# Comcast Executive Team says no more TiVo



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

I had a BBB complain open with Comcast on some issues with my plan. In speaking with the woman on the executive team, she said that TiVo's days on comcast were numbered, that they won't be supporting cablecards in the next year or two.

Googling, all I find is this-
Future of CableCARD - TiVo Blog

Anyone konw the plan with TiVo / Cablecard support on Comcast?


----------



## jrtroo (Feb 4, 2008)

That's bs, generally. Though I could see them eventually dropping on-demand feature.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Yeah they could drop VOD, but the law currently requires them to support CableCARDs. Although the new GOP controlled congress or even the FCC could change that. The law requires them to provide some sort of 3rd party access, so the FCC would have to say that an app qualifies before they are allowed to drop CableCARDs. Congress could just eliminate the law completely if they wanted.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

Adam1115 said:


> I had a BBB complain open with Comcast on some issues with my plan. In speaking with the woman on the executive team, she said that TiVo's days on comcast were numbered, that they won't be supporting cablecards in the next year or two.
> 
> Googling, all I find is this-
> Future of CableCARD - TiVo Blog
> ...


Do you have a name and contact information? It think TiVo would be interested in that.

Scott


----------



## garyprud (Jan 13, 2017)

Most cable companies are developing, or currently testing, an iptv model, such that all you need is a secure password connected account that is tied to your network ip address. Boxes & cards will eventually become obsolete. You'll use an app they provide as the ui.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

garyprud said:


> Most cable companies are developing, or currently testing, an iptv model, such that all you need is a secure password connected account that is tied to your network ip address. Boxes & cards will eventually become obsolete. You'll use an app they provide as the ui.


But as long as they have CableCARD devices in the field, which they currently have millions, they'll have to continue to support CableCARDs. They'll also have to get the FCC to agree that an app running on a 3rd party device qualifies under the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Under the new GOP controlled commission that will probably be a lot easier.


----------



## garyprud (Jan 13, 2017)

No doubt. Yes, the embedded base is significant and will need support for years.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

As has been mentioned Comcast can be expecting one or more of several things to happen over the next few years.

They expect to be able to pay the Republicans to change the law - doesn't seem that far fetched to me.

They expect to get the FCC to accept apps as a replacement - again doesn't seem that far fetched to me.

They expect to dump QAM as a delivery method - seems the least likely but certainly is also a possibility.


----------



## mrizzo80 (Apr 17, 2012)

atmuscarella said:


> They expect to get the FCC to accept apps as a replacement - again doesn't seem that far fetched to me.


Are cable companies currently prevented by law from operating outside of their traditional regions? Comcast isn't natively available in my area. Why don't they try to sell me cable TV service on a streaming box?


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

mrizzo80 said:


> Are cable companies currently prevented by law from operating outside of their traditional regions? Comcast isn't natively available in my area. Why don't they try to sell me cable TV service on a streaming box?


There has been allot of speculation on these forums about that and many think that is where we are heading (and I mostly agree). There are already several companies doing it Sling TV (Dishnetwork), Direct TV Now (AT&T), and PlayStation Vue (Sony). Of course all these services are using IPTV tech for delivery as it would be impossible to use traditional cable (QAM) for delivery.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The main reason they're not doing it yet is most likely because they haven't got the licensing lined up. The biggest issue with offering one of the OTT services is getting the license deals to allow for streaming over the internet. Although I'm pretty sure a mega company like Comcast could put together the deals if they wanted, so maybe the just don't see a market for it yet.


----------



## Worf (Sep 15, 2000)

No, the main reason is that then they'd have to compete. 

Instead of competing, Comcast makes deals with TWC and other cable providers to never intrude on their areas. That way, Comcast will never undercut other cable providers, and vice-versa. Competition will just force them to lower prices and thus lower profits. 

Given these times of cord cutting and all that, eating into each other's business is precisely the thing they don't want to do. 

This leaves the phone companies as the competition, but a duopoly doesn't lead to very effective competition - you need at least 3 or 4 roughly equally sized competitors to actually have a competitive marketplace


----------



## SNJpage1 (May 25, 2006)

"Are cable companies currently prevented by law from operating outside of their traditional regions? Comcast isn't natively available in my area. Why don't they try to sell me cable TV service on a streaming box?"
All cable companies have to be approved by the local city and have to pay a fee to the city to operate. Very few cities allow two different companies to hang their cables on the same poles. How ever, streaming would be different because it wouldn't be thru a wired set up. I would check to see if you can get a Comcast account, even if they are not serving your area and then stream everything.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

This better not change. However, I wouldn't be shocked if it moves in that direction in the semi-near future.

I had to call my carrier, Charter, one day last week (for something totally unrelated to my Tivos or peripheral hardware) and the woman to whom I spoke made mention (because I brought up why there can't be On Demand with CableCARDs) that, in her opinion, Tivos will become obsolete in the near future.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

atmuscarella said:


> As has been mentioned Comcast can be expecting one or more of several things to happen over the next few years.
> 
> They expect to be able to pay the Republicans to change the law - doesn't seem that far fetched to me.
> 
> ...


