In an effort to maintain relevancy during a time when online TV viewing
is on the rise, a number of big name cable companies are looking to throw in online companion packages to sweeten the pay-TV equation. The
Wall Street Journal is reporting that top cable providers (namely Comcast and TWC) and TV networks are looking to assemble a large swath of online programming -- some of which has been previously unavailable -- and deliver it only to subscribers. As it stands, loads of shows are available right now for free via
Hulu and
broadcast websites, but some channels without online portals can only be caught via cable. From what we're gathering, it seems that these operators could be working to bring some of that content to the web, essentially providing a means to tune into a Comcast or TWC lineup without having to be in front of the set-top-box.
Update: Due to some quotes taken out of context, we have revamped our story above to show a clearer picture of the cable companies' intentions.
posted Feb 20th 2009 10:04AM
I find nothing wrong with that. It's a sound business plan. Not everything can be free, we're not living in the land of Star Trek.
I agree.
Cable is not a right by no means. It's a payed service. The cable companies have to work with the networks. If they networks don't agree, the cable company can drop them (networks don't want this).
The days of HULU will not necessarily end, but it won't be free anymore.
The problem is that it sounds like they're not giving an option in the middle. What if I only want to watch a couple shows? Why do I need cable in addition to having online services? Why pay $60 if I only care about watching the last 5 episodes of Battlestar or only want to watch the next season of Weeds?
This whole thing sounds like an easy way for cable companies to cheap out on On Demand services.
Those shows on network sites have ads that pay for the service.
I totally appreciate having the shows online, and am more than willing to watch a 30 second ad every few minutes. However, I'm not willing to get Concast to have the privilege.
by free you mean my internet bill i pay every month. hopefully this will be for all paying cable customers, not just $75+ digital bullshit packages.
On the possibility you're not being sarcastic...
Option 1: Shows are available online via an easily accessible advertising revenue supported platform (eg: Hulu). People can watch the shows on their TV via Boxee or similar, or watch them in the browser on their computer. People use this due to ease of use. Content provider receives advertising revenue.
Option 2: Shows are only available online via a subscription service bundled with cable supplier or similar . Only people who can access it are those with the correct cable supplier, and is limited to the supplier's choice of where they can watch it. Additional effort/cost is more than the additional effort involved in downloading from torrent sites or the like. Content provider gets decreasing revenue from the supplier, and no revenue relating to torrents.
Which is the better business case?
@ kjb434
while that makes sense in theory, do you really think comcast will drop nbc? the backlash from customers would be insane, not to mention that you can get nbc ota, so cable companies are powerless for network broadcasts
I'm not sure that you understand the way hulu, you tube and every legal video viewing service works. They're not free they have commercials and sponsors. With your logic over the air TV is free. I wonder how over the air networks stay in business offering a free service?
Yes, but Hulu is not cable shows. The cable companies show not have their hand in the cookie jar on that one. I can throw up an antenna and watch most of the stuff on Hulu. All I would need is to buy my own DVR. And boom, it's Hulu. It's all "free" network television! This is a desparate move on the cable companies part since people are realizing that the actual cable channels are mostly crap and that you can get by with OTA, online, and Netflix. The only exception is live sports, and if you don't mind heading to a sports bar, you can get rid of cable no problem.
I agree too. It's a perfectly logical move, if you ask me, for cable companies to deliver the same content they deliver over a cable connection, via the Internet as well. They have all those content relationships in place and the networks want to see their content available online.
And who knows... maybe the cable company even gets the user interface and delivery model right (like Hulu has)! That'll be the tough part of this for them IMO.
Is it sound?
I pay $62.95/month to Comcast for the cable modem rental and service. That's it. That $62.95/month goes solely to Comcast (sure, the "rental fee" subsidizes their purchase cost on the cable modem, but I've paid for that exact same modem for almost six years now so I have to assume I have more, much more, than covered their costs on that).
