未来也许会有一家新的公司，为影视制作商提供支付和流媒体服务，这一模式可能比现有的视频网站更被用户接受！就像Apple Pay一样是一个无线刷卡器，和支付宝不一样！
4．互联网影视
好莱坞也开始与网络接轨，过去这被认为是一个错误的选择；但现在看来，在这场媒体传输战中，互联网是最后的赢家。
互联网网的胜出要归结于电视观众们，大家往往等不及电视台的更新速度；几个月前大家将电视机更换成iMac，尽管那个无线鼠标不是很容易操作，但整体的体验效果比电视机好太多了。
有些人会经常观看一些电影，电视机被许多其他无关的事物取代了，像是某个社交网络，或者是游戏。也有人会想看传统戏剧。要怎样通过网络来传输戏剧？人们在电脑前开始观看时，他们可以随意观看电视剧的某一集？或者是完整的一部电影？
以下是两种传输和支付方式。
一种是像Netflix或者和苹果一样，成为娱乐的App store；如果这些所谓的应用商店实在搞不定用户，那么就会有新的公司应运而生，为制作商提供支付和流媒体服务。如果这样的话，相应基础设施公司也会大有需求。
http://www.leiphone.com/news/201406/paul-graham-ambitious.html
4.互联网影视
[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]
[endif] 好莱坞一度曾不情愿对互联网敞开自己的怀抱。这是个错误，因为我认为在交付机制方面我们现在可以找出获胜者了，它是互联网，而不是有线电视。
[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]
[endif] 其中非常多的原因要归咎于有线的客户端，也即电视。我们的家庭期盼的不是 Apple TV。而是因为我们对自己的上一台电视已经恨之入骨了，以至于几个月前我们用一台固定在墙上的 iMac 把它给换了。用无线鼠标来控制它还有点不便，但是整个体验已经比之前我们不得不与之打交道的梦魇般的 UI 要好得多了。
[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]
[endif] 当前人们看电影和电视的一部分注意力会被似乎是完全不相关的东西夺去，如社交网络应用。而更多的注意力则会被更相近一点的东西偷走，如游戏。不过，也许传统影视—也就是那种你被动地坐在那里，然后观看某一情节发生的表现形式总会残留有一部分的需求的。那么在互联网上应该怎样交付这一表现形式呢？我想，不管你做什么，其规模都得比 Youtube 视频剪辑那样的形式要大才行。大家坐下来看节目的时候，会想要知道自己马上能得到什么东西：或者是一系列自己熟悉的角色的一部分，或者是一部基本前提已经事先知晓的更长一点的 “电影”。
[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]
[endif] 交付和支付有两种实现方式。要么是像 Netflix 或者苹果这样的公司成为娱乐的应用商店，你将会通过他们来获得观众。要么就是设想中的应用商店对此实在是鞭长莫及，或者在技术上不够灵活，那么就会有公司诞生出来为戏剧的制作商提供点播式的支付和流媒体服务。如果是这么做的话，还需要有此类基础设施公司的出现。
http://36kr.com/p/89762.html
原文：
4. Internet Drama
Hollywood has been slow to embrace the Internet. That was a mistake, because I think we can now call a winner in the race between delivery mechanisms, and it is the Internet, not cable.
A lot of the reason is the horribleness of cable clients, also known as TVs. Our family didn't wait for Apple TV. We hated our last TV so much that a few months ago we replaced it with an iMac bolted to the wall. It's a little inconvenient to control it with a wireless mouse, but the overall experience is much better than the nightmare UI we had to deal with before.
Some of the attention people currently devote to watching movies and TV can be stolen by things that seem completely unrelated, like social networking apps. More can be stolen by things that are a little more closely related, like games. But there will probably always remain some residual demand for conventional drama, where you sit passively and watch as a plot happens. So how do you deliver drama via the Internet? Whatever you make will have to be on a larger scale than Youtube clips. When people sit down to watch a show, they want to know what they're going to get: either part of a series with familiar characters, or a single longer "movie" whose basic premise they know in advance.
There are two ways delivery and payment could play out. Either some company like Netflix or Apple will be the app store for entertainment, and you'll reach audiences through them. Or the would-be app stores will be too overreaching, or too technically inflexible, and companies will arise to supply payment and streaming a la carte to the producers of drama. If that's the way things play out, there will also be a need for such infrastructure companies.
http://paulgraham.com/ambitious.html
网友评论