The Jeff Pulver Blog: IPTV Needs a New Name:

« A short history of VON and our plans for 2006: | Main | Cameron Crowe: On the Music of Elizabethtown »

October 07, 2005

IPTV Needs a New Name:

There is still time to come up with a more descriptive term that is less limiting than just calling IPTV, well IPTV.

IPTV may be easy to spell but to me “Internet Television” it is just as old fashioned as the term “Internet Telephony.”

It was at back in 1997 at an ACM Conference when Vint Cerf said: "I would submit that, someday, the phrase Internet telephony will sound as archaic as 'horseless carriage' sounds today." In 2005 the same can be said about the term “Internet Television.”

IPTV does not do justice to just how “disruptive” the advent of “IPTV” is going to be to the traditional broadcast industry. In my mind, the scope of “IPTV” innovations includes everything from the advent of SlingMedia to events like the Internet broadcast of Live8 to the launch of Internet only TV stations like ManiaTV! with a lot more to come on the horizon.

Following the existing format of the term “IPTV”, might mean that “VoIP” should be called “IPV.”

IPTV to me sounds like IP over TV. At the very least IPTV should morph into being known as: TVoIP. Even TVIP would be an improvement. This way the term follows the “VoIP” format and we can refer to “Television over IP” just like we speak about “Voice over IP” today. Not perfect, but an improvement over the existing IPTV terminology.

If you have a suggestion for a new name for “IPTV”, please feel free to share it here or drop me a line.

Tags: iptv, voip

Share this post:

Posted by jeff on October 7, 2005 06:10 AM | Permalink

Additional resources: Watch PrimeTime TV Shows | Watch the Jeff Pulver Show | Jeff's Qik Videos

Comments

MOBA.tv

Media
Over
Broadband
Access

Media (audio,video,text, doesn't matter)
Broadband will always be called broadband no matter which form it is in.

Posted by: Michael Bailey at November 20, 2006 06:06 PM

eyetelly ? ;)

Posted by: eyetelly at October 27, 2006 02:53 AM

Posted by: killy at May 2, 2006 11:54 AM

Watch for the emergence this year of simply 'Internet TV'. There's nothing old-fashioned about the name. It will be described in the media as TV connected to the power of the Internet -- be it on the TV, PC, cell phone, or portable device.

James
http://strmz.com internet tv & video

Posted by: James Brennan at January 31, 2006 01:54 AM

What is the best way to send a press releease regarding IPTV technology advancements to you?

Aaron: Matrixstream

Posted by: Aaron Keogh at November 20, 2005 01:34 PM

I agree that building a brand around your product's plumbing is often poor judgement. With digital content, delivery channels and devices are uncountable and everchanging. So drop the "IP" from the name.

But it's worse than that. As 300 million people using Skype, AOL, MSN, and Yahoo communication clients get blended video, chat, file sharing, publishing and audio conversation tools, watch for an explosion of new forms of blended media. If you thought blogs, podcasting, and vlogging were out of left field, just wait for a stream of new social media to come from and flood our phones, PCs, and everything that connects them.

Posted by: Phil Wolff at November 6, 2005 03:48 PM

Well Jeff, my take on it is simple… let’s start from scratch…

From the old world we have
The prefix Tele which means distance and
Vision (ability to see) as well as
Phone (voiced sound)…

From the new world there is
Internet (the extensive, worldwide computer network available to the public) and
Protocol (rules governing communication between object-oriented programs or electronic devices such as radios, telephones, and computers)

Seems that there are some superfluous roots and stems as well as some irrelevant ones since we are not limited to open networks unless we become the Borg…

What we will be delighted with in the future is a tap into an homogeneous cloud of bit streaming packets that will provide stimulous for the senses beyond the overtoneless sounds and perspectiveless images we submit ourselves to today with various terminal appliances that bridge us to the source… in addition, who says it will stop with sight and sound…. What about smell, taste, touch and who knows.. is there a sixth sense on the horizon… certainly more creative sensory appliances and maybe even the direct connection to the frontal lobe for a more peer to peer experience?…

Looks like whatever can be digitized will and then somehow transported instantaneously over distances through some sort of cloud where distances will not matter… it is the classic dx as x approaches 0…… it is the integral of all that we are now familiar with and what is to come…

Integral Sensations over a Digital Network

Or a more visionary description in lieu of what can become a bad acronym, ISDN, would be

Total Sensory Packet Network… but… that’s not catchy or marketable so we will have a few other possibilities in the same vein…

As far as what we now know as Television, it may morph into something along the lines of a subset of sensory stimulation data descriptions but for now, why not call it

TeleVision?