Scenario #3 may be the furthest out on the horizon but I think it could be feasible for Comcast by sometime in 2019 if they want to go that route (and I do believe that they will eventually dump QAM and go to IPTV). 2019 is a guesstimate on my part based on how quickly their X1 platform has penetrated their TV-subscriber user base so far. (I think X1 was in 30% of subscriber homes at the start of last year and was expected to hit 50% by year-end. If they can add another 20% of homes per year, they'll hit 100% in mid-2019.) X1 is IP-capable (and may well already be using IP rather than QAM for cloud DVR and on-demand) and Comcast has a pretty robust IP-based live TV platform in place already (VIPER) for serving streams to computers and mobile devices. In reality, though, Comcast doesn't need all TV subscribers on X1 to dump QAM and go IP-only. I imagine that those lower-end TV subscribers who don't want to pay for X1 will all have the option of getting Comcast IPTV service through their Rokus and other streaming devices at some point this year or next.


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, I could buy a Bolt+ with AllIn.

I have it on good authority that 1000+ OTA stations were turned off at the end of 2016:Tivo should go after the OTA market (but first understand those customers)


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

sharkster said:


> This better not change. However, I wouldn't be shocked if it moves in that direction in the semi-near future.
> 
> I had to call my carrier, Charter, one day last week (for something totally unrelated to my Tivos or peripheral hardware) and the woman to whom I spoke made mention (because I brought up why there can't be On Demand with CableCARDs) that, in her opinion, Tivos will become obsolete in the near future.


Well, perhaps when Charter begins selling me (not leasing me) a DVR as capable as a TiVo, and for my OTA use . . . .


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

JoeKustra said:


> If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, I could buy a Bolt+ with AllIn.
> 
> I have it on good authority that 1000+ OTA stations were turned off at the end of 2016:Tivo should go after the OTA market (but first understand those customers)


Ha, what happened to that dude?


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

JoeKustra said:


> I have it on good authority that 1000+ OTA stations were turned off at the end of 2016:Tivo should go after the OTA market (but first understand those customers)


I was just thinking of that prediction too. 

Scott


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

i bet margret would like to hear about comcast's comments, it might impact sales of new tivo devices in comcast markets if the rumor were to spread...


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

cherry ghost said:


> Ha, what happened to that dude?


He was no one you know.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

slowbiscuit said:


> He was no one you know.


I always figured that


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

cherry ghost said:


> Ha, what happened to that dude?


You'd think he'd be here taking victory laps.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

NorthAlabama said:


> i bet margret would like to hear about comcast's comments, it might impact sales of new tivo devices in comcast markets if the rumor were to spread...


I forwarded it on to her. I was hoping the OP would post back the name and contact information so she would have it.

Scott


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

slowbiscuit said:


> He was no one you know.


You are confusing some random idiot with no one you know. We generally liked no one you know. 

Scott


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

HerronScott said:


> You are confusing some random idiot with no one you know. We generally liked no one you know.


I just got a message from "no one." He apparently thought I (we) were referring to him rather than the "idiot." As far as I can remember they were different people with different views and styles and I was definitely thinking of the idiot here.

So, I guess, my apologies to no one, though mostly I'm just confused.


----------



## BadDuck (Aug 22, 2013)

Lol, it took me a couple of seconds to realize you were talking about the forum member and not just being smartasses, Lol, I'm still confused.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

I can accept that comcast employees don't know what they are talking about, but the comments do concern me that there is a general culture of disdain towards TiVo at Comcast to the point them may be looking for ways to not support it. Even if they continue to technically support it, remember the pain we went through when they did it against their will in the beginning?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Disdain might be overstating it...more like, to the tiny extent that they know TiVo exists, they don't care.


----------



## wmhjr (Dec 2, 2007)

SNJpage1 said:


> "Are cable companies currently prevented by law from operating outside of their traditional regions? Comcast isn't natively available in my area. Why don't they try to sell me cable TV service on a streaming box?"
> All cable companies have to be approved by the local city and have to pay a fee to the city to operate. Very few cities allow two different companies to hang their cables on the same poles. How ever, streaming would be different because it wouldn't be thru a wired set up. I would check to see if you can get a Comcast account, even if they are not serving your area and then stream everything.


This is simply and completely untrue. There really isn't the slightest bit of accuracy here.

First of all, the city doesn't typically own the poles. Different utilities do.

Second, the city is prohibited by law from preventing a second, third, fourth, or hundredth provider from entering their market. The city has NOTHING to lose in doing so. Franchise agreements are legally prohibited from being "exclusive".

Third, the cable companies do NOT pay a fee to the city. What they actually do is effectively handle franchise fees - which means consumers pay the cable company franchise fees, which then the cable companies pass on to the municipality. To make it more blunt, every penny that the cable company pays the municipality is typically a penny that they collected as a "fee" above and beyond their "packages" and simply pass on to the consumer. Every cable company does this, as the Telecommunications Act of 1996 explicitly allowed for it.