So I'm using OTA to get my broadcast TV, and I have an Apple TV to grab the video podcasts and cable shows I watch from the iTMS. I also game online and stream Netflix. No VoIP here, and, I should note, that I might grab a show unavailable elsewhere using a torrent, but that's very, very rare. I'm running a router using the Tomato firmware and, from month to month, I'm using a decent amount less than 100GB of bandwidth... so I'm not one of their crazier customers.
How much, exactly, does it cost for them to maintain that connection coming into my house?
I just can't imagine, even sucking up 100GB of bandwidth a month (when you have users like my mother, who might use 1GB of bandwidth a month, if that), that Comcast is not making a profit from my being their customer. I even looked into going to their next highest speed... but at ~$75/month they were still going to keep the 250GB bandwidth cap (and, while I'm nowhere near hitting that cap, I think it's a bit greedy to give higher speed at a higher price and not increase the cap for those customers).
So, no, It's not a sound business plan. It's greed, plain and simple. And when you are a greedy company and your customers know you are greedy, you end up paying by losing those customers.
If consumers are going to pay for online content, it should be to the companies producing the content, NOT the cable companies.
What the cable companies are doing is extortion - they are forcing themselves to be a part of a transaction that should be directly between consumers and television networks, because the cable companies control the pipes and have the power to harm the network's traditional services (e.g. by dropping channels or moving channels to less favorable "tiers"). Right now, delivery of traditional channels is more important to the television networks, so the networks comply. But that compliance today will come back to haunt the television networks in 20 years, because the cable companies will have established themselves as a middleman instead of the "dumb pipe" they should be (dumb pipe - we pay for bandwidth and can use that bandwidth however we choose, including buying streaming video directly from the source of our choice).
you know jonathan, S###w you. You must have a bun of money lying around so you dont care about it. Doing this will encourage more pirating.
@Geoffrey Sperl
try signing up for comcast's basic cable service. it's about $12 a month and with this you will get the discount on the internet service. which comes out cheaper than just internet. that's what i do. my bil is about $58 a month with both.
The problem here is that ratings are sinking on TV. Ratings that they depend upon to get advertising dollars. Yes, they may get Ad dollars for an online show, but not nearly as much. They are desperate to find a way to monetize online content before it is too late. I don't agree with how they are going about it (How will they know if I have cable? Will I need to sign up at Hulu now and have my watching habits tracked as if I were a Nielsen household?) but I understand their reasoning.
As for dealing directly with the content producers...well... there is always Itunes where you can cut cable companies completely out of the loop, or by buying a DVD, etc. Nothing is free though. It never has been. (Personally I Tivo things and skip the commercials completely. If I love a show, I'll buy the Blu-Ray version eventually. If I forget to Tivo, I'll watch it on Hulu. If Hulu suddenly was closed off to me because I have Sat and not Cable, I'm sure I'd still find a way to watch, one way or the other)
the problem with hulu is that they don't have enough bandwidth, I have a 16Mbps cable connections an their low resolution content often buffers, and the 480p option is just unwatchable. If my cable company starts providing me the same shows in a similar way it would not only be fast enough for HD, but would cost them less on internet bills since the content is only on their wires. As a customer, I like this idea, and doubly so if I can still access the content from any connection. I'm already paying for cable, but watch online because the network's scheduling doesn't match up with my viewing habits.
as for the other sources, it's mostly Windows only and that's just not convenient for me.
cable companies can't take hulu down, they don't have that power or right, but if they make a better way to watch for their customers, how's that not a good thing?
alt.binaries.tv
alt.binaries.multimedia
bitches!!!
@Onelove
You broke the first rule!
you bastard....lol
No problem, I'll just continue to pirate shows.
meaning you pirate them now, so this really has nothing to do with you. And, if I feel like being really preachy about it (which i really don't, but since you are one of these pirate braggarts...) you are part of the problem, causing these over-reactions that affect the rest of us
I'm sorry, what? I was too busy checking my torrents.
