming video are not prohibitive. The markets for transit and CDN services are very competitive and Apple would have not trouble attracting very aggressive bids for its business.

Read More »

Finger-pointing over interconnection

When a consumer’s OTT video stream starts rebuffering, or suffers packet losses resulting in degraded quality, it’s often hard to know where to direct blame. The problem is typically caused by congestion somewhere between the content’s originating server and the consumer’s receiving device. But exactly where in the chain of transit that congestion is occurring, and more importantly who is responsible and why, can be difficult even for engineers — and virtually impossible for consumers — to ascertain.

045448280-maclean-d-deshler-m-baldwinBack when it appeared the FCC was poised to classify interconnection arrangements between last-mile ISPs and third-party transit and content providers as a new, distinct type of Title II service the question of liability for congestion in the chain of transit suddenly became urgent for those involved in wholesale traffic exchanges. Read More »