Fourth, MANY cities/municipalities now have more than one carrier - if you include for example Verizon FIOS being strung on the same overheads as for example Comcast.

Fifth, the reason there aren't typically a bunch of providers is because the cable infrastructure takes a fair amount of capital to install, and expense to maintain. When there are a relatively constant number of residents in a municipality, and where usually there is already a high percentage of market penetration, decreasing scale means decreased margins. It just doesn't make financial sense for another player to move in.

Sixth, "Streaming" boxes that simply rely on IP services have nothing whatsoever to do with franchise agreements or franchise fees.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I still fully expect all of the major MSOs to release OTT streaming apps in the not to distant future. In fact I suspect that many of them will spin off the video portion of their business as a separate entity so as to avoid regulations completely. Then the infrastructure portion of their business will only be used to provide the internet connection needed to access their OTT service.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Comcast is moving to IPTV. It's not if, it's when and how they transition. The 1-2 year timeframe is probably either that some new channel adds will come on that are IP-only, or that some HD channels will be migrated over, possibly some higher-tier stuff. Local channels and SD will probably stay linear QAM for at least a few years after that. As the transition happens, X1 boxes will get everything, and the user won't really be able to tell what's what, except for maybe faster channel changes on IP, and legacy boxes and TiVos will only be able to access what channels are left as QAM.

Comcast claims that they have an "excellent" relationship with TiVo, and in fact claims that they will work with TiVo to support IPTV. Whether this ends up coming to fruition or not is anyone's guess, as they would have to give parts of their encryption system to TiVo to integrate into TiVo's software to make it all work, which I wouldn't count on.


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

Considering there X1 boxes have cable cards in them. They are not going away for a long time


----------



## keenanSR (Oct 13, 2004)

Adam1115 said:


> I had a BBB complain open with Comcast on some issues with my plan. In speaking with the woman on the executive team, she said that TiVo's days on comcast were numbered, that they won't be supporting cablecards in the next year or two.
> 
> Googling, all I find is this-
> Future of CableCARD - TiVo Blog
> ...


As will be my days with Comcast!


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

compnurd said:


> Considering there X1 boxes have cable cards in them. They are not going away for a long time


If tomorrow they switched to IPTV and the current X1 could fully support it, how long do you think X1's would have cable cards in them?


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

compnurd said:


> Considering there X1 boxes have cable cards in them. They are not going away for a long time


The early XG1s do, the XG2s do not. I can't find a good picture of the later XG1s. Since the integrated security ban is gone, the XG2 doesn't need a CableCard for it's QAM tuners.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

I wouldn't doubt that sometime in the future hardware verification will be gone, because it just takes too much overhead. However, I would also never trust a sales rep saying your purchased non-company equipment is obsolete and you should pay for their own equipment. It's the same reason it was like pulling teeth to get cablecards paired in the past. They get almost no money from you for it.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

b_scott said:


> I wouldn't doubt that sometime in the future hardware verification will be gone, because it just takes too much overhead. However, I would also never trust a sales rep saying your purchased non-company equipment is obsolete and you should pay for their own equipment. It's the same reason it was like pulling teeth to get cablecards paired in the past. They get almost no money from you for it.


I think it's more of them just being clueless, or misinterpreting the transition to IPTV. I'd say CableCard is very safe on Comcast for at least 5 years, but I wouldn't be surprised if you're limited to today's MPEG-2 and SD channels, or even fewer that are left on QAM at that point.


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

Bigg said:


> The early XG1s do, the XG2s do not. I can't find a good picture of the later XG1s. Since the integrated security ban is gone, the XG2 doesn't need a CableCard for it's QAM tuners.


According to the FCC docs the XG2 does indeed have a cable card


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

compnurd said:


> According to the FCC docs the XG2 does indeed have a cable card


I stand corrected. I googled it, and several articles reference it. Where that CC is hidden is beyond me, there is no obvious place for it like there is on the XG1. IMO, that XG2 is ugly as can be with the weird blue line light on the side. The XG1 is ok-ish looking. Also, I'll never understand why someone has pay-TV but doesn't have a DVR, but I digress.


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

Bigg said:


> I stand corrected. I googled it, and several articles reference it. Where that CC is hidden is beyond me, there is no obvious place for it like there is on the XG1. IMO, that XG2 is ugly as can be with the weird blue line light on the side. The XG1 is ok-ish looking. Also, I'll never understand why someone has pay-TV but doesn't have a DVR, but I digress.


 Then there are those OTA people without DVRs. I will never understand that either.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

tenthplanet said:


> Then there are those OTA people without DVRs. I will never understand that either.


Sports. If that's all you watch live, I can see it. Most shows are available on hulu anyway.


