Comcast: Running our Code on Third-Party Boxes 'Not Feasible' Comcast claims that the FCC's plan to require cable companies offer their programming on third party set top boxes without a CableCARD is "not feasible." The FCC voted 3-2 back in February on new rules intended to open the cable set top box market to competition, which the FCC hopes will not only improve the quality and price of set top hardware, but put an end to the $21 billion in rental fees cable customers are forced to pay annually.

The cable industry has been engaged in absolute histrionics since the agency announced its plan, telling anybody who'll listen in a series of industry-funded editorials that the FCC's plan will hurt innovation, consumer privacy, and even diversity programming Now according to a filing outlining a recent Comcast meeting with the FCC (first spotted by Fierce Wireless), Comcast is trying to argue that the FCC's plan isn't even technically possible. Comcast says it told the FCC its Xfinity apps "include software code that manages requests for programming and communications between the box/app and where the programming is cached on the network to ensure the programming is delivered, and done so efficiently." Comcast added that "this network code minimizes the risks of degradation to the service due to bandwidth shortages and congestion, and also enables Comcast to support rapidly evolving entertainment technologies, such as accessibility features and advanced video technologies." Running our network code directly on third-party devices without our application (is) not feasible for a variety of reasons...

Comcast then proceeds to insist that its secret sauce is so proprietary and important, there's simply no way to deliver Comcast cable programming -- without forcing the set tops to use Comcast's own apps and associated technologies. Comcast then proceeds to insist that its secret sauce is so proprietary and important, there's simply no way to deliver Comcast cable programming -- without forcing the set tops to use Comcast's own apps and associated technologies. "In response to questions from Commission staff, we explained that running our network code directly on third-party devices without our application was not feasible for a variety of reasons," said Comcast. Those reasons include "that MVPDs deploy very different network infrastructures so that the code that one MVPD develops for interacting with its network differs from the code that other MVPDs would develop; MVPD network code is regularly updated to accommodate network and service changes, and corresponding changes would be required in the third-party device (or app); and that programmers and content owners require a trusted execution environment as a key element of a strong content security and content presentation regimen." Granted the FCC has been talking with engineers and a laundry-list of stakeholders about reforming the cable box for the better part of the decade, and the general consensus is that it certainly is possible to deliver cable content without companies like Comcast needing to include their app apps and software. Comcast obviously has a vested interest in ensuring that its own software, ads, and tracking technologies are used in third-party devices. To try and prove the FCC's plan wasn't necessary, Comcast recently unveiled plans to deliver its Xfinity app and cable programming to Roku and Samsung smart TVs and streaming devices. This offering, Comcast claimed, proved the "success of the apps-based model in the marketplace," and that the "far-reaching government technical mandate being currently proposed by the FCC is unnecessary." The FCC says that Comcast's "solution" doesn't go far enough in giving third-party set top box vendors full access to programming, and that it obviously wouldn't cover the numerous other cable operators in the market. "While we do not know all of the details of this announcement, it appears to offer only a proprietary, Comcast-controlled user interface and seems to allow only Comcast content on different devices, rather than allowing those devices to integrate or search across Comcast content as well as other content consumers subscribe to," the FCC said in a statement. In short the FCC's idea of progress involves providing third-party set top vendors with access to the raw, still-copy-protected cable content, with the cable operators otherwise getting out of the way. Given the cable box has been the cornerstone of the cable industry's walled-garden approach to content for the better part of a generation, Comcast executives are likely terrified of losing their long-held monopoly control over the cable set top ecosystem -- and the $231 in box rental fees the average consumer pays annually. In short the FCC's idea of progress involves providing third-party set top vendors with access to the raw, still-copy-protected cable content, with the cable operators otherwise getting out of the way. Given the cable box has been the cornerstone of the cable industry's walled-garden approach to content for the better part of a generation, Comcast executives are likely terrified of losing their long-held monopoly control over the cable set top ecosystem -- and the $231 in box rental fees the average consumer pays annually.







News Jump California Defends Its Net Neutrality Law; AT&T's Traffic Up 20% Despite Data Traffic Actually Being Down; + more news Are The Comcast-Charter X1 Talks Dead In The Water?; AT&T May Offer Phone Plans With Ads For Discounts; + more news Europe's Top Court: Net Neutrality Rules Bar Zero Rating; ViacomCBS To Rebrand CBS All Access As Paramount+; + more news Verizon To Buy Reseller TracFone For $7B; 5G Not The Competitive Threat To Cable Many Thought It Would Be; + more news MS.Wants Records From AT&T On $300M Project; Google Fiber Outages In Austin, Houston, Other Texan Cities; + more news States With The Biggest Decreases In Speed; AT&T Hopes You'll Forget Its Fight Against Accurate Maps; + more news AT&T's CEO Has A Familiar $olution To US Broadband Woes; EarthLink Files Suit Against Charter; + more news 5G Doesn't Live Up To Hype, AT&T's 5G Slower Than Its 4G; Cord-Cutting Now In 37% of Broadband Households; + more news FCC Cited False Broadband Data Despite Warnings; ZTE, Huawei Replacement Cost Is $1.87B, But Only $1B Allocated; + more Cogeco Rejects Altice USA's Atlantic Broadband Bid; AT&T Is Astroturfing The FCC In Support Of Trump Attack; + more news ---------------------- this week last week most discussed

