Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
FCC Proposal Aims to Make Subscription TV Available on Any Set-Top Box
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Buy an HD Antenna and you'll get all the local channels for free and in better quality than cable too ( https://www.tablotv.com/tools/ ).
[doublepost=1453939117][/doublepost]
You can get fox, nba and the other local "broadcast" channels for free with over the air antennas (in better quality than cable too) so you are really only paying for cable channels such as AMC, History, Natgeo.
You could even purchase AMC, History channel and Discovery through SlingTV for 20 a month.
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure OTA isn't available for everyone. I live 60 (hilly) miles away from the locals I'd be trying to get. I went to one of the web sites to see if you'd be able to get OTA's with an antenna, and it read that I wouldn't be able to get them.
So if I own one iPhone I should be able to install iOS on any other phone I want? If someone provides a service they should control how it's provided.
.
Cable companies argue it would give technology companies unfair access to customer data and potentially disrupt deals that have been established for channel positioning, giving some programmers better spots in the lineup for higher payments.
Going to emphasize this a bit and focus on the bolded area of the quote. First off, Cable companies have severely monopolized television broadcasts and the costs involved. These companies are now in multi-billion dollar deals to acquire stuff over the other. The concept behind exclusive content resided first with Cable companies. To this day, Folks in the L.A. area can't even see a damn Dodgers game unless they have TWC due to their TV deal.
It's a matter of time before all of these broadcast companies do their own thing and charge for their service because that's where this is all leading. If your company can broadcast damn good shows, it will bank without having to pay extra fees to the Cable companies. HBO is proving that with HBO Now which is the same price to get as it is with any Cable provider (providing you don't sign a deal that gives you HBO free for a period). Netflix is starting to have better programming options than anything on network TV.
Outside of Live sports, what do I need from the cable companies? And Sling is working hard to get more sports programs, so if they succeed, i'm jumping on board Sling.
As far as the FCC goes, this is a good idea! More set tops will have internet content and More internet devices will have network content. And more importantly, this would open up a lot of jobs.
I don't think it's much of a problem here in the UK. In the USA a lot of cable companies place a set top box charge on top of your bill. Here that doesn't happen, with Sky once you have been with them for a year the box is yours, if it breaks it is down to you to pay for a new one, or you could take out their insurance. With Virgin Media you never own the box (stop subscribing and VM will take it away) and if anything goes wrong VM will fix it free of charge.If we could only have this in the UK
Of course these proposals fix nothing, I see nothing that would suggest that the cable companies in the USA have to stop charging customers for the boxes, it only suggests that they have to let set top box manufacters the ability to show cable content.
I didn't know that about VM, interesting. What stance do BT take with their box?
Still wish we could get things easily like HBO Go in the UK.
They just won't have a monopoly on it, that's all. They can do what they want. I want to get nothing but Internet from them. I also think that Broadcast gets interesting with ATSC 3.0, which will be able to deliver 4K over the air, and streaming data IN SYNC with broadcast. So, things like the baseball stats as you watch the game, interactive queries, etc. And subtitles in any language you choose. Bye-bye stupid cable. Maybe they'll be able to specialize in ethnic broadcasts and community programming. Like they used to be.
Examples?
We'd be Comcast's, AT&T's, Verizon's, and TWC's slaves by now if we didn't have a little regulation by the FCC. Sometimes a little regulation is okay.
$14 a month if you're a T-Mobile user
please provide a link for the cheaper t-mobile deal.
I'm not sure on BT, I think it's a similar situation as to Sky.
The FCC should just stream broadcast networks on the Internet, with whatever national ads would normally run stuck in (in the same stream). Our tax dollars have supported the development and continued existence of broadcast television AND the Internet, and it's ridiculous that, while we are entitled to buy a TV that can freely access that broadcasted content, we are blocked from using a computer or box to view that same damn content.
Remember that this tug of war happens through different administrations with different agendas. Laws like those are made and repealed based on politics, not always with the people's best interests in mind.
The FCC's current attempt at giving the people more choice is long overdue. But whether it succeeds or fails is sort of a moot point; the FCC is still leaving the monopolies in place. And now with Comcast moving to a pay-per-megabyte business model for their Internet service, it really won't matter how many individual TV apps you can get on a connected device; Comcast (which often is also the only choice for high-speed Internet) can make Internet-based television prohibitively expensive to use, driving customers back to their tightly controlled cable packages.
Last edited:
YES.
Last line says, "at least for cable subscribers" and that's who the FCC works for.
I also find it hilarious that none of the cable companies complaints had anything to with their subscribers; That's why I'm a cord cutter.
AppleTV is just too weak - there has to be an explanation?
We have "free cable" at my complex. Only to access that "free cable", I have to pay $3/mo for a stupid little Cisco box.