Posted by: Don Swinford at November 2, 2005 11:13 AM

How about IPAV (IP-Audio/Video)...pronounce it "I-Pave." "IPAV...new asphalt for the Info Superhighway!"

...or maybe just the all-inclusive IP over IP..."The I-pipe, one plumbing for all your information needs" (or the more video-specific "Eye-Pipe").

Perhaps it would simplify things if the "P" were just removed. Half the general public doesn't know it stands for "protocol," or if they do they have no idea what makes the internet a protocol anyhow.

"Internet Multimedia" abbreviates to the simple and Zennish "IM" (ack! is Zennish a word? I've been on this box too long!).

Anyhow, Jeff & company, best of success in your quest for the perfect name!

Take care,
--Rich

Posted by: Rich Langsford at November 2, 2005 01:16 AM

Ok, I'll throw out an idea. I do agree iTV and IPTV have been overhyped for so long that it feels less like a 'horseless carriage' than it does like 'the world of tomorrow' ride at disneyland. Seeing all these amazing visions of the future (minituarization and integrated cities) but all delivered via clanky animatronics and hissing pnuematic systems. I love the kitchy quality but the joy of the ride is how dissonant the whole futuristic vision is against the backdrop of 1970s technology. The same can be said IMHO for IPTV. All of this internet technology and all you really experience is a horrid electronic program guide that doesn't even support skins or font options. And this is exciting? There's more excitement about the iPOD (sexy cover around generic chipsets) than there is about Video on Demand that's delivered over the largest IP network every built (granted it's not bursty so the internet is still far more impressive).

My suggestion is we distance from the technology, quit trying to link to the archaic TV wording and actually create a new distinctive ring. Do you Yahoo? iPod? Both now part of the common lexicon and provide a feel of sparkle. VCR? zzzz. DVD? zzzz.

How about iCon? Interconnected Content. That's really what it's about. TV is a dead model. Time shifted television (TiVo) and integration with other communication interfaces (web based programming of net based Tivo, streaming media integration across different intelligent endpoints, individual customized experience like skins...). This is what I think is exciting. Drop TV, the 'e' is so 1990's. Let's expand to interconnected content or interconnected commununications. iCon.

First thought.

Posted by: zb at November 1, 2005 05:04 PM

If TVoIP catches on, you'll need a new tradeshow.

Call it TVON

;-)

Posted by: Ahmed at November 1, 2005 03:02 PM

Why not just call it "TV?" I don't see how "IP"TV differs from CCTV or Cable TV. It's just moving pictures sent over a network. Does the carrier technology really matter?

Posted by: Sue Donim at November 1, 2005 01:01 PM

VideoNET

or Videonet

etc.

Posted by: Philip Veale at November 1, 2005 12:56 PM

I'd call it TOD - "Television On Demand"

Fits with IPOD gone crazy world.

Webster.

Posted by: "The Webster" at November 1, 2005 10:54 AM

If you want acronyms how about HDTVoIP, I would simply name it MoIP - Media over IP

Posted by: Ian Gould at November 1, 2005 10:29 AM

I just blogged about this.

What about just iTV?

http://channelchanger.typepad.com/my_weblog/2005/10/itv.html

Posted by: Patrick Hynes at October 20, 2005 04:27 PM

I blogged about a new name for IPTV here: http://changelog.ca/log/2005/10/15/iptv_needs-a-new_name_-_how_about_newtube

Here's an excerpt from my blog post...

In trying to come up with a new name for IPTV I wanted to have the new name show its lineage to television. To do this, I wanted to somehow incorporate an existing name for television into the new name. While at the same time expressing that this is something new. And also I wanted the new name to sounds good when pronouced and not be a mouthful. My suggestion for what everyone should call IPTV is:

NewTube

(Eventually people will probably just spell it like "newtube". But for now, I wanted to make it obvious how to pronounce it.) Here are the reasons why I like this name:

* In many places around the world, (traditional) televisions are called "tubes". (As in "boob tube" and "the tube".) So "newtube" shows its lineage with television in its name.

