In pushing for Time Warner merger, Comcast cites Apple's development of new set-top box
Rumors that Apple is working on a new set-top box are high-profile enough that Comcast saw it fit to cite them on Tuesday as part of a filing with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission.
Comcast published the document publicly as well, as part of the company's efforts to have its proposed acquisition of Time Warner Cable approved by the government. In the letter, Comcast attempted to portray how its competitors are exploring new ways to offer content to customers, specifically naming Apple, Amazon, Google and Verizon.
Regarding Apple, Comcast cited the iPad as being used by existing cable services to provide content, while Apple's own iTunes and the existing Apple TV are also used to sell video content to consumers.
Comcast then mentioned that the company is exploring "development of an Apple set-top box," seemingly suggesting that a more full-fledged offering could be in the works. The document declines to offer any more details, so it's unknown whether Comcast was simply referring to longstanding rumors, or if the claims were made based on some other knowledge.
The current Apple TV hasn't been updated in two years, and numerous rumors have suggested that the company is working on an update that could be unveiled as soon as this month. While the current Apple TV has been continuously expanded with new content options, it's been suggested that Apple may be considering partnerships with cable providers themselves to provide live and on-demand content to existing subscribers.
As for Comcast, America's largest cable provider has also been rumored to be in talks with Apple regarding potential future partnerships. Specifically, it's been said that Apple is interested in bypassing Web congestion on Comcast's infrastructure to user's homes, which would allow Apple to provide faster and more reliable performance to users watching streaming video content.
Apple was also said to be in talks with Time Warner for a potential partnership, and Comcast announced in February that it hopes to purchase Time Warner Cable in a deal valued at $45.2 billion. Comcast's efforts face serious federal scrutiny, however, as the two companies are the largest cable providers in the U.S.
Comcast published the document publicly as well, as part of the company's efforts to have its proposed acquisition of Time Warner Cable approved by the government. In the letter, Comcast attempted to portray how its competitors are exploring new ways to offer content to customers, specifically naming Apple, Amazon, Google and Verizon.
Regarding Apple, Comcast cited the iPad as being used by existing cable services to provide content, while Apple's own iTunes and the existing Apple TV are also used to sell video content to consumers.
Comcast then mentioned that the company is exploring "development of an Apple set-top box," seemingly suggesting that a more full-fledged offering could be in the works. The document declines to offer any more details, so it's unknown whether Comcast was simply referring to longstanding rumors, or if the claims were made based on some other knowledge.
The current Apple TV hasn't been updated in two years, and numerous rumors have suggested that the company is working on an update that could be unveiled as soon as this month. While the current Apple TV has been continuously expanded with new content options, it's been suggested that Apple may be considering partnerships with cable providers themselves to provide live and on-demand content to existing subscribers.
As for Comcast, America's largest cable provider has also been rumored to be in talks with Apple regarding potential future partnerships. Specifically, it's been said that Apple is interested in bypassing Web congestion on Comcast's infrastructure to user's homes, which would allow Apple to provide faster and more reliable performance to users watching streaming video content.
Apple was also said to be in talks with Time Warner for a potential partnership, and Comcast announced in February that it hopes to purchase Time Warner Cable in a deal valued at $45.2 billion. Comcast's efforts face serious federal scrutiny, however, as the two companies are the largest cable providers in the U.S.
Comments
I've been pulling for this for a while. Again, people wanting a la carte services might as well concede to the fact it wont happen for a decade. Again- the biggest factor is sports programming and their exclusive deals with TNT, Fox Sports, TBS, amongst the networks as well. Could those services sell individually? I guess- but also very very unlikely seeing as they package their popular stations and force the cable companies to purchase their spare and less-watched stations as a bundle.
If the next Apple TV partners with a handful of companies to provide the UI for their services- I would likely switch from AT&T U-verse to one of their services if the UI & search function was compelling enough.
The FCC needs to break up these content agreements as anticompetitive. We should be able to get Television content from the provider of our choice regardless of who owns the last mile.
Apple will be sued for trying to create a monopoly and their statement here will be cited as proof.
I am all for this deal. I could care less about cable monopolies, they are already monopolies.
All that I want as part of the deal is for the complete separation of the ISP business from the cable business. The ISP should own the physical cabling and the cable company can purchase bandwidth from the ISP.
