A: We really don't think so, for many reasons.
But we need to clarify in advance a common misunderstand: tv and internet are usually intended each one as both a service and a network.
Digital convergence means that, in a short-medium term, all the four combinations would be teorically possible, but..
..this is not going to be completely transparent! The reason is easily explained.
This is the table showing the various mix and match:
||Tv as a Network
||Internet as a Network
|Tv as a Service
||It's good old broadcasting, as we know today, but people is looking for on demand services, too.
||Good for personalized tv services (VOD/NVOD) BUT doesn't scale economically and technically very well
|Internet as a Service
||It has been tried, but today it's a misuse as they are scarce resources. Internet is a personalized experience and TV network are naturally broadcast. Then the fruition model is different then the living room.
||That's standard stuff for someone. Crazy anarchy for other. All in all, it's going to be the usual pot for every new service to come to life, but maybe not become mainstream for the mass market.
First of all, we can easily understand) that some combinations are technically feasible but not commercially (they would not scale..)
But the real point is that, to better understand these markets, we should focus on the service side and "forget the network" (it's likely becoming a commodity).
And the two services are totally different, the latter is about complex "digital contents" (both for personal fruition and creation) and the former mainly for the simple public fruition.. they need and exploit different point in time, brain activity, contents, locations, costs, displays, input devices and so on..
What a mistake force a user switch between these two contexts.