And the Web TV wars go on, and on, and on

Wow. With all the drama and in-fighting among cable companies, TV content creators, and Web video companies this week, you'd think the whole industry was one big junior-high cafeteria. Oh, wait, it kind of is.

First, Hulu--a joint venture between NBC Universal and News Corp.--pulled its content from TV.com (which is owned by CBS, publisher of CNET News). Then it did the same with Boxee, a company that makes software designed for watching online video on TVs via set-top boxes. The reason for these measures appears to be either mounting pressure from the TV content owners that have licensed their video to Hulu, or mounting pressure from the cable companies, or both, or something like that.

Now, we've got a report in The Wall Street Journal indicating that cable giants Time Warner Cable and Comcast are in talks with some of the companies that operate pay-cable channels, for a plan to make some of the networks' content available online to subscribers. It'd probably be on a streaming, ad-supported basis, and probably available for free to existing subscribers.

I've been watching all this with quite a bit of curiosity and amusement. You see, I canceled my cable subscription and ditched my TV a few months ago, and have since been relying on a combination of Netflix (which may offer a streaming-only option as early as next year), iTunes, Hulu, and randomly dropping in on friends' apartments if I really, really want to watch something live. If I show up with a pizza and a nice friendly smile, most of them are OK with it.

In this Digital Age, cable subscriptions just seem a bit convoluted to me; no offense to the people who run the Game Show Channel or Boomerang, but those aren't my cup of tea and I'd prefer to not have to pay for them.

If this shadowy, in-the-works cable deal involves any kind of Web-only cable subscription where, say, you can pay by the stream or by the channel, I'd be all for it. And if the content providers finally work things out with the set-top box makers and Web video hubs, it could be terrific for me and other people who've gotten totally fed up with Stone Age TV offerings. For now, however, it's just a dramatic mess and recent signs are indicating that it's taking steps backward as opposed to forward.

Consequently, I'm riding out the storm for now. I'm holding off on purchasing any kind of set-top box--or a television, for that matter--until the future-of-television compass stops wildly spinning. In a few years, I'm sure, the solution to it all will seem like it should've been obvious the whole time.

Isn't that always how these things are?

[The_happy_switcher]

There's nothing I'd like better than to ditch my cable provider. However, at this time live sporting events are still not available over the internet so that keeps the cable bill coming to my house, unfortunately.

[Kev_Orng]

I ditched cable for rabbit ears and iTunes (no Hulu in Canada yet, but I'd use it if I could).

Anyways, you'd be surprised how many HD stations you can pick up for free over the air. Especially right in the city. We get considerably less where I am, but it's more than enough TV to justify the one-time purchase of rabbit ears and satisfy our occasional need to watch TV, and we don't have to pay any monthly bills.

If I were into sports, i could even pick up the most important sporting events over the air where I am.

[The_happy_switcher]

After the San Jose Sharks win the Stanley Cup in June I will be free to cancel my cable. lol

[Kev_Orng]

Would it surprise you if I told you that I have never watched a hockey game all the way through? :)

One time I came close, it was when the French announcers were on strike back in 01 or 02. They ran the game on French CBC with just the ambient sound, and I almost enjoyed it. That's when I realized, it's not that I hate watching sports, I just hate announcers!

[The_happy_switcher]

Well, we have Randy Hahn and Drew Remenda and they are excellent announcers. They are very intellectually honest and criticize the home team when it's called for and will praise the opponent's players--- so they are extremely fair in that respect.

I've notice that if I watch the highlights on NHL center ice or Versus the announcers are biased against West coast teams, like the Sharks, and you can hear it in the way they will call a goal. In general, there's a strong East coast/Canada bias against everyone else.

[kaufmanmoore]

Don't forget the anti-southern Bias. Just remember that in the last decade teams from Dallas, Anaheim, Tampa Bay and Raleigh have won more cups than the original 6, all Canadian teams and the Penguins, Flyers and Sabres combined!

[gerrrg]

10 years ago I ditched Comcast's expanded basic cable for basic cable.
2 years ago I ditched Comcast's basic cable for online content.
8 months ago I bought a digital tuner for my computer and started watching OTA digital TV.
6 months ago I bought a new tv and antenna to watch OTA digital TV on a larger screen.
4 months ago I started subscribing to Netflix.

I highly encourage people to follow suit and give high prices the finger.

[nosliws]

We don't need the cable companies at all. Like you I have also canceled my comcast cable. All that is needed is a central YouTube like service that anyone can upload their content to be it a Hollywood movie a Prime time TV show or my home movies of my cat riding a vacuum cleaner. It the content is good people will watch it. If the content is good then someone will pay for it, either the viewer or an advertiser or some business model that hasn't been worked out yet. But we do not need cable companies and their monopoly and soaring price hikes.