TV-Links FTW!
Niiiice. We should boycott these fuckers.
How can you boycott? They OWN everything we watch. God forbid we turn off the TV. Owww, fate worse then death!
Or you could always go outside and enjoy what God created, or better yet, pick up a book, I know, hard to think of isn't it.
"Or you could always go outside and enjoy what God created"
We need to have at least one thing to enjoy.
@dazepro I use TV to escape the shit your "god" has created.
Truth be told my only reason for watching tv is The Daily Show. So that shouldn't be too hard.
Never underestimate Corporate America's ability to F'up a good thing.
Only when the government has given them a clear path to do so. Generally, when corporations have to survive on sheer competitiveness alone, whoever rises to the top provides a great service.
It's only when the government starts making back-room contracts with these providers that they become lethargic and heavy-handed, taking the position of "You don't like what we're doing? Then leave us...you'll be back..."
Government involvement creates lazy corporations. The only role the federal government should play in private industry is making sure that they are being as competitive as possible.
so...won't hulu still exist?
why does this even matter?
Cable will be phased out but it will take some very big moves to get there. The biggest move, IMHO, will be when Netflix begins some hardcore focusing on streaming video. I'd buy a device for it right now if it weren't for the severe delay/limitations in which movies can be streamed online. When those barriers get broken down, we'll see some big changes. Netflix is paving the way. XBMC and a great host of other media systems are the way of the future. Traditional TV is out of date and unappealing for many of us.
I have never paid for cable, and never will, but I will gladly pay an additional Netflix fee to instantly play TV shows, movies, etc... streaming over the net.
But how do you get your internet connection? Cable. Cable won't be phased out, they'll just deliver different stuff. Considering what they rob me for with my monthly bills, I think they get all the money they need. I wonder if there's a voice of reason in their corporate offices that points out that they DO make money off Hulu, via Internet service charges?
Cable companies may live on as a "dumb pipe" providing internet access, but they don't want to be a "dumb pipe", they want to be a content provider. They want to handle the VOD transaction, not just deliver the VOD content. As long as the money goes through them, they can take a cut of it. But if the transaction goes directly to a third party, it cuts out a potential revenue stream.
Cable companies are turning into ISPs, whether they like it or not (and they do NOT like it). They've been making money hand-over-fist operating as a content provider (read: middle-man) for the last 20 years. That's about to be taken away from them thanks to services like Hulu, Netflix, YouTube, etc. At that point, they'll have two options:
1. Become a full-fledged ISP.
2. Quit the business and let someone else take over.
If they choose to become an ISP, then they'll have to actually compete on quality of Internet service. That means less caps, faster speeds, etc. I honestly can't wait until cable television fails, because it is a terribly antiquated system, and we'll move forward by ten years in terms of technology when they finally fold.
Won't stop them going the way of the dinosaur.
Did any of you read this before posting? This appears to only be targeted at cable channel shows - not the current broadcast shows that appear on Hulu already.
If the cable networks had ANY brains at all, they'd hook up with Hulu, or start their own online service, and pay for it with ads.
Wait! Cable companies are trying to screw their customers?! But that can't be right!
Wait a minute, how would they be able to police this? They couldn't tie it down to a person's internet connection, some people have DSL.
Hmm, well if they made you log in to a special site, what's to stop me from sharing that login with 1000 of my best friends and family members?
I don't think they thought this through...
It's not a sound business plan. These guys live in a vacuum, apparently. It's back to illegal downloads, which were unnecessary when people could watch the show of their choice off services like Hulu. Commercials don't bother people. Cable companies need to focus on their internet access capabilities, which is a viable business, and understand that people are moving off of their old model. It is a last ditch effort for survival and it is unfortunate that broadcasters think it's a good idea. They'll hurt themselves in the end. It's really not hard to get shows off of bit torrent and people will do it. In 9 months they'll complain people are stealing again. It's not because of their lack of vision, of course, it's everyone else.
clap
clap
clap clap clap clap clap....
