Microsoft and Scientific-Atlanta, a major TV set-top device maker, have just announced an agreement to work together.

Microsoft will provide the software operating system. Scientific-Atlanta will make the set-top boxes to give people access and control of all their digital content from one place including video, photos and music. The two companies' technologies will support the rollout of Internet-based TV by telecom giant SBC.

IPTV boxes will sit near TVs and allow people to access digital video as well as control, or move it, to TVs or PCs around the house.

That seems an all systems go for the development of global facing TV and internet video niche markets, but for one major issue.

Unless these guys can make the control device no more  demanding than the current TV remote, it won't work.

TV is entertainment. That's casual and easy. Isn't that the  opposite of accessing today"s internet?

How it works. A guy reads the article about Carlton's internet ad.Then, he emails me this spoof site. Brilliant. The thing just keeps turning, reverberating and highlighting the original Carlton ad.

Last year Andy Roddick starred for American Express on TV during the US Open. This year his ads are on the net. Carlton Beer in Australia has just had  a stunningly success internet ad. Everyone's starting to use the net now, Gap, New Line Movies, Budweiser. Even small advertisers are rethinking how to reach people. 17 grand to shoot a 30 second long something. Post it. Then you're away. You can measure who sees it. From where. Calculate the exact cost of customer. Determine the success. More  And it lives on and one. With each new person "discovering" it anew.

Technology allows precise targeting. Satellite radio is throwing up new formats. So Sirius Radio have spawned 24/7 Elvis station.Good Move.  It'll bring in the mob of Elvis fans willing to pay the US$12.95 a month subscription. Next, Sinatra, Rolling Stones, Beatles. Another mass market being taken down by exact one to one marketing (or PR); by narrow casting; by innovation in a wide but very thin market. TV by internet does the same thing. More here.

Have you ever experienced having to deal with a decision tree in a suppliers phone system? Isn't it frustrating?

About a week ago I tried to change something in my Visa account. And of course the problem that I first encountered was that what I wanted to do wasn't one of the options that were available. The things that I wanted were dealt with by head office and not the partner bank in question. After three calls I believe, I was so angry and frustrated that I was ready to explode.

So I have been reading with interest recently some of the comments about Dell's customer service that are appearing and wondering what other companies have a serious customer service problem, and which ones really excell at service.

Here and here are a couple of interesting reads about the way Dell treats customers for instance. I have heard (and have had) some dreadful experiences on airlines over the years - which is probably not surprising considering how much I fly. And I have heard some dreadful criticism of United and BA over the years. I fly with United quite a lot, and notwithstanding the fact that their planes are all looking a bit tired, I still travel with them, partly because their frequent flyer program is one of the best, I think.

How can companies improve the way that they service customers and make a fundamental shift for themselves?

Interesting move by China and Russia just reported. The president of the Association of Russian Banks reflected on the creation of the Euro to counter the power of the dollar, and suggested that a new currency that suits the Asian region might need to be created, or alternatively the Won or the Yuan could become the trading currency for Russian/Chinese and other bilateral trade.

Remember back in the late 90’s when the buzz word for venture capital investment was disintermediation?  

It was the theoretical driver for on-line commerce as I recall. Then with the implosion of the dot-com era and a general acceptance of the web, the notion of the world going through rapid change seemed to disappear. It seems like a lot of businesses have just gone back to doing what they used to do and expecting life to continue and profitability to increase at 15% year on year.  

There’s even talk about “future proofing” infrastructure, like telephone networks that I keep reading about. How can you future proof anything in a world that is truly undergoing change at an accelerated pace? I think what we need instead is more radical scenario planning.  

What would happen if tied together some of the significant and repetitive trends that we see constantly in the media? Where would the convergence be? How do the social vectors influence the investment and business vectors?  

While people are talking about Peak Oil, Global Warming, Bird Flu, Real Estate, and the economic threat of China what is happening behind the scenes?  

