Archives For TV Shows

Time Warner Cable was the first operator to bring live TV to the iPad earlier this year (apart from Dish with its Sling solution), and now TWC has added an Android app to its arsenal. Multichannel News reports that TWC hit the Android market yesterday with an app that enables remote DVR programming, channel tuning, and filtered program searches. There’s just one catch. The Android app doesn’t include any video streaming. That’s right – no live or VOD content.

I got a glimpse of the new Time Warner app at the SCTE Cable-Tec Expo earlier this month, and it looks pretty much like what you’d expect from a tablet-based TV guide today. However, the fact that there’s no video streaming is a big disappointment. Time Warner’s iPad app already confines live streaming to the boundaries of a subscriber’s home, but at least the service offers a simple in-house place-shifting option. The Android app’s limitations are more significant, and one has to wonder if they’re a result of the  legal battles Time Warner is currently fighting over streaming rights. Viacom took Time Warner Cable to court in March over its iPad app, and TWC pulled several channels from the service as a result. Negotiations and judicial debates are ongoing.

For those who are still interested, the new Time Warner Cable Android app is available to all subscribers running the “Navigator” program guide on their set-tops. The app has specifically been certified for the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, and the Motorola Xoom, but it’s designed to run on any Honeycomb tablet.

UPDATE: Richard Lawler points out that TWC says it will bring live streaming to Android with Ice Cream Sandwich. Stay tuned.

Microsoft Xbox Fios TV live streaming

Verizon has a press release out today detailing plans for the launch of its FiOS TV service on the Microsoft Xbox. The service is still listed as “coming soon,” but all reports suggest general availability will happen before the end of the year.

It’s worth noting again that the new Xbox content (Microsoft is also partnering with Comcast) isn’t representative of a major shift in TV distribution models. Users still have to be subscribers of FiOS TV and Internet service to get access to the new Xbox FiOS app. However, it does illustrate how the shift to IP delivery is slowly taking place. Verizon currently delivers its VOD service over IP to subscriber set-tops, but its live television streaming happens over a QAM-based system. Several cable operators have started to deliver linear TV over IP to mobile devices, but although it was one of the first MSOs to promote the idea, Verizon still only has VOD content available for mobile viewing. I believe the Xbox app marks the first live TV streaming over IP that Verizon has introduced. Continue Reading…

Microsoft-TV-Xbox-Partners-Verizon-Comcast

Microsoft formally announced partners for its latest Xbox TV initiative today. In addition to Comcast and Verizon FiOS (two partners that were leaked last week), Xbox owners will be able to access content in varying degrees from Bravo, HBO Go and Syfy in the US, along with BBC in the UK, Telefonica in Spain, Rogers On Demand in Canada, Televisa in Mexico, ZDF in Germany, and MediaSet it Italy.

It’s all well and good to get excited about Microsoft TV, but there’s no major revolution here yet. In order to get Comcast or Verizon video on your Xbox, for example, you have to be an existing Comcast or Verizon subscriber as well. This is not over-the-top cable TV, freely available to anyone with an Xbox. It’s cable testing the waters of IP delivery.

Verizon has had systems in place for a while now that support delivery of linear television over IP. Although FiOS has always used IP for its on-demand content, we heard back in January that it could flip a switch for delivery of its broadcast content as well. Meanwhile, Comcast has steadily upgraded its own VOD architecture for future IP delivery, and is reportedly even testing linear broadcasting over IP on the MIT campus.

The Xbox experiment is a way for Verizon and Comcast (and others) to test out their new delivery systems. Limited adoption – built in by the inherent service limitations – will let them do a controlled introduction of new technology. They’ll stream a relatively small amount of video over IP, and be able to see how their networks hold up. If that goes well, they’ll push the boundaries a bit farther.

The experiment is a good one, and you’d better believe that every other cable operator will be watching closely. But it’s no revolution for consumers. Not yet. On the bright side, getting to IP delivery of video means cable providers will have a lot more flexibility. Once the networks systems are proven, they can start to play with business models. If the rumors of a la carte discussions are any indication, the timing is right.

A different day, a different story. Experts are now predicting that connected TVs will be hot this holiday season. Jonathan Weitz, a partner at IBB Consulting says that consumers will buy up smart TVs this winter and beyond, and Parks Associates expects more than a tenth of broadband households to purchase a connected TV in the second half of 2011. That’s a pretty big shift from just a few years ago when the focus was still on upgrading to HD, and even from last year when most people were still asking me if they should buy a 3D TV. However, I have to question how radical the change really is from a consumer perspective. For example, when I spoke to Jonathan Weitz late last month, he pointed out that the vast majority of TVs sold in the next three years will be connected TVs. If connected TVs become the default for manufacturers, then sure, that’s what consumers will buy. It’s kind of like having said in the late 1990s that most people would start buying PCs with embedded modems. Yup, pretty good bet.