I just got rid of my cable and frankly it was worthless. I am glad I did that. Like someone said, this is bull shit. I bet the government will just sit there and let them do it. What next? Protection money? These guys are even worse than the mafia when it comes to scruples.
And just when I thought they where starting to get it. Have they heard that people pirate this stuff when you charge too much for it?
I thought Battlestar Galactica was cable content? I certainly can't get it off my rabbit ears, even with DTV. I'm sure there's more shows like this.
That's what you get when the biggest ISPs are the cable companies. If there was a distributed wireless network that automatically routed computers in the best way possible (kind of like bittorrent), it could work for no monthly fee. It would also work the way the original internet was intended to.
Then again, I wonder if my neighbor has cable. They send tons of wi-fi signals through my house already. I probably wouldn't be effected by this at home, but at the free coffee shop, airport, and mall wi-fi spots it wouldn't work.
Then again, I don't download TV shows since I have Mythbuntu grabbing all the HD shows over-the-air that I want to watch.
They seem to be making the assumption that people can't go without television. Perhaps some people are so addicted they will pay the hustler for their fix. I'll just stop watching television in its entirety.
One word: Torrents
That's fine. Take away my Hulu and I'll go back to stealing your content off the torrents.
PS If it ends up being my cable provider's (Comcast) fault I'll cancel my service.
PSS Does anyone use PS anymore?
Apparently PPS is out of style too!
but not the PPSh. I rox0rs dem jappos with demshits in CODWAW.
TWC can kiss my ass. I have been a TWC customer for over 5 years. When I called them three weeks ago to see if I could reduce my monthly bill by getting one of the new subscriber promos, they promptly said no and put me on hold for 15 minutes. So, DishNetwork gave me more programing for 1/5 the price of TWC for the first 6 months, then it's 1/2 the price there after. Screw you TWC...
Fux dat. This is the same petty BS that's forces people to jailbreak iPhones and download software....
Screw you guys, TPB+XBMC for me! (And I do pay for cable, though I wish my damn roommates would agree to get rid of it.)
This just shows how ignorant these execs are... do they really think they're going to get these 20 somethings and teenagers to buy cable TV?
It's the older people such as myself who subscribe to all these TV channels and then hit Hulu to get the episodes I miss. The 20 somethings and teens will just continue to torrent the shows, the only people getting screwed by this are the cable companies legit customers.
They're trying to do the same thing the RIAA and music industry has been trying to do for years. Hulu was a step in the right direction, media companies need to face the facts and find ways to provide their content the way people want it. Instead of trying to limit it, which only creates losses for everyone involved.
Get with the times, get rid of these old over the hill execs and find some new guys with different ideas. You're only hurting yourselves and dragging out the inevitable.
In an actual capitalist system, some start-up comprised of 20-somethings would come along and destroy the cable companies (see: Apple vs. IBM...which was going fine until the older execs took over Apple, lol). Unfortunately, our government not only allows but encourages monopolies to exist in the entertainment industry. Then the monopolists work together to form cartels (see: media industry + content provider industry).
The worst part of all is that people will then say "SEE, CORPORATIONS/CAPITALISM IS EVIL! LET THE GOVERNMENT RUN IT!" The reality of the situation is that the government is the reason this exists in the first place.
Well that didn't take long, only a couple days after asking (forcing?) Boxee to pull Hulu content. I guess I don't have a problem with this, it's just that there's no place to go if I just want to watch a couple things. I watch maybe (big maybe) 10% of the channels I get 1 hour, maybe 2 hours at a time. I nowhere near utilize all I pay tons of money for each month. If systems like NBC direct offered HD downloads on subscription for like $15-$20 a season I'd probably buy into that (assuming services like Hulu are no longer around, which I definitely want them to be).
Like the post yesterday said, it's about convenience. If I have to watch Heroes on Tuesday instead of Monday because it's not available till then, I don't care, it's easier for me. The fact that it's free is just another perk.
