[Josh]

twitter.com 

Wasn't something similar to this planned in the early stages of the streaming era or am I fabricating a false reality?

[Neil Jones]

The earlier attempt was called Kangaroo, which was going to be this, but it was vetoed:
www.theguardian.com 

Project Kangaroo blocked by Competition Commission | Television industry | The G…
Broadcasters shocked as online TV joint venture between ITV, Channel 4 and BBC W…
  Source: www.theguardian.com

Britbox grew out of that project (not a resurrection/succession as such), but didn't involve Channel 4, and since then the venture (or the UK arm at least) has become purely owned by ITV.

[Brekkie]

So essentially the next step in a move towards the demise of Freeview - though absolutely a necessary step even if TV over the air is being written off by some ahead of time.

[Keith]

I guess with uncertainties of the TV frequencies beyond 2030 it makes sense for them to be working on an IP-based alternative now. I note on the rxinfo.com article regarding this announcement it mentions "Freely will be built-in to the next generation of smart TVs". This gives TV manufacturers enough time to support Freely and to have a reasonable number of those TVs in circulation by 2030.

The biggest challenge(s) will be whether people can afford to replace their TVs and pay for a broadband speed that's sufficient for multiple TVs streaming. Whilst for most people this won't be an issue for those on low incomes and those currently in broadband/4G 'not spots' this might be an issue, and justify a perhaps more limited (PSB) freeview service remaining for longer.

[Brekkie]

The trouble here with "next generation" is we still have people arguing Freeview shouldn't go fully DVB-T2/HD because some people may have sets/boxes more than 7 year olds which aren't compatible yet the alternative move forward may require an even newer TV.

[Neil Jones]

The trouble herewith "next generation" is we still have people arguing Freeview shouldn't go fully DVB-T2/HD because some people may have sets/boxes more than 7 year olds which aren't compatible yet the alternative move forward may require an even newer TV.

I think it may be safe to assume Freely will be an app that becomes available on the likes of Roku/Firestick... pretty much every other high profile app that comes bundled on a Smart TV has made its way to other platforms.

So on that basis, there will be no need for a new TV, much in the same way to go digital on Freeview didn't require a new TV, you just bought a box.

[Brekkie]

On the topic of Firesticks Amazon are wanting to take 30% of FTA ad revenue for having their apps on Fire TV in Australia, saying it's a practice they want to standardise worldwide. The FTA channels are saying they'll withdraw the apps.

tvtonight.com.au 

Networks may pull apps from Amazon Fire TV | TV Tonight
A fight is brewing over Amazon's push for 30% of ad revenue from Free to Ai…
  Source: tvtonight.com.au

Something to consider though with a move to online solutions moving forward - could basically put UK PSBs at the mercy of US technology giants.

[Keith]

The trouble herewith "next generation" is we still have people arguing Freeview shouldn't go fully DVB-T2/HD because some people may have sets/boxes more than 7 year olds which aren't compatible yet the alternative move forward may require an even newer TV.

Personally I think in the short to medium term PSB1 or PSB3 could remain using DVB-T/SD to provide a legacy service for those with older devices. The other PSB multiplex could then be converted to DVB-T2. As for converting the other commercial multiplexes it would probably require pressure from Freeview and/or government to spend the money required for the change.

I believe the Freeview SD only standard was discontinued in 2017, so all TV models released since then should support DVB-T2. (That said for a while after it was possible to accidentally buy an older model which didn't support it.) Hopefully six years on there's now enough TVs supporting DVB-T2 in circulation to begin converting at least some of the multiplexes, though that requires will and probably government intervention.

[i.h]

It's worth pointing out that an issue with downsizing Freeview to a bare minimum is that the savings might not be that significant. The transmission network costs £x to run and that's currently split across a relatively large base of services, but if TV gets downsized then the argument for the big high power sites begins to fall away

As for internet costs - many ISPs provide a so called 'social tariff', BT in particular has done so for a long time. It's like £10 or £15 a month for a service that can already support all the streaming you'd ever want to do.

[Technologist]

It's worth pointing out that an issue with downsizing Freeview to a bare minimum is that the savings might not be that significant. The transmission network costs £x to run and that's currently split across a relatively large base of services, but if TV gets downsized then the argument for the big high power sites begins to fall away

There are fairly large environmental benefits if mass viewed programming,
either in real-time or recorded is delivered by broadcast through the air methods
Like DTT DSAT (and DCAB) or when standardised  5G brodcast.
But for smaller audiences fibred IP makes a lot of sense and reduces energy usage.
The current contracts with Arqiva run to around 2035 ….
And as these amortise the assets at a rate the broadcasters  could afford
I cannot see these being Paid off earlier !
And there is still developments for DTT ……

But freely is a great step forward … if the CMA don’t intervene …