Time Warner Cable Launches iPad App With Live TV

ShadowFoxx writes "Time Warner Cable Inc. is launching an iPad application that plays live TV, becoming the first cable company to do so. The app will be free to download on Tuesday morning, but it will only work for people who subscribe to both video and Internet service from the New York-based cable company. Even then, it only works in the home, when the iPad is connected to the company's cable modem via a Wi-Fi router."

Comments

uh

[mingot]

Uh, then who cares? I mean unless you really need to watch TV on the crapper.

Re:uh

[mingot]

Not applicable on this website.

Re:uh

[LostCluster]

It's not a story of what this app does, it's a story of what this app doesn't do. It can't leave home WiFi, won't work while a passenger in a moving bus/train, it essentially acts as a hand-held TV only where you already can put a TV.

Re:uh

[golden age villain]

Plus it is not the first app to offer a similar service. Zattoo has had an app with which you can watch tv on the iPad for months. Plus it works on any WiFi network.

Re:uh

[BitZtream]

The content producers have required contractual obligations by companies like TWC that prevent them from doing things like making a way for you to view it from outside your home.

Do you know how much effort went into just getting the legal OK for TWC to give you a DVR ... and then the outrageous amount of bullshit that happened to get network DVR allowed? And why you won't find things like a 30 second skip forward button on the remote with your TWC dvr ...

I'm sure TWC is going to do what they can to maximize their profit, but its not always them that makes the restrictions, just like its generally not them that require you to buy package deal for channels, its the people providing the channels ... that want to say they've sold just as many 'cooking network' subscriptions as HBO ... so advertisers think advertising on the cooking network is worth what they are being charged.

Re:uh

[PCM2]

They're required to offer anything that should have been available over-the-air in the pre-digital days via Clear QAM. That means no History Channel and no Discovery, but then again, who would watch that crap when you've got six channels of PBS?

(Mind you, I'm not saying they don't encrypt those channels in some markets -- but they're not supposed to.)

Re:uh

[Dynedain]

TWC is big enough that they can play hardball with the content providers to the benefit of their subscribers..

The reality is that since Time-Warner Cable IS A CONTENT PROVIDER they have very little incentive to do so, and instead have every temptation to stifle competitive content generation and distribution.

Re:uh

[DeadboltX]

While I agree that the app would be immensely more useful if you could use it over 3G or on the free WiFi at Starbucks or at my friends house, I also believe that this app still holds a place for usefulness.

If your house doesn't have enough TVs for everyone and you all want to watch something different then this will come in handy. You can now watch TV while cooking in the kitchen without buying one of those little counter top TVs. You can go outside for a smoke break without missing any of 'the game.' You can watch TV on your patio while BBQing or supervising the kids while they swim in the pool. You can prop it up on your desk in your home office so you can watch while you work.

There are all sorts of places in and around a home that don't normally have TV access. If anything this could be a reasonable argument to a spouse or parent for justifying getting one "But mom, it's a TV too!"

Re:uh

[Silentknyght]

If your house doesn't have enough TVs for everyone and you all want to watch something different then this will come in handy.

A 50" state-of-the-art TV costs as much as an iPad. If you don't have enough TVs, this seems like an poor solution for all but the very most fringe cases.

Re:uh

[anyGould]

It's not a story of what this app does, it's a story of what this app doesn't do. It can't leave home WiFi, won't work while a passenger in a moving bus/train, it essentially acts as a hand-held TV only where you already can put a TV.

With the added benefit of counting against your bandwidth caps!

This is really a sucker's bet.

They tried. They failed. Here's what's left...

[LostCluster]

Watching your TV content outside the home has always been crippled by legal agreements between the content owners and distributors. See, if TV was available on the web without restriction, they wouldn't be able to charge the bar and restaurant owners the high per-TV rates they do now. So we're stuck with a fancy iPad app that turns your iPad into a small TV but only when you're on your home WiFi. Sure it could work over 3G, but that's not a deal Time Warner Cable wants to write... and by doing so may be protecting the space from somebody who does want to do such a deal.

Re:They tried. They failed. Here's what's left...

[Pieroxy]

Whan you are a content distributor and you do so much to make sure your viewers cannot view your content, there must be something wrong.

In Which Case

[techsoldaten]

In which case, I can use my iPad to watch live TV while I am watching live TV on my TV. It's like picture in picture that I can actually hold and it doesn't stop me from using picture in picture AGAIN while I am watching.

The drawback is that this means no more beating off to Telemundo with the sound off, my hands are going to be too busy flipping around the iPad while I work the remote to capture the money scenes on the DVR and watch them in slomo.

Next we NEED a DVR app for the iPad.

No, it's not illegal.

[tomhudson]

And its illegal to use OTA for public display of sporting events. I realize sports aren't big to slashdot users, but if you've ever watched any major sporting event like a NFL or MLB game, or a big race ... the first thing you hear and see is a 'no rebroadcasting without permission'.

No, it's not. First, showing it isn't rebroadcasting.

Second, the ban on public display is only for screen sizes of 55" and greater. Don't you remember the fuss about churches being told that 55" screens were too big for watching the superbowl ?

Places are prohibited from charging admission to watch the Super Bowl, and the law prevents them from showing the game on a TV bigger than 55 inches.

Re:itards...

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

You don't get it. Ask any [iDevice fan] and right now he is twittering/fbing frantically on just how UBER SUPER COOL his tablet is, that he can now watch TV AT HOME!!!!!!!!11!!!

I'm not saying this is or isn't a true statement, but...

• http://twitter.com/#!/taawd/status/47751718020194304
• http://twitter.com/#!/ashleexk/status/47772853537488896
• http://twitter.com/#!/KenoComberbun/status/47777150501265409
• http://twitter.com/SCB8/statuses/47402067702194176

Heck, have them all: http://twitter.com/search/ipad%20tv%20time%20warner%20sweet#search?q=ipad%20tv%20time%20warner%20cool (though "uber" turned up nothing ;)

Yes, really

[SuperKendall]

WTF, you're going to spend $500 or more on an iPad so you can ... watch tv?!?

And play games and use it as a highly portable latop when travellign and draw and make music...

But all that is besides the point, because I think I would pay $500 not to have to bother with a cable box.

And of course you can send the display to a real TV if you wish.

Re:Yeah, exactly!

[AK Marc]

Sure, but I've never watched TV on a laptop. Never seen a need to. See the distinction?

That you are a prick that assumes no one else on the planet would ever want anything different than you? Yes, I think I see that distinction.

I think its a great idea

[Shivetya]

because I can flip over to the news on the iPad while outdoors reading or the like. I can have it running in the kitchen when cooking, even turn it on in the morning in the bathroom while shaving or the like. In short, anywhere where it would be nice to have a TV but I am not willing to buy one. I looked into putting a TV behind the bathroom mirror but decided against it from a cost stand point. I do not have a computer or TV in the bedroom but an infrequent use item like the iPad might get a pass.

Call me odd, but I don't have televisions all throughout my house. I have two. One in the den and one in the exercise room. A portable television that has real functionality other than, well tv, would be awesome.