So let’s turn instead to the impact of connected TVs on consumer viewing habits. The two assumptions I’ve heard most frequently are that smart TVs will push more people to cut the cord on cable, and that smart TVs will lead to more interactive TV app use. On the cord-cutting front, I don’t think the impact is going to be dramatic. There does seem to be a slow drain on pay-TV subs, but for consumers who want a good selection of TV and movies, there’s still no better option than a cable or telco subscription. Just because you can access a Netflix app on your TV doesn’t mean you don’t want to be able to watch FX, or Discovery, or ESPN too.

Which brings me to the second point. What is it people want to do with their TVs? I’m still convinced that people mostly want to watch television. The apps that are likely to prove most popular on connected TVs? I’m guessing Netflix, YouTube, and other apps that offer more content rather than new functionality. I’ll caveat that by saying I do acknowledge some behaviors are changing. Parks Associates has found that one of the features consumers say they’d prefer to have on connected devices (including smart TVs) is access to Facebook. So maybe consumers do want some interactivity with their TV watching, in which case, advertisers should be all over that opportunity. However, given how many devices we can interact with, I have to question how far the pendulum is really going to swing. When I crash at night, I don’t want to tweet on my TV. I want to turn off my brain and just watch a show.


Microsoft announced at a financial conference yesterday that it plans to offer live TV on the Xbox in time for the holiday season. It’s like deja vu all over again. It was in January of 2007 that Microsoft first made this promise, and the company has dangled the possible integration at every Consumer Electronics Show since.

Once again, the would-be TV provider isn’t naming any partners, but does say it will have “dozens or hundreds of additional video content suppliers,” and that it will bring this service to market through the network operator channel (i.e. your cable provider). This follows last year’s launch of Xbox-as-a-set-top for AT&T’s U-verse service, which includes an unfortunate $99 fee to cover the necessary hardware upgrade. It also comes on the heels of Jinni’s recent announcement that Microsoft is licensing its “semantic discovery technology for personalized, holistic discovery of video entertainment.” Perhaps this reference guide Jinni touted earlier in the month is the basis for Microsoft’s new Xbox TV interface?

We’ll wait and see what Microsoft actually brings to the table, but in the meantime, here’s a timeline of the company’s efforts to make the Xbox a Trojan horse in consumer living rooms. Note, this doesn’t take into account various other Microsoft TV attempts including the ill-fated Microsoft TV Foundation Edition program guide. Yeah, Microsoft’s been at this for a while.

What’s On TV?

Dave Zatz —  August 10, 2011

With the bulk of the prime time Fall television season still ahead of us, we find ourselves in something of a programming rut. Thanks to Netflix, which I re-subscribed to for our Roku 2 review, we caught up on the fourth season of Mad Men – in HD, via AppleTV, for all of $7.99. We’re also keeping up with the fourth season of Breaking Bad in near real time via FiOS. But otherwise, there’s not much on my radar (after giving up on True Blood).

I wonder what else we might catch up on or look forward to this fall. I queried folks on Twitter – with Eureka, Rescue Me, Sons of Anarchy, and Wilfred each clocking multiple mentions. Concur? Have other suggestions? Let us know below…

As much as people like to hold Netflix up as a competitor to cable TV, the truth is it’s much more akin to HBO in both value and price. The one big difference between the two is HBO’s steadfast determination to tie its distribution to cable subscription packages. On that front, the company got another boost today with the official launch of the HBO Go and MAX Go (Cinemax) apps for Charter subscribers. These Internet apps mean authenticated users can get HBO and Cinemax shows virtually anywhere. And with Charter on board now, the only big players without mobile HBO on the docket are Cablevision and Time Warner Cable.

HBO is following in ESPN’s footsteps, proving that good content can dictate carriage in the online world as much as it can in the traditional pay-TV space. However, the more HBO expands its online content, the more it sets itself up as a direct rival to Netflix. Both are roughly the same price, and offer a mix of great content along with some middling stuff. HBO distinguishes itself in the original content domain, but even there, Netflix is looking to make its own waves. So the question becomes, are people more likely to pay for something separate from cable, or for a bundled cable add-on? And if we want both, just how high do we think we can we stretch the monthly entertainment budget?