42 TVBEurope Forum Channel in a Box
capabilities that our hardware partners offer, we can switch automatically between video and any live signal. Warman: The ChannelPort system makes it easy to take over manual control in three ways. The system supports hardware control panels from multiple vendors, so users can control switching, clip playout, and graphics manually. Harmonic also offers its OPC (On-board Playout Control) application, which allows users to break away from the schedule, override the playlist, and stay with a live event for as long as necessary. And finally, operators can use their choice of automation system to take direct control over the system. Zdravkoski: This can be handled quite simply and comfortably with our Playout Automation Module. It allows the user to interrupt the current programme at any time, switch to the so-called JustInLive mode and later return to the scheduled programme. Besides that, Cueton and/or GPI frame enable precise switching between a currently scheduled programme and the live mode.
How easily can CiaB handle distribution to other media platforms — tablets, smartphones etc?
Gittins: In many cases clip-based content which is to be delivered in advance is handled as part of the upstream workflow before arriving at the CiaB for linear playout. But CiaB solutions which can provide a suitable IP stream do have a role to play in providing the live streaming of content or fast turnaround VOD workflows that relate to live events. Rose: CiaB doesn’t in itself help distribution to other platforms, unless there is a framework around the CiaB devices to provide comprehensive media management. This is a fundamental principle of a well- architected solution. Media is the centre of a broadcaster’s world and being able to view, manage and control it is something that systems that only have a ‘box’ struggle to do. A system that can output channels in baseband and IP, and help master media for distribution to online and VOD platforms is a compelling differentiator when choosing between vendors. Straight: The future is definitely in IP streaming. We offer an RTMP streaming option, which allows us to send a H264 compressed stream to any CDN for final distribution. ten Dam: For a software- based solution it’s not a big step to deliver in different formats. Today it’s primarily streaming in baseband domain, but IP out at various bitrates is quickly becoming the standard and as such is file-based delivery for on-demand systems. Warman: CiaB solutions were not conceived with this objective in mind. However, one benefit of the simulcast output on the ChannelPort is that it can drive downstream devices, with graphics already tailored for Web or mobile distribution.
Someone has suggested that Channel in a Box will be replaced by Channel on a Chip. Is that feasible — and, if so, when will we see it?
Ash: I am not so sure this will ever become a reality because every leap forward in technology that can allow this to happen sees a leap forward in requirements from consumers. Or more to the point, manufacturers of consumer products promoting higher quality and definition, such as 3D and 4K. When technology does allow for ‘channel on a chip’, I am sure
Nick Wright, Pixel Power Lugasi: Aired channels are
still relying on SDI equipment and feeds, so CiaB cannot get much smaller if equipped with graphics and I/O board. Once SDI becomes obsolete, new solutions will come powered by chips producing Channel on Ethernet stream. Shell: There is no reason to believe that a chip could not
drive to Ultra HD and higher frame rates. Yes, if we stuck a stake in the ground and said, ‘no, we’re never as an industry going to go beyond 1080 50i HD’ then maybe. But the landscape is changing so quickly that whether it’s a chip or a card or a box or a piece of software isn’t really the question. The questions are what you want to
“CiaB doesn’t in itself help distribution to other platforms, unless there is a framework around the CiaB devices to provide comprehensive media management”
Scott Rose, Miranda
the PSU to drive the chip and the fans to cool it down will still equate to a 1U box that is the same as today. Gittins: Whilst it may
ultimately be feasible, we are far more likely to see a channel hosted purely in software, and ultimately in the cloud.
host all the elements required, but today we see the drive for channel playout as being in an IP infrastructure, software only and running in a generic IT data centre. Some of the advantages to this approach are that software codecs provide greater flexibility, commodity platforms are economical and virtualisation can provide better resilience. Weigner: Never. It’s not about
hardware but software. A traditional linear or on-demand channel is a software service running on a commodity IT compute platform – either locally in a ‘box’, or remote, or remote hosted in a datacentre which we can then also call ‘cloud’ if we want. Hardware- centric CiaB vendors are doomed just like traditional playout vendors. Wright: This comes back
Goce Zdravkoski, Stryme Andy Warman, Harmonic
down essentially to risk. Even if you can have a channel on a chip it doesn’t ultimately help you with the other costs. It’s not an enabler for the industry and in many regards plays against the
do, how you want to operate and how you get cost-effective, day- to-day operations, now and going forwards? Zdravkoski: I cannot yet
imagine ‘channel on a chip’. But I am convinced that we will see multi-channel in a blade server as a new standard in three to five years from now. We are already working on such a solution. It is our aim to equip the multi-channel in a blade server with capabilities for 32 or 64 completely independent channels, including ingest, graphics, playout and streaming, using just a single 4HE machine.
www.cinegy.com www.grassvalley.com www.harmonicinc.com www.harrisbroadcast.com www.miranda.com www.oasys.com www.orad.tv www.pebble.tv www.pixelpower.com www.playbox.tv www.snellgroup.com www.stryme.com www.toolsonair.com
www.tvbeurope.com January 2014
“The future is definitely in IP streaming” — Bruce Straight, ToolsOnAir
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52