But with live music revenue increasing at 15 per cent per annum, there's going to be an increasing spectrum requirement for wireless microphones, wireless cameras, and the like. The report notes that the soon-to-be-appointed PMSE (Program Making & Special Events) Band Manager is going to have problems providing for that. The report suggest the MoD might help out, but still predicts a short-fall, especially when the switch off of terrestrial broadcast TV (predicted for 2026) removes the possibility of interleaved spectrum.
Turning off broadcast TV isn't as controversial as it sounds. We might be able to squeeze a few HD-TV channels in the space by using MPEG-4, but the life expectancy of DTT isn't long, especially if 3D takes off at all. Finland is talking about a 2017 review to consider a switch-off date for broadcast TV. That would release huge swaths of spectrum by shifting TV distribution to the internet and satellite - the former being unicast, the latter having lots of room at the top end of the dial for HD 3D TV.
Not only does the report suggest that broadcasters will cease to exist as we know them, but it reckons that ISPs are in for a tough time too. The idea that your ISP provides content - part of the much-heralded quad-play - is dismissed by the report, which reckons users will build their own content from a variety of sources, including satellite broadcasts.
That content will be bounced around the house at 2.4GHz and 5GHz. This is apparently ample for a few streams of HD 3D TV, especially once technology solves the irritating interference problems that occur in those licence-free bands. Not only that, but the report expects some PMSE use to move into the unlicensed bands, just as soon as the interference problem is solved.
Wi-fi is also expected to carry 80 per cent of cellular traffic: a figure based on the fact that lots of mobile-phone calls are made from the home, or when near a wi-fi hotspot, but without so much as a nod to femtocell technology or discussion of how the hotspot operators are going to carry all that traffic. The report does admit we'll need a few more hotspots - 50,000 of them compared to the 15,000 currently in operation - but that's going to be necessary if the cellular networks aren't going to run out of spectrum really quickly.
Even with it the report predicts the cellular networks are going have a tough time meeting needs, and that's assuming they combine into "two rival consortia in 2022".
One area that will remain broadcast is traditional radio, though the report reckons that will all be digital by 2025.
It seems realistic to predict that people working or cleaning the house will still want to hear a DJ playing songs on the radio, but when it comes to more futuristic forms of entertainment, the report is sadly lacking. There is some mention of "immersive sports coverage" and "racing alongside a Formula One race", but admits it can't predict how much bandwidth that's going to consume, and anyway notes that:
"There is a significant and steady growth of obesity in the UK population which could increase the demand for passive entertainment services". ®
Obvious nonsense, of course
2028 is a long time after December 2012, after all. Your Mayan wristwatch will have stopped, Xenu will have called by to pick up all the scientologists, and there'll have been many variations on the end of the world, including the Second Coming. But, since we're also supposed to be moving forward into a more enlightened and spiritually aware New Age of Humanity, then Ofcom - and, presumably, political parties - will obviously have become history, as there just won't be room for anything as unenlightened and awful as they are to exist any longer.
Mine's the one with a quartz crystal in the pocket, man ... says 7.030MHz on it ...
"There is a significant and steady growth of obesity in the UK population which could increase the demand for passive entertainment services".
So Woody Allen was correct then in the film Sleeper, with the invention of the "orgasmatron!"
Ofcom and the Tories
Errm, the Tories aren't talking about axing Ofcom. They just plan to take away it's power to create policy. IOW to turn it into the watchdog it was originally. I'm sure you know that, it just makes your sub-heading look better if you pretend otherwise.
The Tory's argument appears to be that NuLabour have used QuANGOs and other bodies to dodge responsibility and accountability. Rember when interest rates were going up so NuLabour "devolved" the power to set interest rates to the Bank of England in order to try to deflect the blame? They've done the same with quite a lot of other things too.
From day one of his premiership Blair instituted a policy of blame dodging with his standard answer of "I'm afraid you'll have to ask the minister responsible about that" when faced with an awkward question. No interviewer ever seemed to spot that as PM Blair was ultimately responsible for all government policy. Ministers then followed suit by passing the buck to junior ministers and more and more junior ministerial posts were created so the blame could be passed further.
Then policy making was "devolved" to QuANGOs and other bodies, including the civil service. Unfortunately the media fell for this ruse hook like and sinker. Always remember that you can delegate a task, you cannot delegate the responsibility for that task. If you delegate a task then you are responsible for it's outcomes.
The biggest failure of this practice is not necessarilly that bad policy is created, but that it has increased costs massively. NuLabour rabbit on and on about the fact that they have increased public spending without admitting that this massive increase in spending is totally uncontrolled and has lead to little or no benefit. The ever expanding size of the NuLabour administration has never been subject to any form of cost-benefit analysis, it is NuLabour doctrine that spending more money will automatically produce results* and they don't need to monitor it. OTOH a lot of the rest of the public sector are required to spend fortunes monitoring every penny spent.
* This fits like a thingy in one of those whatsits with the NuLabour doctrine that setting a target is as good as meeting that target. If you fail to meet it you just set another one.