In this fairly long post I twist and turn my way through some of the alleyways relating to the user experience of the digital television and video revolution that seems intent on impacting upon as all. Some alleys will be cul-de-sacs and some will have deep holes to fall into. Some alleys will be dressed up as prime real estate only to have their cover blown, and some will be, well … just confusing. This particular journey takes us from Hull to China and back.
The promise and reality
First, step in to my time machine and let’s jump back to the year 2000.
“We have seen the future – and it is in Hull.”
That’s what a delegation from the British Screen Advisory Council had to say in their Kingston Communications Briefing (PDF) in July 2000 about the, then new, Kingston Interactive Television Service. Now let’s fast forward to today.
In April 2006, Hull’s Kingston Communications is to close its Kingston Interactive Television (KITV) service. Its subscriber base has fallen to around ~4000 from a high of ~10,000. Hull is unique in the UK in that the city had the only remaining municipally owned telephone operation in the country. Previously called the Hull City Telephone Department it became Kingston Communications in 1987. Kingston Communications is now only partially owned by the city having partially floated on the stock exchange. Because of its unique telecoms provision (the rest of the UK is covered by British Telecom) Hull provides a ready test-bed for new services, e.g. the BBC was using KITV to develop and test its interactive services.
So why is, what was originally promoted as a leading edge service, closing down? The official position from Kingston Communications appears to be that the market just wasn’t big enough to justify further investment.
The digital television market has become much more competitive during the last year, with suppliers offering rich content and improved interactivity, along with much lower prices. Without the benefits of scale, further investment in the KIT service would not be cost-effective compared with other opportunities that are available to us. (Source: Hull Daily Mail citing Kevin Walsh, MD Kingston Communications)
I don’t know what the implications are of the KITV closure, if any, for the interesting looking University of Lincoln’s degree in Digital & Interactive TV. At the time of writing their Web site states:
The course reflects the exciting development in Hull of the Kingston Interactive Television service (KITV), who provides the UK’s only service combining multi-channel digital TV, Video on Demand and Internet services delivered over existing telephone lines using ADSL technologies … The course is offered in conjunction with KITV, who collaborate on programme development, helping to ensure the course is close to the industry it serves, is up to date with market and technical changes, and will have credibility in the industry. KITV participate in the programme through a series of lectures, live projects and case studies, and student placements.
So, as a result of the KITV closure is IPTV dead? Not yet, and possibly it has a brighter future than the Hull experience would suggest. Homechoice is still around and it has apparently around 35,000 subscribers, but is currently limited to London and Stevenage. On the UK cable TV front, NTL Incorporated have already entered this arena, and BT intends to go live with a service later this year.
But … {there’s always one of those in Auricle:}
Ease of use rules OK?
There’s some valuable lessons to be gleaned from the demise of KITV. The fall from ~10,000 KITV subscribers to ~4000 suggests subscribers were abandoning ship because there were insufficient affordances and some usability constraints.
What the marketing department and techno-enthusiasts may see as an affordance may be perceived by the end-user as a constraint. What if users don’t want interaction? What if they just want a ‘good enough’ quality linear viewing experience and to be entertained, and for that to be decided by the schedulers? What if they think they don’t want television/video on demand? It’s this last question that holds the key to progress or becomes the source of failure. Let me rephrase it:
What if they don’t know that they would actually like television/video on demand and how do we get them to know?
The answer is relatively simple. The process must be really easy and the affordances self-evident. Less like driving the car and more like stepping into a taxi or public transport and letting someone else do the driving. Make it too difficult, too multistage, and the users vote with their remote controls or the off switch.
The analogy I draw here is with podcasting. Audio downloads from the Web have been possible for years but still tended to be the province of the enthusiasts. Add portable media players, ‘good enough’ audio compression, and freely available easy to use software to automatically download what interests you and suddenly the process has just got so much easier. Any barriers to ease of use, however, no matter how trivial they appear to the techno enthusiast or marketing departments are enough to scupper the take-up of what may appear to be ‘must have’ services.