Fine with me. LOST is the first show I have watched since Seinfeld, and I cannot imagine anything being as good in the near future. Once LOST ends next season, its back to very limited viewing of any sort - too many fun things to do in life....
Ok, I don’t have cable TV but get my internet through COMCAST. So they will block my access to video sites? I hope the FCC gets some balls some day. The cable companies (Verizon/ATT/Cox/Comcast) have to be the most poorly run (and regulated) companies. Before you say that they have the “right to be lame” remember that they operate on franchise system which is granted by local (county) governments and have very limited competition or technological alternatives. The service they provide is interstate which makes any issues a State PUC/Federal regulatory issue. I wish the FCC would grow up and realize that internet is just as important (if not more important) than voice when it comes to this kind of crap.
Why do I say this….. I worked for two of the companies I listed above and worked closely with the other two to the point of knowing there financial and government affairs strategy. They are all scum.
They're digging themselves a grave and then throwing the matches and gas in the hole and burning themselves.
The 'old' guard of the telephone companies, the cable companies, the networks, and even the shows are trying, trying, and trying to hold on to their old and profitable revenue streams in the face of new, faster, and easier to use technology. Instead of innovating, inventing, thinking, and evolving with the times; they whine, cry, bitch, moan, complain, and; oh yeah; sue their way into holding onto the 'old' system.
Its a wonder we even have the smartphones we do in the states. I've been to Japan and South Korea and their communications, entertainment, broadband internet, and all the interrelated content delivery systems are integrated, almost seamless, easy to use, and; oh yeah; profitable for their telecommunications and entertainment industry because they all evolved and innovated with the times and worked together.
I am the cable company's and content industry's worst nightmare. I watch one TV show a week (24). I read alot of books, especially in the winter months, and I play the occasional video game. And I may go to the movies once a year, and I'm at the gym for 2 hours a day. There are other things to do besides tv and I do them. And while the TV industry and advertisers constantly bombard me and you with show after show after show with ads and ads and ads through the TV, the internet, Boxee, and the Netflix box; I'm out and about doing something else. Come spring, summer, and fall; I disappear on my motorcycle.
No wonder torrent sites are so damn popular. They're simpler.
Content how you want it, when you want it, where you want it. This is torrents.
Content how we want you to have it, when we feel like letting you have it, on the TV in your living room. This is cable television.
There is no solution that ends with content creators/providers getting their way. The only way to stop piracy would be for cable companies to drop their ISP service...but that would just open the door to a new startup (ISP-only, like many local cable ISPs) to pick up the ball. They can try to regulate piracy all they want via their lobbyists in Washington...at the end of the day, there is NOTHING they can do to stop piracy, other than to provide a legitimate, compelling, competitive option. Hulu was only 1% of what that solution would need to be. Now instead of moving forward, they're moving backward.
Rest-assured, this will all be taken care of in a few years. As soon as the teens/20-somethings become 20-somethings/30-somethings, a.k.a. the main target demographic of the entertainment industry, they'll have no choice but to comply, especially after this hellacious economic climate we're in.
And this is the real reason Hulu (NBC/Newscorp) cut off Boxee.
No mention of the quality of the online content, which means it will likely continue to be sub-par compared to what's available from torrent sites. It's like they're only giving a minimal effort towards avoiding the debacle the music industry has created for itself.
back to torrents....
It reminds me of when the music companies started freaking out and tried to stop online file sharing. The problem is consumers don't want to pay inflated prices for music.... just like people don't want to pay inflated prices for video content.
It might work in the short term, but then someone (Hulu-like but not necessarily owned by NBC) will keep pushing a better product... available whenever I want for free save some ad content).
I feel like Hulu has shown us there is a viable model to post large amounts of video content (which is expensive to create) online for free...
Cable companies are making themselves anathema to the companies who actually look to what the consumer wants.
Exactly my sentiment. Bittorrent FTW.