And that stupid little box has its own remote control - so I can't just use my TV remote.
So that's just annoying - but when the NCAA sold out to ESPN, oh well...
I know Apple is an extremely poor company. But, while I know they're very busy pumping everything into iCars and "s" versions of their phones that people are finally realizing aren't worth the investment -
Why can't Apple do whatever Sling has done? But Apple is just so ridiculously wealthy, no reason whatsoever for them to break into gaming, what with Microsoft and Sony doing pretty much everything possible to p--- away their "hold" with bizarre subscription fees and network requirements for networks that seem to go down all the time?
Meanwhile, you can currently just go out and buy a cheap Acer Chromebook, hit up the PirateBay, install TorrentStream - and wow...
Only live sporting events are still (as far as I know) very difficult to acquire - the last time I fired up XBMC and SportsDevil, everything was shuttered. Which led me to paying my $3/mo for my stupid little cable box to watch the college bowl games.
But hey - they're too busy tossing "s" on things and making cars to "amaze" themselves?
Is AppleTV just the running gag at Cupertino? "Hey, how could we possibly make a worse effort? Oh yeah, that's completely moronic - let's do that!"
I don't get it.
We have "free cable" at my complex. Only to access that "free cable", I have to pay $3/mo for a stupid little Cisco box.
And that stupid little box has its own remote control - so I can't just use my TV remote.
So that's just annoying - but when the NCAA sold out to ESPN, oh well...
I know Apple is an extremely poor company. But, while I know they're very busy pumping everything into iCars and "s" versions of their phones that people are finally realizing aren't worth the investment -
Why can't Apple do whatever Sling has done? But Apple is just so ridiculously wealthy, no reason whatsoever for them to break into gaming, what with Microsoft and Sony doing pretty much everything possible to p--- away their "hold" with bizarre subscription fees and network requirements for networks that seem to go down all the time?
Meanwhile, you can currently just go out and buy a cheap Acer Chromebook, hit up the PirateBay, install TorrentStream - and wow...
Only live sporting events are still (as far as I know) very difficult to acquire - the last time I fired up XBMC and SportsDevil, everything was shuttered. Which led me to paying my $3/mo for my stupid little cable box to watch the college bowl games.
But hey - they're too busy tossing "s" on things and making cars to "amaze" themselves?
Is AppleTV just the running gag at Cupertino? "Hey, how could we possibly make a worse effort? Oh yeah, that's completely moronic - let's do that!"
I don't get it.
Two years ago swapped Comcast boxes for Tivo. Best decision ever!
This year swapped Tivo box for one with Over the Air Antenna support and ditched Comcast Cable TV completely! Oh so satisfying.
Now I just need to figure out how to ditch Comcast completely, still have them for Internet. Gosh, I hope Verizon, ATT, or Google Fiber comes to my neighborhood soon!
[doublepost=1453945963][/doublepost]Cablecards are indeed a pain and antiquated. Getting them to pair with your device can be a real nightmare.
All's we need from FCC are laws to allow simple software cable authorization to allow any manufacturer to sell a cable compatible box without the need for cablecard.
This year swapped Tivo box for one with Over the Air Antenna support and ditched Comcast Cable TV completely! Oh so satisfying.
Now I just need to figure out how to ditch Comcast completely, still have them for Internet. Gosh, I hope Verizon, ATT, or Google Fiber comes to my neighborhood soon!
[doublepost=1453945963][/doublepost]Cablecards are indeed a pain and antiquated. Getting them to pair with your device can be a real nightmare.
All's we need from FCC are laws to allow simple software cable authorization to allow any manufacturer to sell a cable compatible box without the need for cablecard.
Sling is Dish's stepchild. Same overly expensive nonsense.
Last edited by a moderator:
This proposal means nothing. Its too expensive to integrate every single type of interface to all broadcast systems. These OTT companies are trying to kill broadcast so why would they even spend the capital investment to build in such functionality. That's like an iPod having an FM tuner built into it.
If it even gains traction, OTT STBs will skyrocket in price and no one will pay for it. I used to have a Tivo with cablecard and had a hell of a time trying to get it to work.
If it even gains traction, OTT STBs will skyrocket in price and no one will pay for it. I used to have a Tivo with cablecard and had a hell of a time trying to get it to work.
I don't like this. I hope it doesn't force Apple or Roku to have cable interfaces just because they are considered set top boxes.
After cable companies required to let go control of cable internet modem, I was able to buy my own. The cost of modem paid off in less than year of the rent of modem from TWC. Same needs to be done for the STB. You buy any compatible STB and activate it.
Right, so now that ATT lost that battle against a minority of data abusers, they are effectively cancelling everyone's unlimited plan. Yup. Three cheers for FCC meddling. They sure helped out there