Intel Set-Top Box and Cable TV Service Won't Initially Revolutionize the Industry

[MacRumors]

At today's AllThingsD Dive Into Media Conference, Intel Media vice president Erik Huggers announced that the company is indeed working on an Internet TV service and a set-top box to go along with it.

Huggers noted that Intel has put together a team of people hired from Apple, Netflix, and Google to work in a new Intel Media group devoted to developing an Internet television platform.

Rumors of an Intel set-top box and TV service began circulating in late December. The setup was said to be similar to what Apple offers with its Apple TV, but with access to cable networks and and a la carte content. Huggers confirmed today that Intel will be offering cable content, but not in a piece meal format as expected.

For the first time we will deliver a new consumer electronics product under a new brand. We'll offer consumers a box and they'll buy this directly from us. It'll be an Intel-powered device with fantastic industrial design. But it's not just a device. We're working with the entire industry to figure out how we get live TV to consumers over the Internet.

Intel is planning its service as an all-in-one solution that will incorporate live TV, catch-up TV, and on-demand TV. "We're shooting for a service that incorporates literally everything. ... But Rome wasn't built in a day. It'll take time," Huggers said.

Like Intel, Apple has been rumored to be working on a similar set up for its users, speaking with cable services like Comcast and Time Warner Cable, but Apple has struggled to secure content deals.

It is likely that Intel has had similar problems gaining entry into the cable TV market as content providers have been hesitant to offer television channels piece meal. Though earlier rumors suggested Intel would serve up individual channels a la carte, Huggers says that the company is taking a different approach.

Intel will provide the same bundled content that cable services offer, but over the internet, and he does not expect it to be less expensive.

Intel's proposal is similar to traditional cable offerings, and not the piece meal cable revolution that was expected when the project was originally announced. "We believe that there is value in bundles, if bundles are done right," he said, as noted by TechCrunch.

Though Intel is beginning with a more traditional cable model, the company remains interested in changing the way that cable is delivered in the future.

According to Huggers, the unnamed project will launch later this year.

Article Link: Intel Set-Top Box and Cable TV Service Won't Initially Revolutionize the Industry

[kwikdeth]

cable companies will never, ever allow a la carte because then customers will find out how badly they've been getting screwed over for the last 20 years.

[Squilly]

Will be an interesting change in the television market.

[HiRez]

So we pay the same as for cable, but with the inherent unreliability, lag, data caps, and higher compressed, lower-quality video of going through the internet? Sounds awesome.

[Yvan256]

Anything that tries to work with the cable and satellite companies instead of dealing directly with the media creators is bound to fail.

The Internet is the new channel to move content, we don't need the cable companies to be anything else than ISPs. The 1950's called and they want their money-making scheme back.

[the-oz-man]

"According to Huggers, the unnamed project will launch later this year."

. . . and fail shortly thereafter.

[princetanha]

I don't watch TV by the way -_-

[joshsand66]

Have they considered the effect of this proposal?
If millions of people used a set top box like this would the Internet be able to cope with the demand.
Why can't the same idea use TV frequencies instead.

[samcraig]

Won't revolutionize the industry - true or not - is editorializing the article.

He did take a swipe at Jobs/Apple though with the latter part of this quote

"We have been working for around a year now to setup Intel Media -- it's a new division that includes a lot of people from outside of the company. We've hired people from Apple, Netflix, Google, BBC, etc. We're aiming to develop an internet television platform. My opinion is that not many of those rivals have cracked it -- have truly delivered."

[Yvan256]

Originally Posted by joshsand66

Have they considered the effect of this proposal?
If millions of people used a set top box like this would the Internet be able to cope with the demand.
Why can't the same idea use TV frequencies instead.

Just like today's Internet isn't fast enough for on-demand video for everyone, you have to remember that it wasn't fast enough for things like YouTube two decades ago either.

ISPs will be forced to upgrade their systems. It's high time that they put the millions and billions of profits to good use instead of pocketing it like Scrooge McDuck.

[Mad Mac Maniac]

What's with the title? Editorial?

The tone of the content doesn't even match the title....

[rjohnstone]

Originally Posted by Mad Mac Maniac

What's with the title? Editorial?

The tone of the content doesn't even match the title....

Click bait... we always fall for it too.

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by Yvan256

Anything that tries to work with the cable and satellite companies instead of dealing directly with the media creators is bound to fail.

The Internet is the new channel to move content, we don't need the cable companies to be anything else than ISPs. The 1950's called and they want their money-making scheme back.

The problem with that is the media creators are bound to the networks, which are bound to the cable and satellite companies, who like providing channels to you in big bulk packages because it nets them tons of cash both from subscription fees and advertisements, which they then cycle back to the media creators to make their movies and shows so they can make even more money off of them.

The TV industry is a very tightly knit system that works very, very well for those directly involved in it. As of right now, there are no internet based services that provide as much money as good old fashioned television.

[HiRez]

Originally Posted by Mad Mac Maniac

What's with the title? Editorial?

