This week we canvassed opinion around the IPTV community on just what the Microsoft announcement of its new Mediaroom name and new software means to the IPTV market ‘ most of the replies were either hostile or downright unsympathetic.
The most common view was the it was indeed just a new name for Microsoft’s IPTV middleware, with very little added functionality. That new function seems to include streaming content from PCs on the same home network running Windows Media Player 11, and supporting applications that need a browser, with a new Microsoft HTML client in the set top.
The PC streaming exists in a number of other products, and most IPTV systems rely on a browser as at least one of the active components in the set top. The consensus was the these announcements don’t make it more likely that developers will flock to the Mediaroom platform, because developers are interested in installed bases, and Microsoft’s is still small when it comes to actual devices.
Set top makers and VoD suppliers didn’t suddenly feel like knocking on Microsoft’s door again, and are taking a wait and see attitude. Their impression, true or not, is that Microsoft has been resistant to cooperating with their companies because it does everything in-house. If this represents a change, they will wait until Microsoft calls and invites them to develop for exiting Microsoft customers.
The most uncharitable views from the community was that when companies change a name or a logo, it means they admit they are in trouble but don’t really know what to do about it. In effect it hopes to sweep its past under the carpet with what outsiders see as a cheap PR trick.
Others said that Microsoft was trying to reduce IPTV to being a ‘platform’ so that it can convince others to develop capabilities that it has been unable to build itself so far. Again most IPTV rivals felt that the only people that would take up the SDK would be the operators themselves, trying to differentiate their own look and feel from the Microsoft look and feel.
Finally one cynical pundit suggested that the statements were made for the benefit of Wall Street and no-one else was listening.