[Joe_Born]

it does seem like a step back, but it's hard to believe it will work. My company sells a box that runs Boxee ( http://open.neurostechnology.com/content/hulu-still-works-link ) and for our users, this move means that instead of the Boxee interface, they will have to go through a browser instead. Not that big a deal really. For other users Boxee has RSS + Bittorrent that's incredibly easy and automatic, so much so, sadly, that many users won't come back to Hulu even when it comes back to Boxee.

I really think that's a metaphor for how the whole space is developing, there's still a window of opportunity for the content creators to really provide something that viewers want, tighten their relationship with those viewers and make it a better experience for everyone, but that window won't stay open indefinitely, as users are driven to illicit sources, it will be hard to get them back.

[ddhboy]

Honestly? I wouldn't pay more than 99¢ per channel for internet streaming, if I don't just use free services like Hulu, or ala carte services like Netflix (who only charges 9 bucks a month for unlimited access to their entire library) I guess I'm spoiled, and yes I know my figure is lower than the $1.99 that iTunes charges per episode, but since most of the shows I watch are available on either Hulu, Netflix or their network's website (ABC, CBS), most of which are free, the cable companies, and television networks alike really have to give me more of a reason to care, especially since I'm down to like an hour of TV a week and like 16 hours per week in netflix instant view.

[ddhboy]

Also why the hell would the networks want to do this service via the cable company? Skip the middle man and make all the money yourself, especially if your a big content provider like Viacom or Disney.

[Joe_Born]

why would the networks do this? it's a "bird in the hand" thing. Sure they are better in the long run cutting out the middle man, but in the short term, that middle man is their bread and butter, and understandably that middle man is putting a lot of pressure on the networks to reign in their forays into this business. So the content producers have to balance the future with the current, they are in a tough spot to be honest.

[james_thirteen]

The downside is that most, if not all, Internet Service Providers have restrictions on how much you can download and/or upload. I have heard of various schemes to limit usage during prime time that include charging extra, limiting bandwidth, cutting off service, or other means to prevent overloading their capabilities so that everyone can have some of the benefits of prime time use. Some restrictions are 24/7 and some are based upon prime time hours. I do not know which category your service fits into, but before video streaming can be universally enjoyed, the internet's infrastructure needs to be enlarged to encompass prime time streaming. So if you are thinking of ditching television, cable, satellite, or other fixed time scheduled channels, then you will need to modify your viewing habits to accommodate your Internet Service Provider's bandwidth restrictions about how much you may download without some penalty.

[cwlqwp]

just keep in mind that the ISPs that practice this the most are actually the cable companies. (ex comcast/RCN/cox/charter/acc/cablevision)

[Heebee Jeebies]

Frankly, Cable and Satellite can cram it. There is really very little on TV that is worth paying anything for and even then not worth paying much. With all of the ads during the shows, on the bottom third of the shows and with the tiny crunched up credits it is rapidly getting to the point that TV is irrelevant and not worth the money. They are all working hard to put themselves out of business. Serves them right too.

Robert

[GlennAllen]

I won't pay for channels that include commercials--if someone is going to foist ads on me that I can't block, then they can make their money on ad revenue alone or just go out of business for all I care. Sports? Yeah, like I want to put more money into the pockets of cry-baby millionaires. Sorry, "TV" is not essential. I used to watch Hulu some, but now, even though I don't use Boxee, I'm not going there anymore--they're just studio (aka "content provider") lackeys. I just don't feel the need to have something constantly blaring in my ears or have bright, shiny lights flashing before my eyes to find entertainment... "TV" has become more like a drug to too many people--and they're addicted.

[Uilleam]

I ditched Comcast over a year ago, when they raised the price $20.00/month, and then took away 10 channels. They were trying to force everyone in this impoverished rural area to switch to their digital cable service, which was an additional $50.00/month at the time. It was a joke, I told them to suck it. I use the internet for all my TV viewing, and sure I miss a lot, like American Idol, Sporting Events, and my local news (which doesn't reach this far out with rabbit ears), but I've replaced all that viewing with New Media programming, and books. So cable companies can continue to blow it out their ear, their archaic and damn near useless at this point.

[Rhidian138]

I think that the new free sat service looks more encouraging, no long term subscription and only a one-off installation. HD coming soon as well. It seems to be a great alternative to paying through the nose of services that are dependent on network capacity.

At least that's the hope...