----------



## Stu Barrett (Jan 31, 2017)

Just talked to a TWC/Spectrum "retention specialist" and she said two things that got my attention:

- FCC is "re-purposing" spectrum that is used by UHF OTA stations. I checked into this and it appears to be true. The stations that currently broadcast OTA are therefor incentivised to sell their spectrum for big $'s and some have announced that they will go dark in a year or two.

- Spectrum will soon no longer support cable cards. I can't confirm this, but I would suspect they would do this if the FCC lets them.

Anyone have any more information?


----------



## osu1991 (Mar 6, 2015)

Stu Barrett said:


> Just talked to a TWC/Spectrum "retention specialist" and she said two things that got my attention:
> 
> - FCC is "re-purposing" spectrum that is used by UHF OTA stations. I checked into this and it appears to be true. The stations that currently broadcast OTA are therefor incentivised to sell their spectrum for big $'s and some have announced that they will go dark in a year or two.
> 
> ...


The OTA Incentive Auction is nearly complete. The tv band will be shrunk to channel 36 and below allowing reclaimed spectrum to be repurposed for wireless, netting the government $18 Billion minus auction and repacking costs.

The FCC will soon be sending out notices to the affiliates of what their new channel assignments will be, for those that need to move and filing instructions for compensation from the auction proceeds for the moving expenses and for those that have chosen to end operations and go dark in the buyout.

The repack will take 39months and stations will be put into 10 groups with each group having its own schedule to complete moving.

Cable cards won't be going anywhere as long as cable is using QAM.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> I still fully expect all of the major MSOs to release OTT streaming apps in the not to distant future. In fact I suspect that many of them will spin off the video portion of their business as a separate entity so as to avoid regulations completely. Then the infrastructure portion of their business will only be used to provide the internet connection needed to access their OTT service.


Comcast announced their Roku beta app. It is in home only and requires an X1 box which creates a separate wifi network for the Roku to connect. No recording or on demand during the beta.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

TonyD79 said:


> Comcast announced their Roku beta app. It is in home only and requires an X1 box which creates a separate wifi network for the Roku to connect. No recording or on demand during the beta.


Hmm, where'd you read that it requires an X1 box in the user's home? In a couple different stories today I've read that it requires a "compatible IP gateway," which would either be a cable modem that you rent from Comcast (I'm guessing they're all compatible) or a separate piece of hardware that Comcast will provide for those who use their own cable modem. Since it's running over Comcast's "managed IP" network rather than the open internet, I'm almost certain you must subscribe to Comcast internet as well as TV service to use the new Roku app.

Comcast's Xfinity TV app for Roku starts beta testing

Comcast just jacked up my 25 Mbps internet-only package from $30 to $65 per month after the initial 12-month promo expired. The best deal I could then find was their Internet Plus package for $50 + fees per month, which gets me 25 Mbps internet + local channels + Showtime. I can watch those channels live in HD via a web browser now. (I didn't even bother hooking up the TV box they gave me since I do local OTA on my TiVo and Showtime Anytime via Apple TV.) Assuming the little IP gateway device is available for free, I may grab one just to try out their live TV app on an old Roku I have lying around.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

It was a simplification of the xfinity FAQ. Says you need xfinity tv and internet and at least one tv box. The xfinity tv boxes are X1. So, currently you need a box beyond the gateway.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

tenthplanet said:


> Then there are those OTA people without DVRs. I will never understand that either.


I can understand that. They're not paying anything for TV, so maybe they just watch the news once in a while, or a major live event like political debates, State of the Union, Superbowl.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> I can understand that. They're not paying anything for TV, so maybe they just watch the news once in a while, or a major live event like political debates, State of the Union, Superbowl.


Or maybe they have lives.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Mikeguy said:


> Or maybe they have lives.


Now, that's just crazy talk!


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

Mikeguy said:


> Or maybe they have lives.


 That's what a DVR is for so you can watch things on your own schedule, while you go about living your life.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

TonyD79 said:


> It was a simplification of the xfinity FAQ. Says you need xfinity tv and internet and at least one tv box. The xfinity tv boxes are X1. So, currently you need a box beyond the gateway.


Yeah, I've now read where it says you need a TV box from Comcast to use the Roku app, but like you said it doesn't specifically say an X1 box. My simple TV plan came with an old non-DVR non-X1 box. So I think I could still use the Roku app. I also read that if you go with the Roku app for a TV rather than a Comcast box, you get a $2.50 credit on your bill.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> I also read that if you go with the Roku app for a TV rather than a Comcast box, you get a $2.50 credit on your bill.


Which is mildly worrying, as it may indicate that Comcast would be looking to charge the "Additional Outlet" fee for any activated Roku Xfinity app instance.


----------



## keenanSR (Oct 13, 2004)

krkaufman said:


> Which is mildly worrying, as it may indicate that Comcast would be looking to charge the "Additional Outlet" fee for any activated Roku Xfinity app instance.


Almost without question. My local Comcast system office told me just the other day that even though I don't pay any AO fees for my 3 CableCARDS(grandfathered in) as of Jan 1 all new CableCARDS issued will be accompanied by an AO charge of $9.95, so I would say almost certainly that the connected Roku device will incur an AO fee.


