Tom,
WIth all due respect, you are completely wrong. Joost (and it's like) are not irrelevant -- they are completely and utterly (I can't stress this enough) relevant.
First -- and perhaps most important -- there is the mode of delivery. Currently, about 80 percent of American get TV either through cable or satellite. They spend billions of dollars paying satellite and cable operators monthly fees for this. When Joost (and others) get content to match cable (which will happen) those billions of dollars will start to shift to other hands. "Over the top" networks will start recieving this money.
I don't know about you, but hundreds of billions of dollars -- trillions, over the years -- is definitely an "important" or crucial thing. This is the reinvention of TV. It will change a lot of things for those of us who work in these industries.
Add in the on-demand nature, and you'll see changes on the content side, as well.
I mean, really -- this is as big as it gets. As big as the invention of television. But, of course, maybe you don't think that was so important either.
- Krissy
Krissy - I agree that television on the Internet is important. I just don't think that these companies are doing anything interesting. It seems to me that BitTorrent is far more revolutionary than Joost et al. ever will be.
2007-03-08EST16:48:15+00:00
#
