Comcast Xfinity heads to Roku and Samsung TVs without a box (Update: FCC responds)

Poke

Pub Member / Supporter
Original poster
Dec 3, 2003
13,886
238
OK
http://www.engadget.com/2016/04/20/comcast-xfinity-cable-tv-without-a-box/

While the FCC is working on ways to "unlock the box," Comcast announced plans for its Xfinity TV service that don't require the set-top add-on. Later this year, the company will release an Xfinity TV Partner app for Roku-powered TVs and streaming gadgets as well as Samsung's 2016 line of smart TVs. The app is part of a wider Xfinity TV Partner Program from Comcast, which brings its cable service to consumer home entertainment devices while nixing the extra cost of renting a box.

Comcast says this service will offer the Xfinity guide along with live and on-demand content, plus a cloud-based DVR. The company already had live television apps that allow customers to stream shows and more from 70 channels on mobile devices. Sure, you're still paying the monthly cost of a cable subscription, but over the course of a year, the savings from not having to lease the extra box will be significant.

"In light of the success of the apps-based model in the marketplace, the far-reaching government technical mandate being currently proposed by the FCC is unnecessary," explained Comcast SVP Mark Hess in a blog post. "The FCC's proposed set-top box mandate threatens to undermine this highly-dynamic marketplace, create substantial costs and consumer harms, and will take years to develop -- only to be likely outdated by the time it reaches the marketplace -- all in an effort to achieve what apps are already delivering for consumers."

Comcast explains that this is not an over-the-top streaming service, but rather a way for its customers to access programming without the traditional set-top box. While Roku and Samsung are the first to jump on board, the cable company is open to adding new partners as well. Unfortunately, there's no definitive word on when the Xfinity TV integration will launch, as Comcast offered the vague "later this year" timing estimate.

Late last year, Time Warner Cable began a cable TV trial with Roku and its own apps in NYC, offering packages for internet-only customers that range from $10 to $50 per month. However, TWC's beta test didn't include DVR even though it too offered an easy way to access cable programming.

Update: The FCC weighed in on Comcast's announcement with the following statement:

"While we do not know all of the details of this announcement, it appears to offer only a proprietary, Comcast-controlled user interface and seems to allow only Comcast content on different devices, rather than allowing those devices to integrate or search across Comcast content as well as other content consumers subscribe to."
 
Yay, about time, Charter and Time Warner already put live channels on the Roku but it looks like Comcast is going the extra mile with on demand and cloud DVR.

Now when then happens, I can get rid of 2 boxes and in the kids rooms where they only have Rokus, they now can get cable and my bill will drop under $100 again.
 
Yay, about time, Charter and Time Warner already put live channels on the Roku but it looks like Comcast is going the extra mile with on demand and cloud DVR.

Now when then happens, I can get rid of 2 boxes and in the kids rooms where they only have Rokus, they now can get cable and my bill will drop under $100 again.
Yes, but I wonder if they will charge for the DVR availability and find other ways to add fees?!
 
Yes, but I wonder if they will charge for the DVR availability and find other ways to add fees?!

Supposed to be no charge but sooner or later we all know fees are coming, it is the same for all providers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: andy_horton
"While we do not know all of the details of this announcement, it appears to offer only a proprietary, Comcast-controlled user interface and seems to allow only Comcast content on different devices, rather than allowing those devices to integrate or search across Comcast content as well as other content consumers subscribe to."
This sounds like a very reasoned response. At the same time, if you can treat the Comcast provided content the same way that Netflix and Amazon Prime are treated, haven't they met the spirit (outside of the Comcast content not contributing to the Comcast data bandwidth usage)? After all, Netflix and Amazon don't index each others content.
 
The FCC wants Comcast to open their system up at a deeper level so that, for example, someone could develop their own DVR system. If all we get is a Comcast App, then we're limited - we only get a DVR if Comcast offers it, and then, if we don't like it, tough, because no one else would be allowed to offer a DVR that was compatible with Comcast's system. I'm fine with the Apps, and encourage them - as long as it's not the only way to access programming.
 