Most recommended from 83 comments



maartena

Elmo

Premium Member

join:2002-05-10

Orange, CA 32 recommendations maartena Premium Member Maybe people don't want your code? What's wrong with a system that just delivers guide info in XML format which is pretty much universal, and software on the DVR that has its OWN user interface and its OWN configuration.... all the cable company needs to do is deliver programming according some form of digital standard, for both linear and on-demand. I'm sure a DVR developer, or someone that wants to use a PC with Kodi and a TV card.... is more than capable of developing their own code for the OS and functionality of the device. b10010011

Whats a Posting tag?

join:2004-09-07

Bellingham, WA 1 edit 26 recommendations b10010011 Member TIVO manages to work just fine without Comcast's code What exact "code" does Comcast need to operate on their own network that Tivo does not?



Comcast's boxes use a CableCARD, you can see it right inside the cable box.

ctaranto

join:2011-12-14

MA 21 recommendations ctaranto Member News Flash Hey Comcast, no one WANTS to run your code on their box. Your code sucks.

Packeteers

Premium Member

join:2005-06-18

Forest Hills, NY ·Verizon FiOS

·Charter

Asus RT-AC3100

(Software) Asuswrt-Merlin

4 edits 18 recommendations Packeteers Premium Member probably hiding bad code 30 years go i helped ween a company away from custom code to a generic platform, but the software users still needed some customized input and report modules to feed the generic beast. the first generic company i dealt with was resistant to opening up their system to module development (they insisted it be done in batch updates, rather than live) so i eventually abandoned them and went with their competitor (who's code base still endures today after dozens of updates). that first company ultimately went out of business as their poorly written code did not scale up well as hardware (from 8 to 32bit) and network (from 10/100 to 1000) speeds improved dramatically.



comcast's song and dance now is probably because the emperor has no cloths.

tc1uscg

join:2005-03-09

Guantanamo 17 recommendations tc1uscg Member Blame the FCC in the first place Comcast (and the majority of others I assume) have made their cable systems so "propitiatory" that you NEED their boxes just to watch basic cable. Basic/HD tv should not require a BOX. AkumaKuru

join:2006-03-23

Virginia 8 recommendations AkumaKuru Member WHAT??? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the summation of Comcasts argument of why they cannot run their code on a third party device is because its, at a technical level, really hard and to prove it, they run their code on a third party device to show the FCC they didn't need to be forced to be more open, because they already are.



all people are looking for is a combination of the CableCard ease of adding a 3rd party box for channels (minus the card hopefully), a way to accurately receive Guide data (AKA a simple XML file), and a way to access VOD library/apps thru an App that most carriers already have for 3rd party devices (comcast had one for Xbox360 already).

I would even go so far as to say that's really 2 separate activities/apps. one for live TV and one for VOD. both of these have already been resolved at some level for non-cablebox users..

karpodiem

Hail to The Victors

Premium Member

join:2008-05-20

Troy, MI ·WOW Internet and..

·Comcast XFINITY

3 edits 7 recommendations karpodiem Premium Member More fabrications from Comcast, par for the course Stop me if anything I describe below doesn't sound 'feasible' -



Successful subscriber via login/password yields access to a 'channel' which is constantly streaming live content. VoD is just video 'archived' to the channel, and content is searchable. Only one active 'login' per user account - each additional account per family member is a few dollars more per month for their own unique login/password. Could you buy and re-sell these logins? Sure, but Comcast is still getting 90% of the monthly revenue from that primary account.



And I think this cache/CDN issue they're referring to can be handled on their layer - offering a subscriber access API is a level of abstraction above the layer that Comcast controls. Much in the same way that Apple retains control of the VoWifi stack on iOS, yet it's up to the carriers to enable it on their backend.



(oops, they might have to actually lower prices in this model due to it being technically impossible to stop account re-selling (OpenVPN on a router would prevent the in-house IP-location requirement)! Physical requirement of having equipment in residence is protection for Comcast - in a streaming model, this barrier is removed)



In short, they copy YouTube.



In this (young) model, you'd lose the ability of instant channel switching that is associated with traditional TV - what I described above would be more akin to watching video on the web. Don't like change? Feel free to subscribe to traditional TV and pay traditional TV prices.



To say it's not feasible is just another lie from Comcast. Were you expecting anything different?