How funny. Children acting like they have some sort of right to get things that other people spent millions creating for free. Crying whenever the the rights owners want to do something to ensure that they get paid for what they spent money making. LOL....
Awwwwwwwwwwwwwwww... is poor little comcast loosing some money? Maybe if they didnt have a legal monopoly on Tallahassee, FL and had to actually have fair rates because there is competition then i would give a crap they are loosing money.. But as it is every month comcast bends me over a barrel and gives it to me with their outrageous prices for TV and Internet.. i pay almost 100 dollars a month for 6 meg (usually only clocks at 4 meg) internet and only channels 2-99 (and the hdtv equivalents)... to bad i cant switch to the dish or i would leave comcast faster then they could cash my last check...
Hard Harry was right! (pump up the volume)
The tears are STREAMING (get it?) down my face.
Thanks TPB. You make all of this irrelevant.
Mack Swift: "No wonder torrent sites are so damn popular. They're simpler."
No. They are free/theft, not simpler.
bonedog73: "the only people getting screwed by this are the cable companies legit customers."
How the hell are legit customers getting screwed? They are the ones who WILL still be able to get the stuff. The one's who are going to be "screwed" are the ones who have stopped being legit customers, who've canceled their cable because they could get the shows online elsewhere.
Engaget: "nothing more than a desperation heave to keep their business model viable in the face of changing demand"
No. It's a "desperation heave" to try and keep their business alive in the face of thousands upon thousands of customers who have canceled cable due soley to the fact that they can get the conent online. (Have you not been paying attention to the news over the past year??) They aren't trying to keep their business model viable, they are trying to keep their BUSINESS alive.
"No. They are free/theft, not simpler."
You can argue that they are infringing, but it's not theft. I have to physically deprive someone of something to be theft. Downloading a show on torrents could be a case for copyright infringement.
@ hemmy: You are correct in that is not physical theft. But it is still theft. It is theft of an IP, like when you steal an idea. Legally.. yes it would be a case of copyright infringement. But theft as a word still fits.. and is quicker to type. ;p
No, in many cases, torrent sites are the *only* way to get content...
Bittorrent is the only way for many Americans to watch BBC shows like TopGear.
Bittorrent is the only way for Canadians to watch episodes of South Park the same day they are released in the U.S.
Bittorrent is the only way for many foreigners to see popular U.S. television shows in high definition.
Bittorrent is the only way for anime fans outside of Japan to watch most of the shows they read about.
Time Warner get's $50/month for my internet connection. As long as I have Usenet I don't care what they do.
Yeah yeah, I know 'blah blah you should pay for shows blah blah' - that's all fine and dandy but I wouldn't watch them if I had to so put that in your pipe and smoke it. The cable model should have changed years ago instead of charging ridiculous fees for a few good channels bundled with 50 shitty ones. If I could pay a small amount for each channel I'd be doing that now instead of DLing TV shows.
A) Most TV shows are not good
B) Those that ARE good aren't fun to watch week after week and require the DVD box set to make them real
C) I record the shows I like and run a script to remove the commericals
D) There's nothing good to watch on cable except for EPSN (and my son says Little Einsteins)
E) No one cares about what I am saying (heck not even me really)
Here's an idea!! Let's all buy Kindle 2s and READ! Yes!
Either the media groups wake up and realize they do not control everything there is, or they will die off like the dinosaurs they are.
Some people will pay the money. Most will not. Those that do not will either grab what they CHOOSE to watch illegally, or do without. TV is not a necessity. Groceries are. Let's see which one wins out.
Seriously worst idea ever. I don't have cable but i pay what i consider an outrageous fee for high speed internet. Just because the market is changing i can't believe that they would even consider pulling a stunt like this. If you want to take away hulu and such services all together then fine but don't play games with the internet access just because i don't pay for your stupid cable services too. I can't wait for wireless 4g networks to be fully deployed then i'll just forget about my home internet all together.
