Since crippling carriers with outrageous costs for 3G (third generation) networks and spectrum, vendors have introduced new network technologies at a pace fierce and furious. HSDPA (High-Speed Downlink Packet Access) and DVBH (Digital Video Broadcasting Handheld) are the latest technologies hyped by vendors as crucial for the success of Mobile TV. MBMS (Multimedia Broadcast/Multicast Service) and BCMCS (Broadcast and Multicast Services) are futuristic vendor technologies lurging in the shadows. All technologies mentioned above require new handset types and either new or upgraded networks.

The streaming of TV content is more demanding than other type of services for several reasons. As with PC-based streaming, viewing streamed content involves the simultaneous delivery and viewing of content. Content is not stored, so delivery and viewing occur at the same time. As a result, the radio link between the user and network must be sufficiently broad and consistent to enable the user to watch the content smoothly, without delays.

PC-based broadband Internet, which offers bandwidth far greater than can mobile networks, still delivers an inconsistent and poor streaming experience. Mobile networks offer far less bandwidth, and thus simply can not deliver acceptable Mobile TV to the masses. This fact, however, has not prevented the vendors from hyping each new technology as the potential solution. A vicious and costly circle.

The network problem
The race for Mobile TV started with the vendors arguing that the first generation of data networks could not offer the bandwidth required for the streaming of video and TV. The first data networks, such as General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) are called 2.5 generation networks.

However, alternative non-streaming versions of Mobile TV existed. Background download services, where TV episodes are automatically downloaded (say, overnight) and available on the phone for at-will viewing could have been promoted to prove the viability of Mobile TV. Vendors, however, totally ignored these services, and focused exclusively on bandwidth-hungry live streaming. With the PC/Internet world evolving to broadband and multimedia, the carriers, caught in a prisoner's dilemma, bought into the vision, and spent countless billions on buying spectrum and building new advanced 3G networks.

After selling these advanced 3G networks, the vendors began claiming that actually, 3G lacked the bandwidth to offer acceptable Mobile TV services, and that further upgrades were required. 3G, they now argued, could only deliver 1 Mb/second. Most of this capacity was actually reserved for voice calls, which is, of course, the carrier's main source of revenue.

A decent Mobile TV experience requires a data flow of at least 124-256 kb/second per user, depending on the type of video content. The bandwidth must be multiplied for each user in the cell. This all means that 3G could actually support one Mobile TV user per cell at best.

Additionally, delivering Mobile TV users at peak usage times, in congested areas, or on trains and subways (where coverage is patchy) are the most popular usage-scenarios. However, delivering Mobile TV in these scenarios is extremely difficult, if not impossible. As a result, carriers ended up launching Mobile TV services over 3G for publicity purposes only.