Even though there are an increasing number of viewers watching online content -- especially high-definition content -- it hasn't taken off as much as people thought, analysts have said on numerous occasions.
These services continue to try and get consumers to cut the cord in their living room, but it has been a very difficult road to try and conquer, with a very unsure future ahead.
"It's still the wild, wild West," Ogilvy Interactive spokesperson Rob Davis recently said during an interview with the New York Times.
I've enjoyed watching streaming Netflix content through the Xbox 360, and watch YouTube and Hulu through the PC, though I see numerous improvements that could be made in the future. Furthermore, the difference in quality between a Blu-ray movie on a large flat screen and streaming content to the same TV is extremely noticeable. (This is one of the main complaints I hear from people who aren't ready to leave TV content behind.)
Most broadband subscribers don't have the necessary bandwidth to watch content in 720p without possible skipping and lag time, which makes watching 1080p virtually impossible. It will likely be years before content providers and broadband companies are able to have consumers comfortably watch 1080p streaming content.
Aside from quality, there is a more pressing issue that involves money, and the lack of it heading to video sites and advertisers.
It's seriously doubtful sites such as Hulu are generating large amounts of revenue, but the CBS-backed web site understands that its position in the online video market will help it later down the road when money starts flowing into the online video market.
"It's a quandary we think about every day," CBS CEO Les Moonves recently said when asked about online programming not making money.
Will advertising work? If so, should it be text-based or video-based ads? Will the growing market segment be overlooked if consumers find some other platform or distribution model is offered?
