Thursday, May 23, 2002

I read an article earlier this week that suggested that one reason why TVs and computers won't mix is that they are in different rooms: the TV in the living room and the computer in the den, so the broadband pulled to the computer won't affect the TV. i don't know whose house the author visited, but that ain't so. We're a TV-limited family, and so are probably not representative. However, we have friends. They have TVs. Lots. There's a TV in the living room, the family room, the den, the kitchen, the basement, the kids' bedrooms, the master bedroom suite, the bathroom -- wherever there's counter space. Wherever there's a TV, there's coaxial cable. The computer is tucked out of the way: it's an unsightly mess, and it takes up a lot of space. It's not part of the home entertainment system because it's butt-ugly, needs a desk, a chair, space for the printer, a phone jack, and so on. And then there was the iLamp. And the Mira. But most importantly, wireless Ethernet. Most houses don't have the structured wiring necessary for a typical network. There's coax, Category 3 Unshielded Twisted Pair (UTP) (2-pair) cable, and the electrical system, but no Category 5 UTP (4-pair), so 10/100-BaseT Ethernet is not an option without considerable expense. Wireless Ethernet is. So bring the broadband link into the house wherever the hell you want to, because it doesn't really matter. Terminate it next to the power distribution, slap a modem on the wall or plug that fiber directly into your switch. Pop the TiVo on the net to include the unsophisticated CATV legacy boxen. Stick a wireless card in your ugly old hunk o' beige, and away you go. If you have technical difficulties, buy the lamp. 2:43:42 AM

The advertisers know what's happening. It's the middlemen, the sellers of advertising space who have issues. 'We need to start to understand how we're going to have to reach our consumers with this new technology,' said Mollie Weston, a product manager for Best Buy's image advertising. 'It is going to force us to put advertisements out there that people are actually going to choose to watch.' [The New York Times] via [The Shifted Librarian] Then again maybe someone needs to explain the economics "You start losing marginal dollars when people who you thought you were buying are not viewing," said Daniel Jaffe, executive vice president of the Association of National Advertisers. "This is not just a theoretical problem that might be happening somewhere down the line. This is happening now." What? Buying people? I thought that went out in 1865. You're buying the probability that someone is viewing. You didn't lose a thing; we've all left the room to go the bathroom already. If you didn't hook us in the fade between the drama and your commercial, then you're not doing your job. If you believe that your audience just sits there, then you're a fool. Unless you can provide a one-to-one correlation between advertising coverage and sales, you're just pissing in the wind. And Mr. Zellner, that's not free TV you parlay. I sold you my time. You resold it to Mr. Jaffe. I can always turn off the TV and read a book. (Jenny notes that people are more comfortable with their TVs than their computers. I'd like to say that's the couch's doing -- a desk chair is just not as cozy -- but I'm sure Microsoft is at fault as well.) 2:25:37 AM