In an era of a multitude of choices and multiple digital channels helping users to identify what they want to view and making it easy to view it live, or to record, is a must. The reality, however, is that, despite the growing abundance of digital channels in the UK, relatively few people have experienced the power of pointing to an item on an electronic programme guide and, voila!, the programme is either displayed or recorded for you. No special VideoPlus codes to read from print-based guides, no entering start times, stop times and channels; just point to the item, read a displayed summary of what the programme is about, and it’s done. The programme is then reliably recorded or displayed and the quality is ‘good enough’. So usability, reliability, and ‘good enough’ quality are the key (I’ll address that good enough later).
But participating in the world of digital TV can be considerably more complex than the relatively simple analogue television service with its limited number of choices. As the UK heads towards shutdown of the analogue TV service more users are switching over to one or other of the digital service alternatives. That means cable, satellite, or in the UK, the terrestrial Freeview service. Some of the difficulties arise because digital TV usually means a set-top box plugged into a television which contains its own analogue tuner. For anyone frightened of programming their VHS video recorder a whole new world of terror awaits. For example, what has actually got control of your TV set, is it the set-top box or the analogue tuner? Or, how do you get the video recorder to record a digital channel? How do I find new digital channels? Can I record one digital channel whilst watching another? The answer to the latter is no, maybe, perhaps, but …
The problem is that the user can easily drown in the multitude of technical and programme options now available and so solutions that help them cope with this complexity are a must. Failure to help users cope with complexity means that they don’t make any choices at all and opt out completely, or they can use only a tiny subset of what is available because it’s just such a pain to find out about the rest.
One of the solutions to this complexity is to try and buy a black box which takes the complexity away. Such an approach has proved very successful for some. For example, the Sky+ Personal Video Recorder (PVR) links a very good custom electronic programme guide (EPG) with Sky satellite programming and makes recording to a hard disk as easy as it gets. There are now Freeview alternatives to Sky+ but none quite match the ease of use of the Sky system.
Building your own PVR?
In this section we’ll take a little diversion and describe how to get build a Sky+ like experience for yourself. An average computer can be pressed into service just as long as you as opening hardware and configuring software doesn’t fill you with terror.
It’s possible to simulate the Sky+ experience using your own computer and a digital television card plus some freely available software. It’s fair to say that it’s possible to achieve a high degree of usability and reliability from this route but it does require a willingness to embrace the technology and not be put off by problems. It’s probably not a route suited to the technophobic or those who are intimidated by terms like XMLTV or automating scheduling.
My particular system uses a Hauppauge Nova-T USB2 external box which feeds the terrestrial digital TV (Freeview) to my computer via USB (although cable or satellite signal feeds could have been used). I use two pieces of free software to make the recording process easy, i.e. the excellent GB-PVR software and the equally excellent XMLTV GUI software. The latter feeds the electronic programme guide part of GB-PVR software with up-to-date programme data courtesy of the BBC. I reached this combination only after a lot of trial and error. I originally used the open source Media Portal rather than GB-PVR but Media Portal produced recordings in the non-standard Microsoft DVR-MS format which was originally designed for Windows XP Media Center edition. Ironically, a DVR-MS recording does contain a standard MPEG2 video stream, but the DVR-MS wrapper contains additional metadata and the net effect is to make for very large file sizes and for the file not be recognized by many media players. Media Portal does provide a converter from DVR-MS to MPEG2 but I found this resulted in loss of audio-video sync. GB-PVR gives me the option of recording in MPEG2 and I don’t have any audio-video sync problems. I also tried the Showshifter software instead of GB-PVR and I was quite impressed with this but, between the time I downloaded the software trial and decided I liked it, the company that produced it went into liquidation leaving their key asset and their potential user base high and dry. So GB-PVR gets the Morrison vote.
I’ve now reached the point of starting up GB-PVR looking at the EPG and clicking on the programmes for the week I wish to record to my hard disk and then walking away from the machine and letting it get on with it. Intermittently, I transfer the MPEG2 files to a recordable DVD and can watch them on my domestic television/DVD or from a laptop when I’m on the road.
