发布时间：2008.7

摘要

In the past year, the mobile video market has shifted radically, and two forces have emerged to radically change the definition of "mobile video." First, Internet delivery of user-generated and professional content is moving viewers from their living rooms to their computers. Second, high-quality mobile devices that use wireless networks (such as Apple's Wi-Fi iPhone and iPod Touch) are improving mobile access to the Internet in general. As a result, "Internet video" increasingly means "mobile video."
 
 This research uses innovative survey techniques to provide an in-depth comparison of US consumer attitudes toward various types of mobile video content delivered over cellular, broadcast, and Wi-Fi networks as well as device preferences and content sources.
 
 In-Stat's 2008 survey illuminated interesting trends and adjustments in the ways people think about mobile video.
 
 In-Stat also defines potential usage models that highlight the benefits of mobile video solutions offered by mobile operators, time-shifting and place-shifting hardware, as well as portable media players and similar devices. Unlike other research that is available, this report also includes an analysis of the ATSC M/H standard now being tested for use by US broadcasters.

目录及图表

• Executive Summary
• Introduction
o Content Choices
 Mobile Operator-Selected Content (MediaFLO and 3G)
 Broadcaster-Controlled Content
 User-Controlled Content (Internet Access)
o Access and Device Choices
 3G
 Broadcast Spectrum
 Non-Cellular Broadband and 4G (Wi-Fi, WiMAX, LTE)
 Sideloading
• US Consumer Attitudes Toward Mobile Video Options
o Survey Methodology
 Scenarios
 “Second Chance” Question
 Refining Questions
o Survey Results: Overall Interest in Mobile Video Scenarios
o Respondent Demographics and Characteristics
o Scenario: Out-of-Band Cellular Video (Mobile Operator-Controlled)
o Scenario: Free-to-Air Local Broadcast (Broadcaster-Controlled)
o Scenario: Remote Access to Home Programming (User-Controlled)
o Scenario: Wi-Fi Access to Web Video (User-Controlled)
o Scenario: 3G Video Clips and Streaming (Mobile Operator-Controlled)
o The “Second Chance” Response to Scenarios
o Mobile Content Viewing Preferences
 On-Demand Programming (89.6%)
 Access to STB and DVR Content (82.7%)
 Professionally Produced Content (80.9%)
 Broadcast-Quality Content(79.7%)
 Monthly Payments (70.9%)
 Local and Network Broadcast Content (61.5%)
 Full-Length Shows (60.4%)
• Assessment: Mobile Video Networks and Content
o Two Usage Models
 Waiting Room Usage Model
 Leisure Time Usage Model
o Networks: Broadcast, Wide-Area, Local-Area, and Sideloading
o Content: Professionally Produced and User-Generated
o Content: Made-for-Mobile, Network, and Local
• Conclusions and Comparisons: US Consumers Want…
o …Something Familiar and Free
o Second Place But First to Market: Out-of-Band Cellular Video
o Americans Prefer Monthly Payments to Hardware Purchases
• Methodology
• Related In-Stat Reports
List of Tables
• Table 1. Mobile Video Scenarios and Conditions Considered in the Survey
• Table 2. US Consumer Response to Five Mobile Video Original Scenarios
• Table 3. Characteristics of Respondents by Interest in Mobile Video
• Table 4. Refined Responses to Out-of-Band Video Scenario
• Table 5. Refined Responses to Free-to-Air Local Broadcast Video Scenario
• Table 6. Refined Responses from Place-Shifting Video Respondents
• Table 7. Refined Responses from Mobile Internet Access Video Respondents
• Table 8. Refined Responses to 3G Scenario
• Table 9. Ranking of Initial, Conditional, and Second Chance Responses
• Table 10. Either/Or Pairs, All Responses
• Table 11. Comparison of Mobile Video Usage Models
List of Figures
• Figure 1. Consumer Interest in Mobile Video
• Figure 2. Scenario Presentation Process
• Figure 3. US Consumer Response to Five Mobile Video Original Scenarios
• Figure 4. Before and After Responses
• Figure 5. Expected Mobile Video Viewing Time
• Figure 6. Expected Mobile Video Viewing Location
• Figure 7. Initial and Modified Responses to Out-of-Band Video Scenario
• Figure 8. Reasons for Response Change to Out-of-Band Video Scenario
• Figure 9. Initial and Modified Responses to Free-to-Air Local Broadcast Video Scenario
• Figure 10. Reasons for Response Change to Local Free-to-Air Local Broadcast Video Scenario
• Figure 11. Initial and Modified Responses to Remote Access to Home Video Scenario
• Figure 12. Reasons for Response Change to Remote Access to Home Video Scenario
• Figure 13. Initial and Modified Responses to Wi-Fi Access to Web Video Scenario
• Figure 14. Reasons for Response Change to Wi-Fi Access to Web Video Scenario
• Figure 15. Initial and Modified Responses to 3G Video Scenario
• Figure 16. Reasons for Response Change to 3G Video Scenario
• Figure 17. Second Chance Response to Mobile Video Scenarios