In a newsletter on consumer electronics that I just read, I saw that research from consumers is showing that the number one driver in considering purchasing HD equipment is price…. Then design, quality of picture, and lastly features.  

This is nothing new of course. The understanding that competitive pricing together with quality product manufacture is what enabled Hyundai and Toyota to become so powerful in their space. And we still haven’t seen the real impact of this on the world. It used to be that what was good for GM was good for America. Now both GM and the US seem to be economically challenged!  

The ability to be able to change business models in a truly dynamic marketplace is not an easy thing to pull off. And it’s hard to reconcile that your business may be impacted significantly by things that are a hemisphere away…. Like the demand for consumer goods in China.  

The BBC has announced that it's going to pipe its programs through the Internet from next year. Plus,  send them to cellphones. The Beeb woke up with Dr Who. An episode "leaked" to the net. The net went crazy for it. Hmmm, BBC bigwigs think, missing out here.Today,  live TV on the net is a mixed bag . Still, I watched the last two Australian election nights  via ABC Broadband. Throw in cellphone calls and it was as good as being there.

Live net TV  is only possible now because so many people have switched to broadband. But the cascade is beginning. Verizon is bringing fiber optics into the American neighborhoods this year..They already sell multi-channel TV (satellite). But a great new fast pipe, a software interface, maybe Tivo a big screen and I'm ready to watch all the world's images; live local and network TV, (here and anywhere over there) podcasts, internet channels, video on demand, movie downloads; all via the net.

Take Rugby enthusiasts. Worldwide, a  sizable audience. Jujitsu lovers. Maybe bigger. Displaced Armenians. Or Iranians. Could there be a business case for any dispersed interest group to have channels/sites only carried by the net? Sure.

Pay per view, pay per program, pay by month. One studio. Somewhere. And we're all reached by the net. Thanks BBC for proving the business case. 

I always enjoy reading Stephen Roach's take on globalization, macro economics and why the world is heading to hell in a handbasket. I was reading his latest posting today - for those who are concerned about where oil prices are headed and its impact on local economies, this is a must read. Of course Stephen Roach is a big supporter of globalization, unlike John Ralston Saul, whose new book I have just bought.

Like the car chases described in Richard McKinnon's posting this is just another take on reality TV in some respects. We are living through the most complex soap opera ever seen, and one that everyone wants to predict the ending for.

Will we hit peak oil in the next three years? Will China go to war over Taiwan? Will the real estate bubble in the US burst or just deflate? Will the US attack Iran next? Watch next week's episode and find out!

Flicking around the channels last night during the news at eleven, we delightedly settled to watch a car chase. A lone driver lead at least, 14 or 15 black and whites, (ie the cop cars),  one cop chopper and a flock of media helicopters, along the 110, 10 and 60 freeways, until he finally stopped and the cops pounced, guns drawn and shotguns out. Wonderful!

The car chase is a staple of LA and its TV. Has been since OJ ran for it. The TV channels just love them. Me too. And since ratings go up when a live chase is on, count everyone else in.

You see, it's live for a start. We don't know how it will turn out. Will the guy make a break from the car?  Will the cops shoot? Will all the freeways be closed totally. What will the cops do to bring it to a close? So, its immediately compelling. It has a beginning, middle and eventual end. It's surprising. And it's now.

All the rest of the news is packaged and old. Much of the rest of TV s repetitious. After all, we have the Law and Order Network (NBC) facing the CSI network (CBS). TV's mass audience is fracturing downwards, and less and less speaks to "broad"casting except live; live sport, live events (the Academy Awards, State of the Union) and of course, car chases. With the decline goes the advertising base. Now network and channel TV is urgently in needs of a new set of ideas. What is there? It's more live.

So perhaps Les Moonves, the CBS boss, should start a car chase channel. It could  bring us car chases at all hours.From all over LA. More. All over the country! And why stop there. All over the world!  It's hip. It's now. And as we know form LA, its a broadcast ratings winner. What else is these days?