The FCC wants Comcast to open their system up at a deeper level so that, for example, someone could develop their own DVR system.
It isn't just Comcast.

There really isn't a meaningful precedent for that outside TiVo and as we should recall, TiVo's hands were pretty tightly bound with the advent of digital cable. Not since the News Corp era of DIRECTV have we seen multiple CE manufacturers putting their own names and interfaces on their STBs.

The show stopper here is that the manufacturers have to mediate between their customers and the carriers when the end user needs technical support. This wasn't so much of a problem with DIRECTV and the cable systems of yore, but modern cable systems seem to run all the way from CATV to fiber and trying to homogenize that experience would be a tall order indeed.
 
I would be happy to use my Roku to watch TV in the bedroom...really dont even need a DVR in there
I'm not paying $9.75 a month for an extra outlet fee + whatever equipment I want (Tivo mini or Comcast HD box)
 
I know it's not just Comcast and actually it's not just DVRs. I think a lot of TV manufacturers would like to make Digital Cable Ready TVs that (at least) have the same functions of an HD-DTA built into the TV. And I believe they should be able to do that without having to sign special deals with Comcast and ideally without downloading a Comcast app. (I'm willing to allow a Comcast app download if someone wants Video On Demand or Comcast cloud DVR, so long as competing VOD apps like Netflix and Hulu are allowed and competing DVR apps as well.)
 
And I believe they should be able to do that without having to sign special deals with Comcast and ideally without downloading a Comcast app.
Among consumers, I don't think you'll find much argument. Unfortunately, carriers don't share your views. They like the captive revenue and are going to drag their feet to Xfinity and beyond.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jegrant
I think a lot of TV manufacturers would like to make Digital Cable Ready TVs that (at least) have the same functions of an HD-DTA built into the TV.

They did make one (cable card ready) and it failed and now it is not even included anymore in new TVs.
 
They did make one (cable card ready) and it failed and now it is not even included anymore in new TVs.
There were two problems with CableCARD:

1. As a technology, it couldn't keep up with the needs of cable operators
2. The cable operators weren't sufficiently motivated to use it (many had their own ideas that they preferred and the gubmint didn't apply sufficient pressure); there were more loopholes than paths

Like many things that are licensed, it was relatively expensive to add to TVs and STBs.
 
CableCard wasn't a great technology, but let's face it, the cable industry never wanted it to work -they wanted to keep renting crappy boxes at inflated prices.

And we need something that is an open standard, not something that you have to license at great expense. Example: The manufacturer of a phone does not have to pay AT&T or any other Bell company money in order for their phone to function as part of the telephone network. As long as the phone is made to the correct standards, you can plug it in and it works.
 
And we need something that is an open standard, not something that you have to license at great expense.
That's obviously what we want, but who is going to deliver it? Many manufacturers play the old "not invented here" game and the gubmint hasn't shown a burning desire to seek international help or agreement in our standards. That's how we always seem to end up with standards that are unique to the U.S., Liberia and Burma (the only countries still officially using the inch-pound-fluid ounce system).
 
WHEN ???????

My contact at Comcast (Husband of a former co-worker/friend of my wife ) says the first 3 months of 2017, but it is up in test mode right now but I do not have access to it.

Right now, when they upgrade us the the 1 gig speed in a few weeks, I am leaning towards dropping Comcast TV service and going with PlayStation Vue, can have 5 devices going at the same time with no box charges ( already own the Rokus), the only problem I have is the 30 day DVR since we binge everything, if Comcast had their App going it might be a different story.
 
My contact at Comcast (Husband of a former co-worker/friend of my wife ) says the first 3 months of 2017, but it is up in test mode right now but I do not have access to it.
It is important to remember that Comcast is typically years late in delivering on their hardware announcements. Sometimes the promised devices never make system wide before they are orphaned. A friend of mine is still waiting for external hard drive support. Others were promised a Comcast version of TiVo.
 

Internet Held Hostage

Troubleshooting a headend system

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)