----------



## alleybj (Dec 6, 2000)

NashGuy said:


> Yeah, I've now read where it says you need a TV box from Comcast to use the Roku app, but like you said it doesn't specifically say an X1 box. My simple TV plan came with an old non-DVR non-X1 box. So I think I could still use the Roku app. I also read that if you go with the Roku app for a TV rather than a Comcast box, you get a $2.50 credit on your bill.


I don't have a Comcast cable box, and although I have Comcast internet, I use my own modem, and I was able to activate the app


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

alleybj said:


> I don't have a Comcast cable box, and although I have Comcast internet, I use my own modem, and I was able to activate the app


Hmm. Weird. Well, who knows, it's early days in a beta and with Comcast the left hand often doesn't know what the right hand is doing. It's cool that you were able to activate the app on your Roku but it wouldn't surprise me if it stopped working without either a Comcast modem or their new IP gateway device.

You mentioned that you have Comcast internet. Do you also have some level of TV service from them?


----------



## keenanSR (Oct 13, 2004)

alleybj said:


> I don't have a Comcast cable box, and although I have Comcast internet, I use my own modem, and I was able to activate the app


Just tried as well and it works. Looks okay, I wonder if there's a way to delete channels you don't want.

The guide looks similar to what I remember seeing on their STBs.

VOD works also.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

krkaufman said:


> Which is mildly worrying, as it may indicate that Comcast would be looking to charge the "Additional Outlet" fee for any activated Roku Xfinity app instance.


Comcast has confirmed that, once the beta for the Roku app is over, additional outlet fees will apply. As expected, there won't ever be hardware rental fees for using your own Roku.

Analyst to Arris Investors: Relax About Comcast's Roku App | Multichannel

I wonder how they'll calculate the number of outlets based on Roku app usage. Will you be charged based on the maximum number of Rokus that simultaneously accessed streams within that month? (E.g. On the 24th, from 8 to 9 PM, there were two Roku devices both accessing your account's TV programming, so we're charging you for two additional outlets.) Or will it be based on the total number of separate Roku units that used the app at any point in the month?


----------



## webminster (Dec 13, 2016)

I was able to "authorize" the Roku app, but it would not work. Told me I had to be on an Xfinity wireless network and exited. Not running wireless, and I have residential TV but business internet and voice. Seemed like the app did not recognize the biz internet service, maybe it only works for people on residential internet and TV service both?


----------



## keenanSR (Oct 13, 2004)

NashGuy said:


> Comcast has confirmed that, once the beta for the Roku app is over, additional outlet fees will apply. As expected, there won't ever be hardware rental fees for using your own Roku.
> 
> Analyst to Arris Investors: Relax About Comcast's Roku App | Multichannel
> 
> I wonder how they'll calculate the number of outlets based on Roku app usage. Will you be charged based on the maximum number of Rokus that simultaneously accessed streams within that month? (E.g. On the 24th, from 8 to 9 PM, there were two Roku devices both accessing your account's TV programming, so we're charging you for two additional outlets.) Or will it be based on the total number of separate Roku units that used the app at any point in the month?


So even though the app seems to work perfectly fine while using zero Comcast equipment once out of beta a Comcast gateway will be required?



> *Update:* Comcast clarified that, in or out of beta, there will be no equipment charges for use of the Xfinity TV app on a Roku. But out of beta, other fees associated with a customer's account would apply, such as additional outlet charges. The company also confirmed that the app will be available to video subs who also subscribe to Gigabit Pro, Comcast's 2-Gig residential broadband service that uses FTTP technology.
> 
> Plus, those Roku/Xfinity TV app users will require an Xfinity IP gateway in their home - something that Arris also makes.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> Will you be charged based on the maximum number of Rokus that simultaneously accessed streams within that month? (E.g. On the 24th, from 8 to 9 PM, there were two Roku devices both accessing your account's TV programming, so we're charging you for two additional outlets.) Or will it be based on the total number of separate Roku units that used the app at any point in the month?


I assume it'll be based on the number of activated Roku app instances. It's not like they only charge you for set-top boxes that are actually used each month.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

krkaufman said:


> I assume it'll be based on the number of activated Roku app instances. It's not like they only charge you for set-top boxes that are actually used each month.


Right. But with their own STB or CableCARDs, they know the total number they've issued you and which have been activated. I'm not sure whether individual Roku units can be tracked by Comcast so that the total can be counted. Maybe so -- maybe the Comcast app can access the Roku device serial number. If so, I wonder what the user would have to do in order to de-activate a Roku (i.e. before selling it) so that it no longer incurs an additional outlet fee? Would simply deleting the app suffice?

