Cable Companies Appear To Be Screwing Up TV Everywhere

from the what-a-surprise dept

Back in March, some cable companies announced plans for an offering called TV Everywhere, which was designed not to actually add value to your cable subscription plan, but to pressure TV networks to stop putting their content online for free, and offer it, instead, via cable authentication. For users, it would mean the ability to watch their cable subscriptions online, but only after they authenticate themselves, which seemed like a big hassle. It may be an even bigger hassle. Apparently, in this effort to take on things like Hulu (and, to a lesser extent, YouTube) no one at the cable companies got the message that simplicity is what made those sites work:
CBS Interactive president Quincy Smith this week proclaimed that there's no unified standard among cable companies for the project, and dozens of companies are all approaching back-end technology differently. There's also no real consensus between cable companies on how to proceed. One result? Users not having a central resource for video content.

Bowman suggested that projects like TV Everywhere may not yield a single site that will contain content from dozens of programmers. Instead, the authentication system the industry develops may be used to point pay-TV subscribers to several different sites to view their pay-TV content online.
Now that sounds like a winner.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Tristin, Aug 20th, 2009 @ 11:22pm

    This is why people pirate

    And the P2P parade marches on...

    Someday one of these overpaid monkeys in a suit will figure out that the only way to compete with something that is free and convenient is to make something that is free, convenient, AND somehow more valuable. It probably wouldn't hurt to fire all of the lawyers and start thinking like someone that has to earn their paychecks.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    icon
    zenkishi (profile), Aug 21st, 2009 @ 5:09am

    Who still pays to watch tv anyway? That's what you have the internet for.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Aug 21st, 2009 @ 7:01am

    more stuff for the business plan ....

    265 note/entry) Add the ability to plugin custom Authentication modules server side.

    266) Add the ability to pluging encryption modules to both the servers and client software.

    267) Add multi level encryption, for client to client communications.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Aug 21st, 2009 @ 7:16am

    Re: more stuff for the business plan ....

    Since its going to be asked for anyway......

    268) Ability to use plugins for Client and Server Side Video to DRM'd Video.

    269) Ability to request from the server and send the client custom (DRM'd) Codecs.

    The rationale behind that is someone/group is going to ask to be able to use DRM'd videos that expire, have a usage limit, require server side validation, etc.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    icon
    diabolic (profile), Aug 21st, 2009 @ 7:38am

    Sounds like this will be as successful as cable cards that let you own your own cable box. Good luck getting what you are paying for from any cable company at any time, they have local monopolies. If the cable company has to do anything, like add some kind of authentication system, then you will see that in your bill. All this program does is lock up content behind a pay wall as a way to prop up the existing way of doing things. Nothing good can come from this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    yozoo, Aug 21st, 2009 @ 7:39am

    confused

    I thought ComCast had a big stake in Hulu (with FOX and several content providers) - it completely owns Fancast as far as I know? So why again do they want to destroy themselves?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 21st, 2009 @ 8:19am

    Who cares?

    Read a book, learn something. Television is for sheep.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Improbus, Aug 21st, 2009 @ 9:41am

    Buh Bye

    I dropped my Time-Warner cable service in June but kept my high speed Internet. So far the only downside is having to wait a few hours to a day to watch a show. This small inconvenience saves me ~$60 a month. The small inconvenience is balanced by the fact that the shows I download have had the commercials removed.

    Now, I would be perfectly happy to watch commercials if the networks would just put the shows on the web and let me stream them. Wake up and smell the coffee you stupid suit monkeys! You no longer get to say when and where I watch your content.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Jiss Plain Folks, Aug 26th, 2009 @ 8:19pm

    TV is having its last gasp...

    I did not buy a converter nor digital TV. They are a waste of time and money. Six hundred channels does not give anyone 600 times more content.
    I have had cable for a few months, satellite (dish) for a year and "free" TV for years.
    With my wireless internet connection I get the weather immediately, the news has no "teasers" ie: details on that disaster at 10:00PM. More details at 11:00. My movies come on when I want them, my reruns are of my choosing, if I want them.
    Network TV is gasping for air and going down fast. Nobody is going to save it. Next to die are cable companies. Sixty to one hundred dollars per month to watch junk! You gotta be kidding, right?
    Best of all I pay no one for access to any of this. All at T1 speeds or better. All it took for me to get on line was $35 for a wireless card.
    Isn't technology great?!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    icon
    The Mad Hatter (profile), Jan 6th, 2010 @ 7:00am

    Rogers On-Demand in Canada

    Is the same thing, and why Rogers is so aggressive in enforcing bit caps. On-Demand is exempt the bit caps. Rogers want you to only watch it's programming.

    Oh, and Rogers service sucks. If you stream a You-Tube video it skips and jumps, even though Rogers claims it has the fastest internet service in Canada.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Real estate agency Bangkok, Feb 18th, 2010 @ 12:08am

    It was nice shower. More sophisticated.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    icon
    Nicole Vega (profile), Jan 10th, 2011 @ 9:47am

    TV can be Everywhere without hassle

    Nicole here, it's sad that the idea of TV Everywhere is being drawn out and causing confusion. I work for DISH Network and I've recently purchased a Sling Adapter. This innovative technology works with my VIP 722k receiver, compresses my TV signal and makes it available over the web so I can watch TV anywhere I have high-speed internet access. I downloaded the free app for my iPhone and I literally can watch my TV from anywhere. No lagging, no monthly fees, no problem.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This