Without this all of this is a sad and not funny joke. Isn't it interesting that all of the "competition" that these cable jokers pointed to are in large part dependent on the cable company's ISP services? So, in other words their competition is dependent on their good graces. Yeah, that always works well.
Cable and ISP should be broken up. It is a huge conflict of interest.
I've been pulling for this for a while. Again, people wanting a la carte services might as well concede to the fact it wont happen for a decade. Again- the biggest factor is sports programming and their exclusive deals with TNT, Fox Sports, TBS, amongst the networks as well. Could those services sell individually? I guess- but also very very unlikely seeing as they package their popular stations and force the cable companies to purchase their spare and less-watched stations as a bundle.
If the next Apple TV partners with a handful of companies to provide the UI for their services- I would likely switch from AT&T U-verse to one of their services if the UI & search function was compelling enough.
Apple shouldn't have to partner with U-verse. They should be able to compete with them and kick their ass. It would be great to hand pick my channel lineup, but right now I want to be able to pick my provider. Choosing between U-verse, Time Warner, Dish, and DirecTV is not what I have in mind.
Maybe Apple has an agreement of exclusivity with Comcast like it did with AT&T back in 2006/2007
To take "exploration" from the actually quote, and turn it into "development" in the headline is a RIDICULOUS stretch.
If you ask me, Comcast desperately needs more competition...
The FCC needs to break up these content agreements as anticompetitive. We should be able to get Television content from the provider of our choice regardless of who owns the last mile.
We should be able to buy content from the content creators. The best scenario is to have a retailer middle man, like Apple, for the entire thing.
Works for iTunes.
Wonder how successful it would be if you could watch a show LIVE when it Airs, but still had to pay per episode (you then own the episode thereafter as well). I think very.
I think $0.99 for a 30 min segment with ads, and $1.99 for a 60 min segment with ads, to Watch LIVE and own the content Ad-free on demand afterward would be great. Certainly not cheap if you watch too much TV...but for my limited habits of consuming live TV it would be great.
Let's say I watch a weekly series with 60 min episodes, that runs 24 episodes over the course of 6 months.
I pay $1.99 per week to watch each episode with Ads, and then own it as part of my iTunes account for on demand streaming.
At the end of 6 months, I've paid roughly $48 to watch Live and Own a full season. Over 6 months, not bad if you ask me. Not bad at all. More expensive than a current Season Pass on iTunes, but with added value.
Nobody's gonna build a new network just for internet. The cost is astronomical, and it would take decades if not centuries to recover the cost.
http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/04/one-big-reason-we-lack-internet-competition-starting-an-isp-is-really-hard/?kw=100k_pvs&search=100k_pvs
That's called 'unbundling' the network. The telcos were forced to allow other companies on their network. Many businesses get their DSL from Covad over the local telco's network. Don't see why the same couldn't be done with a incumbent cable company.
And I
Nobody's gonna build a new network just for internet. The cost is astronomical, and it would take decades if not centuries to recover the cost.
http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/04/one-big-reason-we-lack-internet-competition-starting-an-isp-is-really-hard/?kw=100k_pvs&search=100k_pvs
I never proposed that anyone should. What I said was that the current Cable/ISP company should be split into two different companies. The ISP company would get control of the existing network and the cable company would be allowed to buy bandwdith on that existing network from the ISP.
This would allow the cable companies to remain content providers, and would also allow the ISP companies to become dumb pipe providers.
Nobody needs to build anything new at all and the conflict of interest inherent in cable companies controlling the conduits, ISP, for their competition is removed.
It's ironic.
I get live Time Warner cable on every device that I have except for one, the Apple TV.
I can watch live Time Warner cable tv on iPhones, iPads, iPod Touches and Macs, but not on Apple TV.
Apple shouldn't have to partner with U-verse. They should be able to compete with them and kick their ass. It would be great to hand pick my channel lineup, but right now I want to be able to pick my provider. Choosing between U-verse, Time Warner, Dish, and DirecTV is not what I have in mind.
Please expand. If picking between U-verse, time warner, fios, dish, directtv, cox, etc. isnt what you have in mind- then what did you mean by you want to be able to pick your provider?