With OTT streaming services like Netflix and Hulu, they look at the number of simultaneous streams being accessed, not the total number of devices that have installed the app and accessed the account. Hopefully, once the beta is over and regular charges apply, Comcast will have some kind of pop-up screen when first activating the app on a Roku that states "Your account will be charged an additional outlet fee of $X.XX per month after activating this app on this specific device and that charge will recur unless and until you de-activate this app on this device."


----------



## keenanSR (Oct 13, 2004)

NashGuy said:


> Right. But with their own STB or CableCARDs, they know the total number they've issued you and which have been activated. I'm not sure whether individual Roku units can be tracked by Comcast so that the total can be counted. Maybe so -- maybe the Comcast app can access the Roku device serial number. If so, I wonder what the user would have to do in order to de-activate a Roku (i.e. before selling it) so that it no longer incurs an additional outlet fee? Would simply deleting the app suffice?
> 
> With OTT streaming services like Netflix and Hulu, they look at the number of simultaneous streams being accessed, not the total number of devices that have installed the app and accessed the account. Hopefully, once the beta is over and regular charges apply, Comcast will have some kind of pop-up screen when first activating the app on a Roku that states "Your account will be charged an additional outlet fee of $X.XX per month after activating this app on this specific device and that charge will recur unless and until you de-activate this app on this device."


Comcast can tell by the device activation. It's just like activating Vudu or Hulu on a PS3 or Roku, you have to enter a code displayed in the app to the activation webpage and then the device becomes active.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

keenanSR said:


> Comcast can tell by the device activation. It's just like activating Vudu or Hulu on a PS3 or Roku, you have to enter a code displayed in the app to the activation webpage and then the device becomes active.


Yes. But if I delete the Hulu app on my Roku, and then re-install it and re-activate it, I'll be given a different activation code by Hulu the second time. But I haven't installed it on two different devices, just twice on the same one.

Also, most apps like Hulu, Netflix, etc., allow you to simply sign in with your user name and password if you don't wish to activate via a code through a web browser.


----------



## keenanSR (Oct 13, 2004)

NashGuy said:


> Yes. But if I delete the Hulu app on my Roku, and then re-install it and re-activate it, I'll be given a different activation code by Hulu the second time. But I haven't installed it on two different devices, just twice on the same one.
> 
> Also, most apps like Hulu, Netflix, etc., allow you to simply sign in with your user name and password if you don't wish to activate via a code through a web browser.


Some OTT providers track activated devices, and some don't. If I had to bet, I would guess that Comcast is going to track every device using the app to enable them to apply an AO fee.

How it's currently working now may not be the way it works once out of beta. Put another way, if Comcast is going to charge an AO fee you can bet they'll track how many devices are connected, how they do that, I don't know, but I can't see them letting you connect as many Rokus as you want without getting their pound of flesh from you.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> I'm not sure whether individual Roku units can be tracked by Comcast so that the total can be counted. Maybe so -- maybe the Comcast app can access the Roku device serial number. If so, I wonder what the user would have to do in order to de-activate a Roku (i.e. before selling it) so that it no longer incurs an additional outlet fee? Would simply deleting the app suffice?


Seems like this is what all the streaming services do, typically with interfaces for managing the activated device instances.

e.g. Hulu...











​


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> Yes. But if I delete the Hulu app on my Roku, and then re-install it and re-activate it, I'll be given a different activation code by Hulu the second time. But I haven't installed it on two different devices, just twice on the same one.
> 
> Also, most apps like Hulu, Netflix, etc., allow you to simply sign in with your user name and password if you don't wish to activate via a code through a web browser.


Isn't "code" vs "login" just the method of activation? Regardless of the activation method, the service likely grabs some device-specific identifier from the hardware.

Where I'm unclear on how things could work is when you move from a streaming device with no concept of users (ahem), with users being implemented via profiles only within select apps, to something like an Xbox 360 or Xbox One, where each individual user account on the gaming console has to individually activate the streaming app.


----------



## keenanSR (Oct 13, 2004)

krkaufman said:


> Seems like this is what all the streaming services do, typically with interfaces for managing the activated device instances.
> 
> e.g. Hulu...
> View attachment 28012
> View attachment 28013​


That's what I was talking about, a method such as you've posted up.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

krkaufman said:


> Isn't "code" vs "login" just the method of activation? Regardless of the activation method, the service likely grabs some device-specific identifier from the hardware.


Well, the service knows the name/type of device but I question whether they're keeping track of the specific hardware unit (i.e. serial number). One reason I say that is because I've had one or more of these streaming services list the same device twice (e.g. TiVo Series 5) among my list of activated devices, counting it as two different devices, even though I only own one of the device.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> I've had one or more of these streaming services list the same device twice (e.g. TiVo Series 5) among my list of activated devices, counting it as two different devices, even though I only own one of the device.


That'd be a problem.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

krkaufman said:


> That'd be a problem.


Right, it could be a problem when it comes to how Comcast ends up charging additional outlet access fees. But it's not a problem for OTT streaming services like Netflix because they don't care about how many devices you've activated on your account, only how many simultaneous streams you're accessing at a given time among those devices.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

krkaufman said:


> Seems like this is what all the streaming services do, typically with interfaces for managing the activated device instances.


