Published by MRG, Inc.
January 2008, 91 pages
Hard Copy Print Edition or
PDF Single-Departmental License is $995 USD;
PDF Corporate-Wide License is $1495 USD.
California orders please add 8.25% sales tax
To order click here.
Contact Rob Smith at rsmith@mrgco.com for futher information.
This report summarizes the findings of a research project where the purpose was to determine the Test, Measurement and Monitoring requirements of Cable TV Operators.
| 1 |
Executive Summary |
| 1.1 |
Scope of Project |
| 1.2 |
Project Methodology |
| 1.3 |
Summary of Results |
| |
|
| 2 |
Survey Results |
| 2.1 |
Findings from Part 1: General Questions |
| 2.2 |
Findings from Part 2: Detailed Questions |
| |
|
| 3 |
Survey Results by Company |
| 3.1 |
Survey Results by Company – Company 1 |
| 3.2 |
Survey Results by Company – Company 2 |
| 3.3 |
Survey Results by Company – Company 3 |
| 3.4 |
Survey Results by Company – Company 4 |
| 3.5 |
Survey Results by Company – Company 5 |
| 3.6 |
Survey Results by Company – Company 6 |
| 3.7 |
Survey Results by Company – Company 7 |
| 3.8 |
Survey Results by Company – Company 8 |
| 3.9 |
Survey Results by Company – Company 9 |
| |
|
| 4 |
Aggregated Survey Results by All Companies |
| |
|
| 5 |
Appendix 1: Listing of Survey Participants |
| |
|
| 6 |
Appendix 2: Survey Questionnaire |
| Figure 2-1: |
Q3: Level of Sensitivity to Video Issues |
| Figure 2-2: |
Q4: Source of Reporting of Video Quality Problems |
| Figure 2-3: |
Q5: Plant Locations of Most Video Problems |
| Figure 2-4: |
Q6: Importance of Video Quality Monitoring |
| Figure 2-5: |
Q7: Monitoring Video Quality from End-User's Perspective |
| Figure 2-6: |
Q7: Monitoring Live Multi-Channel Video |
| Figure 2-7: |
Q7: Monitoring VOD Video Quality |
| Figure 2-8: |
Q8: Aspects of Service Delivery Monitored |
| Figure 2-9: |
Q9: Importance of QoS, QoE and QoV |
| Figure 2-10: |
Monitoring Results Describe Actual End-User Experience? |
| Figure 2-11: |
Q11: Causes of Most Quality Problems Today |
| Figure 2-12: |
Q12: Expectation of Quality Problems a Year From Now |
| Figure 2-13: |
Q13: Most Troublesome Element in Network |
| Figure 2-14: |
Q13: Importance of Ad Insertion |
| Figure 2-15: |
Q13: Importance of IP Transport |
| Figure 2-16: |
Q13: Importance of Encoding |
| Figure 2-17: |
Q13: Importance of Modulation |
| Figure 2-18: |
Q13: Importance of Home Wiring & Network |
| Figure 2-19: |
Q14: Depth of MPEG Analysis |
| Figure 2-20: |
Q15: Kinds of Errors Reported |
| Figure 2-21: |
Q17: Vendors Used for Monitoring |
| Figure 2-22: |
Q18: Benefits of Monitoring |
| Figure 2-23: |
Q19: Main Problem with Monitoring |
| Figure 2-24: |
Q20: Reasons for Support Calls |
| Figure 2-25: |
Q21: Main Reason for Churn |
| Figure 2-26: |
Q22: Budgets for TM&M |
| Table 2-1: |
Importance of Video Quality Monitoring Responses |
| Table 2-2: |
Aspects of Service Delivery Monitored Responses |
| Table 2-3: |
Importance of QoS, QoE and QoV Responses |
| Table 2-4: |
Monitoring Describes Actual End-User Experience Responses |
| Table 2-5: |
Causes of Most Quality Problems Today Responses |
| Table 2-6: |
Expectation of Quality Problems a Year From Now Responses |
| Table 2-7: |
Most Troublesome Element in Network Responses |
| Table 2-8: |
Depth of MPEG Analysis Responses |
| Table 2-9: |
Video Macroblocking Responses |
| Table 2-10: |
Number of Errors Resulting in Service Calls |
| Table 2-11: |
Video Headend Type Responses |
| Table 2-12: |
Benefits of Monitoring Responses |
| Table 2-13: |
Problems with Monitoring Solutions |
| Table 2-14: |
Main Problem with Monitoring Responses |
| Table 2-15: |
Reasons for Support Calls Responses |
| Table 2-16: |
Budgets for TM&M Responses |
| Table 3-1: |
Top 25 MSOs - As of June 2007 |
| Table 3-2: |
Cable Survey Respondents |