I do not see how the cable companies are going to be losing money. The larger cable providers are already testing bandwidth caps. If it proves successful this plan will be pushed out nationwide and we will end up paying more for online content as a whole, and who ends up with that money but the cable providers.
This move about restricting content to only paying customers is a great idea. Why do I have to pay for cable service and someone who doesnt gets to watch it for free. Right now all they can do is just give a small sample to the non paying customer and let me invest in a cable box.
If you dont like the idea then go back and watch your tv on rabbit ears.
Assume Hulu and things like that will either go away or there will be a charge for it, just like a cable TV subscription. Get an antenna, build yourself a PC with a twin tuner card in it and record your network shows ATSC (HD). Download all the other content from wherever you can get it. Get rid of your cable/satellite. Don't go to the movies, wait awhile and rent from Redbox for $1 or for free with a code when available.
but i want to watch top chef live :(
Tom,
not all people are trying to get something for nothing. Most users are more than willing to watch the commercials on Hulu or pay netflicks for the content which they are watching. The content creators are more than satisfied with the revenue this arrangement provides and will continue to create content.
Cable providers have had a great run, they have pretty much done anything they wanted for a long time and are now paying for it. People are seeing that they can get what they want easier, better, and cheaper, making cable unnecessary. Trying to keep their business model alive by stifling innovation and consumer value is obviously not going to work in the long run, and attempting to ignore this is going to increase the problem of piracy.
When a service ceases to provide value and innovation to consumers it either dies or adapts, right now cable is attempting to do neither.
BACK TO TORRENTS!
Okay, I'll just pirate then. Thanks.
And what is screwing our economy? The greed of big business that want to screw their customers and then expect the general public to bail them out when they start to fail because everyone is tired of paying big bills.
And what you don't see is that their business plan includes locking everyone in and then screaming "We need to limit eveeryone's bandwith. So we'll need to raise rates."
I rarely use torrents, I haven't DLed one for a couple years now. However, I am one of the many who have now gotten use to and enjoy not having cable, instead using Hulu, iTunes, YouTube, and over-the-air programming for all my needs, and I like it a lot. I will not pay those exorbitant cable fees again (and deal with that horrible costumer service everywhere you go). I will be DLing torrents like a mad-man if this happens, some just to get the feeling that I'm shoving it up their A$$$$$.
Is it just me or is the headline wrong?
Between this and the cancellation of Hulu on boxee, it's like they're trying to push us all back to torrents. Really, why not just offer an official torrent with hulu-style ads baked in? Release it right after the show with high quality and you have a winner. Having problems with localization issues? Charge for international ads! Make it all DRM free and offer multiple video formats, it doesn't even cost them anything really. Plus, they can update the ads in the older episodes if they so choose. In order to beat the pirates, they have to be competitive. Most people won't mind a few 15 second spots and a bottom banner or two if its, fast, legal, free, and available. Plus, its currently a bit confusing to get into TV torrents as-is, although there are a few sites offering RSS feeds for the best releases of each show, the videos themselves might not be so coherently encoded.
I try to get all of my content legally, as often as I can. Luckily, the few shows I watch are on Hulu, and usually the day after they air.
Guess what, if this threat is carried out, no more. The gloves are off and I will jam the Pipes with torrents and push for UTOPIA (an open fiber pipe any ISP can use in Utah) to be extended in every corner of this state to break the stranglehold of Comcast/Qwest monopoly that currently exists.
Is this, or is this not, teired service. And I thought we didn't need net neutrality laws.
Oh no, the cable companies are "scheming" to make money! Please. I'm so tired of the bitching and moaning about cable companies. It costs money to produce the programming and it costs money to deliver the programming. The Cable companies have spent billions of dollars building networks to deliver video content in a very efficient manor. Delivering video on-demand over IP is a horribly inefficient model and it costs a lot more, so you're going to have to pay more. It's that simple.
Great. At this rate, we're all going to be reverting back to the sneakernet.
