Information Appliance point of view

[David Farber <farber () central cis upenn edu>]

From: Will Stackhouse <wstackho () mail valverde edu>
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 94 14:10:44 -0800
To:  (Farber-David )farber () central cis upenn edu


Dave - -


For possible relay to your "Interesting People" list.


Will
**********


Begin forwarded message:


Date: Thu, 24 Feb 94 10:10:27 -0500
From: pcubed () farnsworth mit edu (Craig J. Birkmaier)
Subject:   Information Appliance point of view
Re: interlace/proscan in information appliances


  I've enjoyed the latest round in the continuing debate over what
may happen with image composition standards as we move to
proscan displays and digital transmission systems.




  Here are a few "realities" that may be relevant to this discussion:


1. The traditional interlaced entertainment display will be with us
for a long time. The hybrid analog/digital, fiber/coax systems being
field tested by the telecable industry will continue to support the
analog services until they are no longer economically viable (10-15
years).


2. The set top decoder box for IDC (interactive digital cable) will
be a powerful computer--it will be capable of generating and
appropriate GUI for both interlaced and proscan display. It's worth
noting that systems based on the Oracle/NCube server will use a
slightly modified A/V Mac as the set top decoder--the Mac can
produce both filtered interlace and proscan outputs.


3. Content creators will produce for a lower resolution--but this
resolution is driven as much by viewing distance, as display
resolution.  The GUI and navigational tools for entertainment
applications will be heavily influenced by these requirements: larger
text for legibility at 5-7 picture heights; an emphasis on glitzy
effects oriented presentations rather than highly detailed
information content. The reality is that an evolutionary simulcast
(NTS/ATV) period will drive the composition criteria for
entertainment applications.




4. "Infotainment Computing" will play a major role in the roll-out of
the NII. BY this, I mean that the personal computer in the home will
provide an alternative interface to the NII which will be used for
different applications than the entertainment display. The home
computer will tap into the same network as the entertainment
display, however, it is far more likely to be used for interactive
applications like gaming, accessing information services, and online
collaboration. The infotainment computer has two major
advantages: 1) it can also be used as a high resolution entertainment
display, or for monitoring traditional entertainment services while
being used for other activities; 2) it will become the hub of the in-
house network, and introduce the consumer to concept of integrated


functionality.


  What I believe all this means is that there will be two parallel
markets driven by the content that is being presented:
entertainment and infotainment. The entertainment industry has
endured the low resolution of television distribution for a simple
reason...it works. The original high resolution product has much to
offer, but the low resolution subset is adequate for the application.


This will not change when "higher" and "wider" display products
enter the market. Those who can afford them will move up while
those who can't will continue to watch NTSC quality displays.  This
is no different than the current market for television
receivers--huge volumes of cheap 20"-25" direct view displays and a
small volume of high-end large screen projection systems.


  Meanwhile the infotainment market is likely to be driven by the
"up close and personal approach" of an interactive information
appliance--an infotainment computer--hooked up to the cable in
another room.




  The real questions are raised when we start to integrate
functionality with an in-home network.  Initially, the end user will
"deal" with separate venues for entertainment, infotainment, and
traditional telecommunications. The fun begins when the customer
decides that there is "value" in integrated information appliances. I
believe that there will be a high level of convergence once a "large"
multi-resolution display can be placed in the family room. That is,
when a display can provide a large "theater like" presentation for
entertainment and an information rich windowed environment that
can be viewed at 3.3 picture heights for interactive applications--a
25"-40" display cannot do both unless the viewer moves closer for
interactivity.


In the end analysis, it is clear that it will be necessary to define
several NII formats that content producers can use for different
applications. I might point out that the publishing industry has not
suffered because it supports multiple resolution levels and formats;


You can get "TV" resolution in the Enquirer and USA Today (80-100
line screens), enhanced resolution in Time and Business Week (133
line screens), and high definition in a book (>150 line screens).




  "Higher" and "Wider" pictures mean little when one looks across
the "vast wasteland" of entertainment television--it's strictly a
niche market. However, these features are essential for infotainment
and integrated network systems. If we are to generate a market for
improved displays, there must be compelling content to pull the
customer through.  Historically, "It's the new things" that drive the
fundamental shifts in society--I doubt it will be different this time
around.


Craig
PCUBED