* The word "new" and the "tube" rhyme (in most dialects on English). So when you say "NewTube" out loud it has a nice sound to it.

* It is only 2 syllables long. Which also helps make it sound nice. And makes it so it is NOT a mouthful to say.

* No one is going to have trouble pronouncing it.

* The word "new" expresses that this is something new :-) (Much like "New York".)

* "NewTube" is a completely new name. So there won't be any ambiguity when searching for it on the search engines.

Posted by: Charles Iliya Krempeaux at October 15, 2005 08:33 PM

How about the simple, easily rememberable acronym of iTV? Remember, this will have to be something people can remember, and people are stupid...

Posted by: Bryce at October 11, 2005 10:27 AM

Um...

IPTV refers specifically to an RBOC's deployment of cable-like television services, closed network.

Broadband TV refers to streaming video across the internet, as an open network.

What else would you like to call it???

Posted by: Charles Kemper at October 7, 2005 04:34 PM

We could call it "Web TV"! Oh, wait that's already taken, lol.

Posted by: Phil A. at October 7, 2005 04:03 PM

Generally I agree, but what's the fuss? We'll all look foolish in the future anyway. The name will morph as the concepts do, whether we push on it or not.

For now, a name that doesn't create misunderstanding is more than sufficient. And to my mind, IPTV doesn't sound like IP over TV any more than Internet Telephony sounds like IP over telephone lines. To capture the disruptive aspects effectively, I think it's crucial to be sure that the terminology communicates the notion to current audiences that an existing ubiquitous concept is being transformed, rather than introducing an unrelated new concept.

Note that "horseless carriage" was a descriptive term that conveyed to the times exactly what it was intended to be - a new variety of something familiar, indicating its use and purpose. A later term, "automobile", while technically descriptive, probably did not convey the concept of something useful to the daily lives of the earlier audience, while the current terminology of "cars" and "vehicles" does not convey anything radical because they no longer refer to anything radical. They would not be suitable in the day when they were indeed something radical. That some Brits and Europeans (and, consequently, purveyors of upscale conveyances in the USA) often prefer calling them "motorcars" - an earlier term - is apparently a mere affectation.

Far better to push (as you do!) against people thinking that merely because the new concept meets the needs served by the old that it should be limited to doing the same old things in the same old way - such as connecting VoIP subscribers to the same limited, costly PSTN-bound PSAPs when much more robust solutions costing orders of magnitude less are available.

If you could achieve that by a name, I'd be impressed.

Posted by: Brian Thomas at October 7, 2005 09:31 AM

Ah. Acronym fun. OK. I'll play.

So let's start with the acronyms that might work, but that are -- unfortunately -- already taken:

IV (Internet Video)? Sorry, but adopting that one would just confuse too many doctors, nurses, candystripers, hospital administration staff, insurance folks...oh, and patients.

VIP (Video over Internet Protocol)? Again, we run into problems of confusion, but this time it doesn't shake up the medical world but those of social entertainment and organized sports. Simply put, there are just too many Very Important People out there who wouldn't allow that acronym to make its way over to the technology sphere.

VoIP (Video over Internet Protocol)? Waiter...check, please!

.......

So, OK. Those three can be easily eliminated from consideration. To offer some contrast and balance, here are three that have not yet been offered up:

BIP (Broadcast over Internet Protocol)? It sounds a little too much like a "Batman" fight sound effect from the 1960s, but it is catchy. And consider the verbing possibilities! "Hey, I just took a video of the kids throwing the ball around...I'll BIP it right over to you." or "I think I'll just sit in front of the monitor tonight and get BIP-ed."

BOB (Broadcast over Broadband)? Talk about your warm-n-fuzzy name for a new technology! And again, the opportunities for entering the common lexicon are delightful. "I'm going to spend the evening in with BOB." or "I watched the game on BOB yesterday. Did you see it?"

BON (Broadcast over the 'Net)? BOB's twin sister...or the next great pulvermedia conference?

;-)

K²

Posted by: K² at October 7, 2005 09:15 AM

October 07, 2005

IPTV Needs a New Name:

Comments

Post a comment