Cable companies restrict online content to subscriber only, ISPs start enforcing three strike policies, and we (non-cable subscribers) will be reduced to the Netflix catalog.
Wait... that actually doesn't sound too bad. I love Netflix. Cable companies: Eat it.
Hey - this is Kate from Comcast. I've read some of the comments, and want to make something clear. This is about us brining more content to consumers, not less. We want people to be able to watch their favorite shows where they want to watch it including many premium shows that aren't available online. Sure there are broadcast shows with commercials, but there aren't premium shows online because it costs money to make shows and programmers need to be paid for it, they can't just put it online for free. So with this project that we're calling (for now) "OnDemand Online" we'd be giving people more access to what they already pay for, which isn't a new idea for Comcast. We've had OnDemand on TVs for years which gives our customers a big library of shows they can watch for free when they want to. This is similar, we're just brinigng that content online.
hi kate, thanks for forwarding us the inter-office memo, there was a 'g' missing in "brining" otherwise i'd say you are fine to release that to the press. also, i'm sure comcast loves you making statements on their behalf.
fact is the model already exists...hulu. fox and nbc joined up just fine and released a ton of content for free to anyone, why don't these poor tiny networks that can't afford to release their content just join up and do the same? oh yeah, because your evil company strong arms them into doing whatever you want.
only reason i ever had comcast, twc, etc was because of the regional monopoly they had. the second fios is available im dropping the crappy cable.
if you are really serious about on demand content, let me pick and choose what channels i want and only charge me for those, i really don't need to be paying for lifetime or speed or 15 different public access channels.
Hey Kate,
You know what would be great? If you stopped charging ludicrious prices for your services. Also your HD channels look like TOTAL crap. I'd also like the NFL Network back for free, as other companies offer it. Oh and I think my Commodore 64 had a better programming/DVR setup than the current craptacular boxes you force us to use.
Do you have some time to chat? Can I call you? I'd love your ear for a few hours.
Comcast has already teamed up with Hulu. Check out Fancast.com, they just pull in content. Also...I read up above about live sports not being online....check out MLB.tv Every game, live, and in HD if your connection is fast enough. NFL sunday ticket is online also (but only for DirecTV subscribers). Now imagine if Apple opened up an AppleTV app store, and a MLB.tv app appeared with all the games streaming live in HD.
oh, you meant "HD" not HD, that makes more sense now
uh oooooooooooh....Engadget got in trouble with their ooooowneeeeeers!
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh!
Hey Kate:
Here's an idea. All I want from you (or, actually my incumbent cable provider) is Battlestar Galactica and the Big Ten Network. That's what I choose to watch. I'm willing to pay for that programming, and only that programming. When can I do that?
And don't cry about "the content providers not allowing that." Grow a backbone and stick up for your customers.
Hate to state the obvious here, but if pricing were to go a le carte, your Big Ten Network would be the first channel to disappear. I don't think the majority of cable viewers give a damn about 11 college sports teams in the Midwest.
Battlestar Galactica is in HD on iTunes. You can watch that on your HDTV using AppleTV. Big Ten network streams some games online. I'm rooting for Apple to make these content deals, or Netflix. Netflix is streaming the LIVE version of Starz online now also. What you want is coming, it's just not here yet. I bet Apple and Netflix beat the cable providers to it though.
Can you even read? They are talking about bringing new content (like HBO) online, all other content like (NBC, ABC, etc) will remain free. They are just bringing extra content online for their costumers.
"Pick up the gun."
"But I don't want to pick up the gun mister."
"Pick up the gun"
"Well, okay, if you say so."
BANG BANG BANG
"Hey, why did you shoot me?"
"You picked up the gun."
If you know Bill Hicks you know what I'm talking about. Same thing here. Time Warner are going to dangle all this juicy content in your face saying "look at all this cool stuff you can watch online" and the moment you start watching you'll break your pitiful 20GB bandwidth cap and won't know until your next bill that you've probably just spent another $15.