Alternatives to the PVR?
Another alternative to the full blown hard-disc based PVR is the DVD Recorder with integral tuner (preferably digital although analogue is still more common).
Don’t confuse hard disk PVR’s and DVD recorders (with integral television tuners). The presence of that super-fast high capacity hard disk is all important to the experience. The DVD recorder/tuner combo does have offer affordances over the old fashioned VCR but there are also some constraints. For example, when did you have to format your video tape before you can record? Also, the DVD recorder certainly lacks the immediacy of hard disk PVR, i.e. everything related to the DVD recorder is so slow. And what about the supposed high capacity of the DVD? Well, that depends on what quality of recording you want to make. Choose the highest quality setting and you may be lucky and get 1.5 hours whereas the lowest quality setting may allow you 6 hours. Want to make an instant recording? Then do make sure you know how much capacity you’ve got left on your recordable DVD and that the blank is formatted before you start and then wait 30 seconds to a minute for the thing to go through its start-up sequence. Put starkly, the DVD recorder and tuner is slower than the old VCR although it does produce recordings in the more useful DVD format, i.e. my laptop doesn’t like video cassettes and I wouldn’t want to carry them around … it’s just getting to the DVD recording stage which can be such a pain. As indicated earlier, people usually want to watch television to relax, and sometimes to learn. Anything which puts barriers in the way has got a problem. If the non linear experience equals complexity and multiple stages to gratification, then there’s a problem.
But yet once the user has a positive non-linear experience then things will look up. It’s just at the moment it requires quite a bit of knowledge to set up. Once setup, however, then there’s no looking back. Anyone who has used an electronic programme guide (EPG) to view what’s available and then simply clicked on the item and that’s when you will know what I’m talking about.
Enough of the minutiae above and let’s get back to the bigger issues related to digital television and video.
Models of delivery
As I’ve indicated before in Auricle there are two possible ways of looking at television and video on demand.
First, there’s the interpretation the would be content owners or distributors would prefer, i.e. broadband (or cable) used as the route to deliver media streamed from central servers which act, therefore, as some remote digital VCR thus, so these companies think, eliminating any danger of illegal copying. So instead of going to your local video store you use a set-top box interfacing to your television and, voila, your programme of choice gets underway. That was the KITV approach and looks like being the approach which will underpin BT’s forthcoming video on demand over broadband service (a hybrid terrestrial digital/broadband receiver is possible, i.e. Freeview Plus – standard digital channel provision off-air plus pay-to-view channels via broadband). BT also seems to have committed itself to the Microsoft IPTV solution. To this we could add Sky by Wire which is making the satellite broadcaster’s channels available via a number of broadband networks. It is currently available in the UK via HomeChoice and in Ireland Sky recently reached a similar agreement with Smart Telecom.
Second, there’s the model where, instead of being streamed, the video file is offered as a download to the local machine. There’s some similarity here with podcasting (of usually MP3) audio files where some client application or even an RSS aggregator could automatically download such files. So, theoretically, you could set your aggregator to download each new episode of your favourite soap (or educational programme:) and watch all episodes when you are ready. I say, theoretically, because the guardians of the moving image don’t want you to do this because once on your hard disk you can too easily share your downloads with others. For example, if you are a fan of ’24’ in the US you could have the temerity to send the latest series to your friends and relatives in the UK before it has been offered over here. Even worse, so the argument goes, the real criminals could be offering mass produced copies on a well known online auction site. The automated download model is what already drives the podcasting phenomenon and is intended to be the delivery model for video to be viewed in the forthcoming BBC interactive Media Player (iMP):
iMP could just be the iTunes for the broadcast industry, enabling our audience to access our TV and radio programmes on their terms – anytime, any place, any how – Martini Media. ([url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/05_may/16/imp.shtml]BBC Press Release[/url] 16 May 2005)
Let’s not forget, however, those anxieties about illegal copying in the download model. Readers may remember I have also alluded to the loss of freedoms inherent in the iMP architecture because of such concerns in previous Auricle posts.
