If you've read any of my previous articles, you know I'm not a big fan of cable. So my short, biased answer to the question at the top of this article is yes. The more convoluted answer is "Probably, if you're willing to test out some hardware."
Luckily, even though there still isn't a "plug and play" system that fits 100 percent of our needs, the cable-free landscape is improving almost daily. (See: Who Needs Smart TV?.)
These changes in the landscape are due in part to the increased interest in mobile technology. Total OEM revenue from mobile devices is set to top $565 billion by 2015, with consumers flocking to smartphones, notebooks, and tablet PCs. The main factor in this growth is broadband access. Silicon Image Inc. expects its mobile HD technology (MHL) to be incorporated into 200 million mobile devices by the end of 2012. That's a lot of high-definition streaming, from mobile devices to TVs.
In addition to increased access to streaming via mobile devices, content is now readily available online, though I've found a subscription to a DVD rental or streaming service becomes useful. Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu all charge about $8 a month for unlimited streaming. They have limited libraries, but you can supplement their content by going directly to the networks' Websites, where recent episodes are available for free and usually within 24 hours of airing.
Not having had TV since 2007, I've gone through each new content distribution trend, and I am excited to see the technology getting closer to my ideal scenario month after month. More and more people are abandoning cable, and eight of the nine largest cable providers lost subscribers last quarter.
This trend is making the content providers nervous. Hulu, for example, was having a great run -- new shows were posted sometimes within hours of being shown on TV. Then the networks got scared. Even though Hulu generates advertising revenue from commercials, some content providers abandoned the platform. Even Starz is pulling out of Netflix, and there is talk of waiting 60 days before releasing new DVDs for rentals.
At first glance, this seems like a step backwards, but we can't forget that "pull" is more important than "push" in winning these technology battles. When consumers pull a technology (like mobile streaming) into the market, it has stronger staying power than when companies try to push a technology (like 3D TV).
In addition to the increased mobile access and the nearly limitless content, let's not forget the cost savings. If you want all 200 channels, Comcast will charge you $85 a month. Then there is the DVR, which can cost up to $500 for the box in addition to a $20 monthly service fee. The total cost of a cable subscription for one year is potentially $1,760, and over the course of five years, you're looking at saving roughly $7,000. The average person spends $720 a year on Internet service, which means you can basically get cable for half the price you're paying now.
Joanne Itow of Semico Research Corp. recently hooked up an old laptop to her TV. That simple first step is saving her $80 a month. Four months later, the only thing she misses is the remote control -- something she'll soon rectify when she finds the perfect Smart DTV.
I love your comment. I gave you five stars for being one of the best things I have read today (apart from Bolaji's blog about the truth of made in China).
I agree with every word you have said here. I don't miss TV either, not even a bit, not one day, the same as you I haven't owned one in hundreds of moons, not having TV has been one of the blessings in my daily life.
Give up Cable? Haha! Beat you to it. I have not owned a functional television set for more than 15 years; no plans to buy one. WIth some years experience behind me, I can fairly report: Living without TV is a joy. Living without TV is not difficult. Living without TV allows me even more freedom to do the necessary and on MY schedule. To Hell with TV and cable and all that goes with it!
Do I miss much? Not really. News and current events come via the internet or even the old-fashioned, printed word. Do I miss the pictures and videos? NO. Pix and vids, when necessary, are available via the net and usually full-screen, without those disgusting banners that eat up so much space on a TV screen. Some will say that the entertainment portion of TV is an American Treasure. Fine, for them. I see it as mostly junk. In the case of some exceptional program, it can usually be had via the net, if perhaps at a later date. In fifteen years without TV, I've sought a specific program exactly once. Got it?
Cable is a miserable rip-off, fostered on folks who too often follow the crowd. The programming is cheap, superficial and designed to dumb-down the watcher. It is also laden with advertising that is not necessary. Cable is worthless. I might consider it when they start paying me to at least have it available. Short of that, hell no! there are several reasons. For informational programming - news and good documentaries, etc., the factual content is minimal and often poorly delivered. The spoken word is a waste of time: I can read 4x - 5x as fast as the typical video journalist speaks. If they's just publish their script and skipt the talking heads (and embedded opinions) I can easily absord an hour long program's material (about 38-40 real minutes) with 6-8 minutes of reading. If it is complicated stuff, perhaps 10 minutes. In short TV and cable is a collosal waste of my time. No thanks. I also dislike the bias that so many talking heads include. Even if unintentional, it is there and it stinks. The written word can also include bias, but it is much more difficult to hide. Lastly, I do not need or appreciate "Production Values." Pretty pictures do not convince me and overly graphic details will not change my values. I know what beauty and pleasure look like and I know what death and misery look like. Spare me. Please, journalists, just report the facts.
Back to basics. Cable? Hell NO! TV of any kind? Hell No. Learn to read and find the appropriate sources for the written words that you need. Amen.
In an earlier post, I suggested that, since my cable TV and internet services are provided by the same company, all they have to do is revise their billing schedules to make up for the internet access to programming.
On the way to work this morning, I heard a statement that service providers are looking at billing baes on useage, like the electric companies do. That accomplishes the goal (for the service providers).
Some of the on-demand programs I watch have more commericals than if I were watching a program live, (that's you TNT) and they disable the fast-forward feature. No fair
Cable is losing ground to on-line content, but it's going to be a while before it's replaced completely. The way content deals are made is a major issue--for example Viacom has sued Time Warner because it claims it doesn't have the right to allow Viacom content to be streamed on an iPad.
FWIW cable has a regulatory framework that mandates basic service for under $40/month. Another thing to consider is some cable companies offer packages that include bundled cell phone service, so they could be the pipe where you get your on-line content.
You're right michell. Online streaming look no different from TVs this days and will continue to do better. I personally watch everything online. its cheap and you have a huge range of programs and channels to choose from.
@Himanshu: The "no ads" feature is certainly a very important plus point for internet TV compared to the plethora of ads on normal cable. However, I don't think they'll be able to survive with this model for long. Ads is the ultimate source of revenue for content providers.
I agree. Especially when the providers here in the US pretty much have a monopoly in certain areas & increase prices alomst 20% in some areas year over year.
i recently did some experiment on the content and quality of programs between cable tv and internet. As most of the content that we see on cable is also available on internet (via streaming or paid) so i found that i could enjoy more on internet (without ads; thank heaven God) the content. I have more than 100 cable channels but in the end i keep on flipping between channels to find the program that i like. So, if i have unlimited internet bandwidth and at a reasonable cost then i do not need cable.
Given the low rates that Internet TV has, the variety of content available and the flexibility it offers, I don't think cable TV can survive for long. It's only a matter of time before cable dies its natural death.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Archived Dialogues
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Euro-Crisis: What It Means for High-Tech Firms Join EBN Editor in Chief Bolaji Ojo and Contributing Editor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday, July 12, at 10:00 a.m. EDT for a Live Chat on high-tech and Europe's economic difficulties.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.
To save this item to your list of favorite EBN content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This