June 2014 Presentation shared during the Connected TV World Summit event (cf. https://connectedtvsummit.com/)

1. 1
What we can learn from the
vSTBs in the field
Erwan Nédellec – Orange Labs, June 2014

2. 2
Orange in a
nutshell

3. 3
 236 million customers worldwide
 €40.9 billion revenue, and
€1.873 billion net profit (2013)
 165 000 employees
– 102,000 in France
 4G in 10 countries
 450,000 km of submarine cables
– enough to circumnavigate the earth 10 times!
 IPTV launched in France 10 years ago
– 6.5 million digital TV (IPTV / satellite )
customers in Europe
 Live TV & VOD services available in OTT on
SmartTV and Xbox game consoles

4. 4
Virtual STB:
the birth of
a new
buzzword?

5. 5
My proposal for two simple definitions
Virtual Set-Top Box
[vur-choo-uhl] [set] [top] [boks]
noun
1.A device which is not a Set-Top Box,
but which acts as a Set-Top Box plugged
on a TV set
2.A basic Set-Top-Box where most of the
service execution environment
- e.g. the web browser – is running in a
cloud infrastructure

6. 6
A virtual STB as the first screen (e.g. living room)
Residential
Gateway
TV Platforms
Internet
Managed
Network
LAN
Solution Pros Cons Example
IPTV approach:
o multicast
o CAS (card-less or
CI+ 1.4)
o Same UX as the STB
o CAPEX reduction
o Technical fragmentation
(on both side: telcos & CE)
o Can be costly in OPEX
Elion +
Samsung

7. 7
A virtual STB for the multi-room scenarios
Solution Pros Cons Example
o Headed (STB) vs
headless (RGW) approach
o Local PVR sharing
o More natural for cable
and satellite
o Standardized
solution exists
• DLNA CVP 2
• RVU Alliance
o Adaptation may be needed
(content protection (DTCP-IP),
transport protocol, transcoding)
DirecTV
Residential
Gateway
TV Platforms
Internet
Managed
Network
LAN
STB

8. 8
A virtual STB for the other rooms
(e.g. not the living room)
Solution Pros Cons Example
o OTT based solution o CAPEX reduction
o Keep the control
of the STB for the
living-room
experience
oTechnical fragmentation
o Scale up issue with large audience
for Live streams (unicast)
o OPEX costs (call center, lose of the
control of the QoE)
Orange
Residential
Gateway
TV Platforms
Internet
Managed
Network
LAN
STB

9. 9
A cloud based approach
Solution Pros Cons Example
Cloud-based approach =
IPTV approach + UI
rendering in the cloud
o Same advantages
as IPTV (multicast,
content protection)
o Less complexity on
the device
o No standardized solution
o Additional costs in the cloud
o Need a good network access
o Tricky for multicast support
Deutsche
Telekom
Residential
Gateway TV Platforms
Internet
Managed
Network
LAN

10. 10
What have
we learnt?

11. 11
We come from the same planetary system, but not
from the same planet
Their goal is to keep
their STB in the field
as long as they can
Their goal is to sell
as many TV sets as
they can
Telcos
CE
manufacturers

12. 12
A typical schedule for a content provider
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 …
Year n Year n+1 Year n+2
Service A
Service B
Service C

13. 13
A typical year for a TV set manufacturer
Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov.
Engineers are
developing
next year platform
Qualification
of the new
platform
New year
model on
the market
Engineers are
switching on the
next year platform

14. 14
A typical year for a TV set manufacturer, and the
impacts for the content providers
Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov.
Engineers are
developing
next year platform
Qualification
of the new
platform
New year
model on
the market
Engineers are
switching on the
next year platform
Visibility
given on next
year’s model.
Good
support,
but very
hard to get
samples
Not always
possible to
certify a
service as
QA team is
qualifying
new year’s
models
Good support,
products are
available. But it is
no longer possible
to set up co-
marketing activities
on previous year
model
Less support
on previous
year’s model
(which
means
models sold
until May)

15. 15
Our biggest fear is regression
 We have faced regression with all our partners
 Regressions are unfortunately unavoidable, but:
– It is more complex to identify regressions for a CE manufacturer with
100+ partners, due to the distance from Korea or US, than for a telco
with its end-to-end controlled solution in its premises
– So, regressions are identified too late (after a firmware upgrade in some
cases), and the probability of facing regressions is higher on CE
devices than on a STB

16. 16
And when a regression occurs, the following questions
come up straight away
1
2
3
Are we the only partner impacted?
Is the firmware already rolled-out?
Was it the latest firmware for that device?
Yes
Yes
Yes
+
+
Very
bad news

17. 17
Firmware management is the second hot topic
 As we do not control the device, we have no
control on
– the features included in the firmware
– when the firmware will be rolled out
– which kind of firmware will be rolled out (mandatory
or optional update)
 Firmwares do not always behave the same way
(differences between mid-range and high-end
models within the same line-up)
 We lack visibility on the scope of the firmware
– In almost all cases, there is no release note
available for partners

18. 18
And last, but not least, the support is more complex
 Today, we have representative
configurations of households in our premises
(STB + gateway)
– This is a really useful means of reproducing
customers issues
 When we rely on SmartTV, this is not
possible
– Between 2 and 4 different platforms by
manufacturer each year
– In some cases, there are several different
firmware releases in the field for a same
device
 It is very hard for hotlines and technicians to
help our customers

19. 19
What we need
from CE and
service providers
for this to really
work?

20. 20
Our ecosystem is not a long quiet river
 Yes, STB represents an important part
of the CAPEX for a telco, but relying on
CE devices induce important cost side
effects as well
 Beyond the technical fragmentation (on
both sides: telcos & CE manufacturers),
and the certification process (a painful
experience with some CE partners), all
the operational aspects must not be
underestimated

21. 21
And so, the challenge is huge…
 IPTV providers want to limit the CAPEX for the STB but
– with a good QoE as it is today in IPTV
– with keeping the relationship with their customers
 Improving the current situation on the OTT scenario is a prerequisite for us, before
going further on the scenario where the SmartTV is replacing the IPTV STB

22. 22
Thank you