The only two streaming services I have are Amazon Prime and Netflix and AFAICT neither one tracks devices.


----------



## keenanSR (Oct 13, 2004)

Not all do.


----------



## delgadobb (Mar 6, 2004)

lpwcomp said:


> The only two streaming services I have are Amazon Prime and Netscape and AFAICT neither one tracks devices.


Waaaaiitt a minute ... Netscape has a streaming service? That might be the answer to what became of the now-defunct web browser


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

delgadobb said:


> Waaaaiitt a minute ... Netscape has a streaming service? That might be the answer to what became of the now-defunct web browser


Most likely it's an error and the word should be Netflix. Netscape still lives.
Netscape - Wikipedia
Netscape ISP Homepage


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

delgadobb said:


> Waaaaiitt a minute ... Netscape has a streaming service? That might be the answer to what became of the now-defunct web browser





JoeKustra said:


> Most likely it's an error and the word should be Netflix. Netscape still lives.
> Netscape - Wikipedia
> Netscape ISP Homepage


Yes, error. Fixed now.


----------



## CharlesH (Aug 29, 2002)

The Xfinity app on my Roku activated and works fine. I have a Comcast modem with TV and Internet service, but no set-top devices other than TiVo. The signup page says that when Beta ends, that you will be given an option to opt-in to the service with fees that will be stated at that time. What was a bit disappointing was that the audio was PCM, even though my Roku audio is set for Dolby+/DTS+.

By the way, the Roku Xfinity TV app seems to have the same UI as the Xfinity TV app on my Android phone. But I did discover that I cannot MiraCast the Xfinity TV app to my TV; I get an error that says "viewing restricted to mobile devices".


----------



## SNJpage1 (May 25, 2006)

wmhjr said:


> This is simply and completely untrue. There really isn't the slightest bit of accuracy here.


In my area the cable company has to get the OK from the city and have to pay a fee to the city to run their cable thru the city. The agreements usually are for 10 to 15 years in length. In my city part of the agreements was for Comcast to provide high speed internet to the public schools and to provide a channel for city events, Brodcasting city meetings and announcements


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

Article about Comcast & Roku:

Why Comcast's new Roku app fee will infuriate you


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

atmuscarella said:


> Article about Comcast & Roku:
> 
> Why Comcast's new Roku app fee will infuriate you


What they can get away with/what the market will bear, in an industry which largely is monopoly-driven due to $ entry barriers.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

SNJpage1 said:


> In my area the cable company has to get the OK from the city and have to pay a fee to the city to run their cable thru the city. The agreements usually are for 10 to 15 years in length. In my city part of the agreements was for Comcast to provide high speed internet to the public schools and to provide a channel for city events, Brodcasting city meetings and announcements


You forgot about the kickbacks that the local politicians get from enforcing the monopoly.

Plus, Comcast has a ton of leverage since any new provider would take a few years and millions of dollars to rollout a new service. It would cost a new provider millions of dollars because the local politicians will double the price and take half for themselves. That's why the FIOS rollout stalled out earlier than expected.

And Comcast could simply say it doesn't like the new competition, and come up with an excuse to break the agreement and pull out before the new guys are finished. Leaving a city without any Internet and cable TV will probably get their voters upset.

The only solution is to have the FCC and/or FTC dissolve these local agreements and force the current provider to remain until the rollout is finished. In other words, treat it like a utility. But that's not going to happen for at least four years. That could also happen on a state level, but many states have laws in place that forbid them from doing that.

The other alternative is to rollout low cost high speed wireless Internet.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

The problem is that once a widespread competitor comes along, the incumbent, which has already long since paid for its plant, will just drop their prices to make it harder for the competitor. The overbuilding model does work in some areas, but generally only in medium- to high-density urban/suburban areas. Our local overbuilder was a financial disaster for the city, although their service isn't bad.

Incumbent telcos have an advantage in that while they have to build a new network for fiber, they already have the COs and a presence in the area. Frontier is slowly rolling fiber out in CT.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

Adam1115 said:


> Sports. If that's all you watch live, I can see it. Most shows are available on hulu anyway.


that would be awful. no instant reply, no pausing your game to go to the bathroom, etc.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

b_scott said:


> that would be awful. no instant reply, no pausing your game to go to the bathroom, etc.


Sports have instant replay automatically. There are commercials and halftime to go to the bathroom.

I would freak out on someone if they were rewinding the game or pausing it to go potty all the time, how annoying!


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

Adam1115 said:


> Sports have instant replay automatically. There are commercials and halftime to go to the bathroom.
> 
> I would freak out on someone if they were rewinding the game or pausing it to go potty all the time, how annoying!


only on what they want to rewind. and you always only watch sports with other people? lol


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

b_scott said:


> only on what they want to rewind. and you always only watch sports with other people? lol


So what of it? Not everyone is you. I don't mind if you like having a TiVo for sports, your presence to pause and rewind live sports isn't everyone's.

