CableCompanies
Latest
NAB scolds cable companies for downconverting HD locals
We've certainly seen the head honchos give the cable companies a piece of their mind before, but this time the carriers are receiving a fairly stiff scolding care of the National Association of Broadcasters. David Rehr made sure to make every moment of his speech segment count, as he ripped cable providers for "downconverting" the signals of local channels in order to boost the bandwidth available to "their own high-definition signals." Mr. Rehr even went so far as to call the process "broadcast discrimination," and we can only presume that certain providers -- such as Time Warner, who has ties to HBO and Comcast, which is strongly linked to Versus / Golf Channel -- are the targets of recent battles. Unsurprisingly, anonymous cable services have reportedly denied the claims of delusion, but how do the actual end-users see it? Let us know folks: is your cable company giving preferential treatment to channels it has vested interest in?[Via HiDefster]
FCC unties cable boxes from cable companies
According to Dow Jones, the FCC has shot down Comcast's request to be exempt from new rules intended to open up the playing field for cable boxes, leaving an appeal the company's only hope of keeping its customers tied to its own set-top boxes. Under the new rules, which are set to go into effect July 1st, cable companies will not be allowed to use integrated security features that tie their cable boxes directly to their own service. Instead, customers would be able to simply get a cable card from their cable company and pop it into their set-top box of choice -- the idea being, from the FCC's perspective, to open up a new marketplace for cable boxes, ultimately reducing the cost for consumers. Not surprisingly, Comcast sees things a little differently, calling the FCC decision "regrettable" and adding that "it amounts to an FCC tax of hundreds of millions of dollars on consumers with no countervailing benefits." The FCC has apparently given some smaller cable companies a bit of leeway with the deadline, however, saying they won't enforce action against companies that have already placed orders for new cable boxes but aren't expected to get them by July 1st.[Via Slashdot]
AT&T, Verizon get holiday gift from FCC: ruling eases IPTV regulations
On Wednesday the FCC handed down a new ruling that will make it easier for telecom providers to roll out IPTV services, which would bypass traditional cable company offerings. The commission voted 3-2 that AT&T and Verizon shouldn't have "unreasonable conditions" imposed on them by local municipalities whose rules often differ from one city to the next. However, the two dissenting Democrats cited the fact that it may become more difficult for municipalities to require providing public access to television channels over the internet. Further, these same commissioners remained concerned that the phone companies would select more affluent neighborhoods over lower class ones because the new ruling eliminates the long-standing policy that the same level of service must be offered to all residents in a given area. Based on those arguments and others, the new ruling is likely to be challenged in court and possibly by Congress; Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), who will be heading the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet in January, will also be checking whether or not this falls under the FCC's purview. In other words, it ain't over until that fat bandwidth pipe really sings. [Via Slashdot]Read - Ars TechnicaRead - The Washington PostRead - Los Angeles Times
Can cable keep up without big infrastructure expenditures?
The unsettling tension between cable, satellite, and now FTTH providers is growing ever tighter, and the delivery of HD channels, on-demand content, and internet services through aging coax pipelines is leaving little room for expansion. While some analysts are suggesting that cable companies should be prepared to spend big bucks in order to maintain their current service levels -- especially considering the seemingly imminent additions of HD content and higher-high-speed internet services -- they may not have to bust out that checkbook so soon. It's no secret that Verizon alone has spent $20 billion in fiber optic deployment in order to get FiOS services to various parts of the country, and cable providers can't exactly afford to sit around and get leapfrogged. Reportedly among the various suggestions (that don't involve just throwing down for a larger infrastructure) is one that focuses on changing the way channels are delivered entirely, requiring no expansion whatsoever. The (relatively) antiquated analog stations aren't doing cable companies any favors, and as they begin to (presumably) phase out in favor of the leaner, meaner digital flavor, the lines can start to breathe a bit easier. But probably more important than the switch to digital is, well, switched digital -- in a switched system, only the channel that's currently being viewed is sent out (much like current IPTV installments), thus freeing up loads of bandwidth. Apparently this efficient design allows for "hundreds of stations" to be available at any given time, while giving providers one less reason to crack open the piggy bank for fear of clogged pipes. It's fairly obvious that cable companies still have a firm, albeit loosening, grip on the television market, and until this newfangled FTTH thing can reach a few more folks (or Google breaks out a dark-fiber solution of its own), it's cable or bust for most of us.[Via Ars Technica]