The tone of the content doesn't even match the title....

Yeah, I don't get that. Where's the part that says it won't work? Well, I don't think it will work, but I don't see it in the article.

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by Mad Mac Maniac

What's with the title? Editorial?

The tone of the content doesn't even match the title....

Originally Posted by rjohnstone

Click bait... we always fall for it too.

Maybe we can add this to every headline (like "in bed" for chinese fortune cookies)

IE

Apple Patents Nearly Invisible 'Microslot Antennas' Allowing for Smaller Devices - Won't Revolutionize the Industry

Tim Cook at Goldman Sachs Conference: Retail Philosophy, Acquisitions, and the Apple Ecosystem Won't Revolutionize the Industry

Apple Exploring Alternatives to Traditional Passwords with Photo Identification as Authentication Won't Revolutionize the Industry

[smoledman]

Even Apple can't break the cable/satellite hegemony over the pipes. So we're stuck until we get legislation that breaks them up.

[topmounter]

"...But Rome wasn't built in a day."

What? Really? I had no idea.

[Moonjumper]

Originally Posted by kwikdeth

cable companies will never, ever allow a la carte because then customers will find out how badly they've been getting screwed over for the last 20 years.

My Mum is on a higher cost TV cable package just for 1 channel, but it is a channel she watches a lot, but maybe not for much longer as she has seen most of the content on that channel. A la carte would be a brilliant for her, and the cable company might get to keep some business.

It is cheaper for me to get the Blu-Ray or DVD of the series I want rather than a cable package. A la carte would be a brilliant for me, and the cable company would get some business from me.

Packaging channels raises the value of some customers, but I'm sure it keeps many away.

TV companies than embrace the new options stand a massive chance of leading the race into the future, but stand still for fear of losing their existing (and diminishing) market. But would they really lose out?

[chuckd83]

Originally Posted by princetanha

I don't watch TV by the way -_-

nobody cares.

[Rogifan]

Originally Posted by samcraig

Won't revolutionize the industry - true or not - is editorializing the article.

He did take a swipe at Jobs/Apple though with the latter part of this quote

"We have been working for around a year now to setup Intel Media -- it's a new division that includes a lot of people from outside of the company. We've hired people from Apple, Netflix, Google, BBC, etc. We're aiming to develop an internet television platform. My opinion is that not many of those rivals have cracked it -- have truly delivered."

One we don't know what Jobs meant when he said he "cracked it" and two, I don't think anyone believes the current ATV is Apple's grand vision when it comes to the TV space. If anything he's taking a swipe at Google TV and Samsung's Smart TV.

[Chrjy]

I'm from the UK and as far as I'm concerned the UK needs to focus their efforts on telecommunications before anything else, we're so far behind in this area it's now becoming a joke.

Without the proper technology in place initially (because the telecommunication companies are so tight!) the option of quality TV internet services and the like are far from our reach....obviously a UK based opinion only!

[d21mike]

I don't care how the content is delivered to the house. I just want a better way to search and organize that content on the 9 TV's in my house. The problem for me is having to pay for 9 STB's if I want all channels on each TV plus if I want Netflix / iTunes I then need 9 ATV's. I want to have my Network Tuners (with CableCards) in 1 room that will feed my ATV's (or Intel box or Google TV box) which can combine all of the content in a customizable UI.

I think everyone needs to understand if we went with all Internet TV our Internet Cost are going to go up. You have to increase bandwidth to hand multiple TV's streaming HD Channels at the same time in every household.

[jchase2057]

I haven't had cable in years. Everything is available online. To me it's much more enjoyable to watch a season of a show without any commercials or a week or more between episodes. And the ones that are currently airing, I still get to watch them every week.

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by Rogifan

One we don't know what Jobs meant when he said he "cracked it" and two, I don't think anyone believes the current ATV is Apple's grand vision when it comes to the TV space. If anything he's taking a swipe at Google TV and Samsung's Smart TV.

I dunno. Using the word "cracked" seems to be a direct jab at ole Steve there.

Though the sad truth of the whole situation is that it doesn't matter who has the best concept for the future of television, or who has the best UI, best delivery service. The content providers hold all the cards here. If they don't want to play along, even the most brilliant ideas will wither on the vine.

[samcraig]

Originally Posted by Rogifan

One we don't know what Jobs meant when he said he "cracked it" and two, I don't think anyone believes the current ATV is Apple's grand vision when it comes to the TV space. If anything he's taking a swipe at Google TV and Samsung's Smart TV.

I disagree. No other company has claimed to have "cracked" the TV thing.

You don't know context of what Jobs' comment meant. He said that he cracked it. This guy is saying that no one has cracked it (yet) or has delivered.

I don't think he means Apple TV was supposed to be what cracked TV.

He's making a general statement - that, to date, no one has cracked anything. IE - the proof is in the pudding. Or "talk is cheap."

He's drawing a line in the sand and saying he believes intel will be the first to market with something unique. And in his mind - "cracks" it.