Optimum quality or ‘good enough’?
And what about that ‘good enough’ quality I alluded to at the top of this posting?
Despite what the commercial interests and some techno fundamentalists would like to think, the average user will be prepared to trade the optimum technical standard for convenience, reliability, and ease of use.
Don’t believe me?
We tolerated VHS video for years despite better standards being available. We tolerate MP3 despite its technical limitations because it enables us to a lot of music or speech audio around in very small devices. We tolerate JPEG compression in our digital cameras or DivX/XVid in our portable media players for much the same reason. We tolerate MPEG2 in our DVDs. We tolerate WiFi because it’s better to be connected wirelessly than not connected at all.
And with video via broadband we may have to tolerate a lot more. At the highest data rates, i.e. highest quality, video streamed over broadband would soon overwhelm the bandwidth currently available to the average domestic premises. Or if you imagine your children (or flatmates) pulling in their video streams and one parent pulling in their own stream and another trying to browse the Web all at the same time then the quality is soon going to fall off. Data rates of 1.5 Megabits per second for video equal modest quality but that could easily consume half the actual bandwidth available to a household with even an 8 Megabits per second feed. I know that there some broadband suppliers in the UK are now offering as high as 22 Megabits per second, but they fail to mention you are going to have a nice clear telephone line and be real close to the telephone exchange to achieve anywhere near that – preferably your home should be [b]in[/b] the telephone exchange:) And if you can’t get broadband and you’re still stuck in modem territory don’t upset yourself by reading any of the above (but there again life is simpler for you:)
Still linked to quality we now come to devices which are meant to go well beyond ‘good enough’, i.e. high definition television (HDTV) and Media Center PCs. The hype machine has been running on overtime for both of these.
Let’s consider the latter first. We are supposed to buy these expensive and, at the moment, sometimes noisy boxes (due to the cooling required) and place these centre stage in our living and learning space to have them do what exactly? If they end up being used as no more than expensive video recorders why not just buy a dedicated PVR and save yourself a whole lot of pain and expense? Of course they can do more since they are meant to become the digital media hub (complete with you know who’s digital rights management system) which will meet all of your media domestic needs, but only if you add on the compatible satellite boxes so do make sure to buy your compatible network media device at the same time. And, of course we can browse the Web from the comfort of our couch but I’m not sure I want to do that … for all but the most casual browsing it’s a much better experience in front of a computer where I’m sitting in a proper chair and am close to the action.
Linked to the Media Centre PC we need our HDTV. Or do we? As indicated earlier people put up with the technically limited VHS for years and, apart from the audiophiles they have gladly swapped high fidelity for MP3/DivX/XVid and other compressed formats in their droves because they were willing to trade fidelity for convenience. High definition broadcast(Sky) and DVD sources (competing and incompatible HD DVD and Blu-ray formats)are going to come on stream this year and so we are expected to upgrade our DVD players and display technologies to take advantage of these. So it’s time to go out and buy yourself a ‘HD ready’ plasma screen and ‘HD ready’ DVD player but do be careful which products you buy because you are going to have to be pretty knowledgeable about sockets on the back of your plasma screen and you’ll need to be betting on what format of high definition DVD will the eventual winner in the stupid format wars now taking shaping up between Sony and the rest. Oh, and do be careful about the digital rights because if you thought it was complicated enough already the putative migration to high definition technologies is going to make it a lot more complicated. In a world where users have demonstrated they are prepared to trade convenience for the highest quality, e.g. movies or clips on mobile phones or mobile media players, and where broadband is in most cases anything but broad, high definition sources face both user acceptance and technological issues. On the user acceptance front the early adopter with high disposable income (or those without high disposable income but with a need for instant gratification) will go down the HD route. On the technological front it’s going to be Sky HD broadcasts via satellite and, for those without Sky, it’s going to be the competing DVD formats with mass sales not taking off until the format wars have resulted in a resolution. As for HD broadband? We can forget that until bandwidth ceases to be an issue. One HD channel can easily take 40 megabits per second. And as to those plasma screens; they still tend to consume energy far in excess of the humble standard television a factor that is going to become increasingly important as we enter an era where energy consumption is moving higher and higher up the political agenda.