I'm not trying to convince you to get rid of your tivo. lol


----------



## wtherrell (Dec 23, 2004)

Adam1115 said:


> Sports. If that's all you watch live, I can see it. Most shows are available on hulu anyway.


No way I will watch sports live in "real" time with commercials.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

A lot of people watch sports alone, and may want to pause here or there. If I'm with other people then, yeah, it's super annoying to be DVR'ing a live event.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

wtherrell said:


> No way I will watch sports live in "real" time with commercials.


Good for you. Doesn't mean nobody does. I couldn't care less if I had a TiVo for live sports.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

How does *Comcast Executive Team says no more TiVo* have anything to do with how one watches sports ?


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

lessd said:


> How does *Comcast Executive Team says no more TiVo* have anything to do with how one watches sports ?


Call the New York Times! A thread on TCF got off-topic!


----------



## schatham (Mar 17, 2007)

lessd said:


> How does *Comcast Executive Team says no more TiVo* have anything to do with how one watches sports ?


I think the poster is saying he won't watch Comcast Sports without their Tivo. In other words a lost customer. Seems on topic to me. My thought is no Tivo, then no Comcast.

I always record sports and watch about a half hour to an hour behind.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

schatham said:


> I think the poster is saying he won't watch Comcast Sports without their Tivo. In other words a lost customer. Seems on topic to me. My thought is no Tivo, then no Comcast.
> 
> I always record sports and watch about a half hour to an hour behind.


Or, no TiVo than the X1 for Comcast people


----------



## jrtroo (Feb 4, 2008)

I hate to ask a question on topic, but my girlfriend just was told by xfinity that they should not have enabled her new box to receive the app and that was why she was getting an error. My guess is the csr was clueless, but I have not been able to call the cablecard hotline to clarify.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

jrtroo said:


> I hate to ask a question on topic, but my girlfriend just was told by xfinity that they should not have enabled her new box to receive the app and that was why she was getting an error. My guess is the csr was clueless, but I have not been able to call the cablecard hotline to clarify.


What app ? and is her new box a TiVo I assume, are you talking about cable card pairing ?


----------



## jrtroo (Feb 4, 2008)

The xfinity app worked great for a week, then she started getting the 301 error. So, card is paired correctly. When she called comcast, she got the response that she should not have gotten the app at all since it's no longer supported.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

jrtroo said:


> The xfinity app worked great for a week, then she started getting the 301 error. So, card is paired correctly. When she called comcast, she got the response that she should not have gotten the app at all since it's no longer supported.


What is the* xfinity app* (or are you referring to Comcast OD) your talking about and was it on what model TiVo.


----------



## jrtroo (Feb 4, 2008)

Actual name is Xfinity On Demand. I called in last night and confused the cablecard folks. Apparently it is as I suspected and that there is some confusion on their side and that the app is still available. No news on why it worked for a week before stopping, but I'll try again later today when they are better staffed.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

jrtroo said:


> Actual name is Xfinity On Demand. I called in last night and confused the cablecard folks. Apparently it is as I suspected and that there is some confusion on their side and that the app is still available. No news on why it worked for a week before stopping, but I'll try again later today when they are better staffed.


Xfinity On Demand works now without problems in the Hartford CT area, but in the past there have been some problems that get resolved in a few days. As long as the Moto cable card has a* V* after the word *Val *and not a *?*


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

lessd said:


> How does *Comcast Executive Team says no more TiVo* have anything to do with how one watches sports ?


Because someone said they do not understand how OTA people watch TV without a DVR, I answered that people who watch sports was one group of people I know who might be satisfied with streaming but use OTA.

Apparently that was super offensive to to b_scott and bigg.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Adam1115 said:


> Because someone said they do not understand how OTA people watch TV without a DVR, I answered that people who watch sports was one group of people I know who might be satisfied with streaming but use OTA.
> 
> Apparently that was super offensive to to b_scott and bigg.


I wouldn't call that super offensive. It was just too easy to respond with lots of sarcasm.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

Adam1115 said:


> Because someone said they do not understand how OTA people watch TV without a DVR, I answered that people who watch sports was one group of people I know who might be satisfied with streaming but use OTA.
> 
> Apparently that was super offensive to to b_scott and bigg.


Not offensive to me.


----------



## dstoffa (Dec 14, 2005)

webminster said:


> I was able to "authorize" the Roku app, but it would not work. Told me I had to be on an Xfinity wireless network and exited. Not running wireless, and I have residential TV but business internet and voice. Seemed like the app did not recognize the biz internet service, maybe it only works for people on residential internet and TV service both?


One typically needs to be behind a modem / gateway that is tied to a video subscription account.

I have Spectrum (was TWC) video and internet, and can use my Rokus as additional outlets (no fee, and please don't give them any ideas). I get live TV, and VOD via the Roku.

I assume that since you have no business class video subscription ties to your modem / gateway, you cannot use the app on that network.


----------

