dslreports logo
 story category
Roku Dislikes FCC & Cable Sector's "Fixes" for the Cable Box

As we've been noting the FCC has proposed new rules that would require cable companies provide their programming to third party hardware vendors, without the use of a CableCARD. The goal is to free consumers from the $21 billion they pay in cable box fees annually, and create a more competitive market for cheaper, better, and more open cable boxes. Needless to say, the cable industry has been engaged in incredibly misleading histrionics over the idea of losing this immensely profitable, captive monopoly market.

Click for full size
To derail the FCC's plan, the cable industry has proposed a system whereby they simply have to provide their content via a first-party app, much like they do now. But critics point out this being the cable industry the plan has numerous caveats, including forcing users to still rent a cable box if they want to record via DVR (and that's only the caveats we know of).

While most third party hardware vendors (Google, TiVO) support the FCC's plan, Roku recently came out in opposition of the idea, in part because the company just struck a huge new deal with Comcast giving them early access to Comcast's Xfinity app (read: "we've got ours, too bad for you guys").

But as it turns out, Roku doesn't like the cable industry's proposal, either.

In a new ex parte filing with the FCC (via Fierce Wireless), Roku complained that the cable sector's HTML-5 based app proposal is clunky and cumbersome. According to Roku, HTML-5 is "a bulky and expensive architecture that would require third-party device manufacturers to include additional processing power and memory to support it, even in their lowest-priced devices."

Roku called the HTML-5 approached proposed by the cable sector "ill-advised given that consumers have clearly demonstrated their preference for an array of devices with diverse user experiences at various price points, which has spurred competition and innovation in the marketplace."

If you're waiting for this to end with something vaguely resembling cable box competition, you may not want to hold your breath. The cable industry's relentless attack on the FCC's idea (including claims it hurts diversity) has resulted in some waffling at the FCC among Commissioners that previously supported the idea. The hope is that the FCC and cable sector can comes to some kind of compromise on the subject, but anybody thinking the cable sector is going to willingly give up $21 billion in captive annual revenue (and open the door to third party set tops directing users to alternative streaming options) doesn't know the sector as well as they think.

Most recommended from 27 comments



NoOneCares
join:2000-09-16
Portland, OR

NoOneCares

Member

Great Idea In Theory

I'm all for the idea of having "open" standards that allow for 3rd party devices, but lets face it, the cable companies aren't going to just willingly give up that revenue. They'll just start charging somewhere else, so this isn't going to be the cost savings that is bandied about. Only direct content competition is going to do that.
wkm001
join:2009-12-14

wkm001

Member

Vested Interest

Roku has spent the better part of a decade getting into bed with the cable companies. Lets hear from someone that doesn't have a huge vested interest in the situation. At this point everyone is trying to CYA. Cover Your Ass
amungus
Premium Member
join:2004-11-26
America

amungus

Premium Member

Can't say I blame them...

The ability to "tune" a "stream" or "channel" should not be so difficult.
Then again, Roku, interlaced video shouldn't suck so badly on the Roku 3...

See, the thing is, I don't care WHAT they come up with, but it had better be as simple as what "cable ready" used to be.
Remember when TVs would actually "just work" with analog cable?! What a concept! Plug the damn thing in, and tune a channel.
#getoffmylawn

Anyway, right now, my HDHomerun Prime still works just fine. It's a super simple little box that has a cable card, and spits out the channels it can tune straight to Ethernet. There are already ways to do this very easily, without making any of it more complicated.

Why we can't just key in some code from the cable company is totally beyond me.
If they still want control over the subscription, yeah, fine. Why can't it be as simple as activating a cable modem?
Here's my device, here's its "ID" and on the back-end, they simply authorize it to receive whatever is paid for. Done.
Get a new TV? Ok. Call them up, or activate it on your acct. online. Done.

TIGERON
join:2008-03-11
Boston, MA

TIGERON

Member

more cord cutting is needed

to force the cable TV sector to build apps similar to sling TV on OTT hardware.
malletto
join:2009-01-03
Purcellville, VA

malletto

Member

just sell me the data stream

Just like they should do for internet, just sell me the stream of channels and just sell me the data pipe. Let me put what I want on the other end connected to my tv. When you get water from the water company they don't tell you what kind of faucet to install. The gas company doesn't tell you what kind of stove to install. The power company doesn't tell you what kind of light bulbs you need. As long as it is all designed to work with what is coming down the pipe you should be able to get the device from whoever wants to sell it. Competition will drive the quality of the devices and the features. Problem is the cable companies want to control the entire flow of data from end to end.

Anon18e25
@2602:306.x

Anon18e25

Anon

The wrong argument

I've worked as an installer for 3 different companies, and my argument against third-party boxes is based on what I deal with every day.

Basically, people are idiots. You may not think third-party boxes are bad, because you have a reasonable grip on technology. But the vast, VAST majority of people are technophobic, panicky, and yet oddly self-assured. Here's how the whole scenario will play out:

1: Third-party boxes will come out. WOO!
2: People will go out and buy the LOWEST END ones they can find, especially if they have several tvs.
3: They'll hook them up. A large number of them will hook them up incorrectly, and refuse to try a second time. Or the box, being cheaply made, just doesn't work, or is difficult to set up. THEN:
4: They call the cable box's tech support, which due to being dirt cheap has no support, or only through a website, or outsourced phone support.
5: They'll be run through the most basic of things before being told the problem is their cable provider.
6: They'll call their cable provider, and get a technician to come out.
7: Technician will see the non-company owned box, immediately tell them it's not the company's problem AND bill them for wasting the tech's time.
8: Customer turns into a supernova.

You can say "but the cable company's boxes are cheaply made", but they'll fix it if it's not working. Yes, the rental prices are high. The number of customer-ruined boxes I've traded out is insane, and we don't make them buy the replacement box. I've picked up SO MANY DVRs with decorative candles that were placed on top, and now are INSIDE because they didn't notice the box was hot when they put that pretty candle there. Or ones that failed "for no reason", which were sopping wet with milk or water or whatever drink they gave their toddler. Sundays, we always have a couple jobs where the box is soaked with beer.

While the cable companies, YES, are trying to protect a staggering amount of income, *I* want to keep clueless people from being able to cause themselves a LOT of misery. Mostly because they'll try to pass that misery on to ME.