The impact of the Internet on how users now spend their time
The assumption in a lot of the developments described above is that we are all going to be watching even more television or recorded video; but are we? What if the digital generation are actually going to be watching less? What if the driver now is the Web, the social software and not the television? It’s interesting to reflect on some of the work that’s taking place on the impact of the internet on the ‘traditional’ media. For example, as a welcome alternative to the recent polemics, and to add an international dimension to the deliberations we have the interesting report Surveying Internet Usage and Impact in Five Chinese Cities by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. The following extract gives a flavour of the report’s content:
… with the popularization of the Internet in Chinese cities, the Internet has begun impacting the traditional media. From the survey results, we find that though the penetration rates of television and newspapers are still much higher than those of the Internet … the time spent on the Internet per day was at least twice the time spent on other media … Internet users not only first select the Internet for interactive communication, but they also choose to use the Internet in such fields dominated by the traditional media, such as to learn about news, to obtain information about personal life, and for learning and entertainment … the more time that is spent on the Internet, the less time that is spent on television … (p66)
Or, from the University of Essex’s Chimera site working paper The Social Impact of Broadband Household Internet Access (PDF) we have:
… it is not only Asian internet users who are driven to a great extent by social communication. This should remind us that those looking for ‘killer apps’ may need to investigate social rather than consumption software more fully … Given previous findings using longitudinal data that getting household internet access has a negative effect on television use (Gershuny 2003) … (p15)
The Chimera paper also goes on to suggest, however, that time spent watching television is resilient to a range of life transitions.
For those wishing to keep in touch with the impact of the internet on how people are using their time (or related issues) then the Oxford Internet Institute (OII), with its focus on the societal implications of the Internet, is well worth a Web browser bookmark. In particular, I would attract your attention to the OII May 2005 report The Internet in Britain: the Oxford Internet Survey (OxIS) which states:
… 28% of users said they watch less television than before they had the internet. (p6)
Interestingly, the OxIS also states:
Most respondents (43%) feel able to do other things, such as listening to music or watching television while the use the Internet … (p38)
e-Learning implications?
Is any of the above relevant to what we call e-learning?
At the top of the post you will have seen how one University linked part of a visionary course to the fairly high profile KITV service which has now been closed so there are some practical implications from linking a course to specific and fairly unique delivery vehicle, but at the same time as we’ve seen there are soon to be a larger number of major actors in this space.
From a practical point of view there’s a lot to learn from experiencing the synergies between what by themselves are modest technologies. An online or off-air catalogue of TV and audio programmes is fairly unremarkable nowadays but when such a catalogue is connected to a recording device suddenly the user experience becomes so much easier and better. Point to what you want and click to make it happen. Complexity disappears and the user can do much more as a result.
The irony is that although digital television and video is beginning to provide users with lots of choice it’s being accompanied by technologies and legislation that will seek to limit use. For example, from an educational perspective we may only be interested in a relatively small extract from a digital television programme which we may wish to incorporate or repurpose into some learning experience.
Under the terms of a UK educational institution’s Off Air Recording Licence there should be little difficulty as long as that experience is face-to-face, but once that experience or repurposing is incorporated into another medium and moves outside the physical boundaries of the institution then the growing surfeit of choice could quickly become like being stranded at sea where we are surrounded by water but never a drop to drink. The surplus of media choice may prove to be a surplus of complexity. And if the digital video is locked to something like the BBC iMP with its seven day ‘view again’ clock ticking what use is that going to be in an educational context?
A digital television channel devoted to the production/dissemination of resources and exploration of the issues related to Higher Education could have some potential and maybe isn’t too pie in the sky. We already have the part-time Teachers TV channel as a proof of concept so there’s obviously some channel time still available. Now who can we persuade to pay for that?
