I don’t read much in hard copy anymore, but I did leaf through the print version of PC World while on the beach last weekend. One article caught my attention as much for what it didn’t say as for what it did report. The piece, Early IPTV Uses Only a Little of Its Fat Pipe, missed a few critical points. And having made my own share of mistakes and errors of omission in the blogging business, I thought I’d make some amends by adding in information where I do have a little knowledge.
First, the IPTV story profiles AT&T and Verizon, but it does so without making the distinction that AT&T delivers all-IP TV, while Verizon uses RF with an IP return path. Essentially Verizon has chosen to use IP only for certain interactive services, and actually more closely emulates a cable network architecture than AT&T’s offering.
Second, the review of Verizon’s FiOS TV talked about the first version of the television interface, but of course the telecom company has already moved on to version number two. If you’ve somehow missed our ZNF FiOS 2.0 coverage, check it out here.
Third, as someone mentioned in the comments online, there are big differences in bandwidth between Verizon and AT&T because of their different fiber strategies. Verizon uses fiber to the home (FTTH), while AT&T uses fiber to the node (FTTN). Verizon’s got a much fatter pipe at its disposal; good for delivering uncompressed HDTV content and lots of it.
Fourth and finally, the authors of the PC World article happen to mention that AT&T uses Motorola set-tops. I have more than a passing interest in that little detail, and would like to add that Verizon too uses Motorola set-tops. If the information is worth mentioning for one operator, I figure it’s worth mentioning for the other.