Home » Editorial & Site News » Recent Articles:

Fail: Time Warner Cable’s TWCable TV iPad App Is a Complete Mess

Phillip Dampier July 8, 2011 Editorial & Site News, Online Video 12 Comments

The performance doesn't match the promise.

Time Warner Cable took a fine free iPad app allowing authenticated cable TV customers to watch dozens of national cable networks and turned it into a complete disaster in its latest upgrade, now dubbed TWCable TV App for iPad.

Under no circumstances should you consider running this until the inexcusable bugs are worked out in a future release.

We tried this app at Stop the Cap! HQ last evening and ran into immediate problems — troubles shared by the majority of app users who took the time to bottom rate the app in Apple’s App Store.

  1. On several attempts, the application claimed we were running a modified version of the Apple iPad 2’s basic software.  While “jailbreaking” iPad to improve the user experience is important for some, it has never been for us, and we are running an unmodified original firmware version of iPad 2.  But you can’t tell that to Time Warner Cable — the app will refuse to run when this error message displays.
  2. When we were able to launch the application, we found the expanded channel lineup, which now includes around 100 national cable networks enticing… if we could manage to watch any of them.  Within two minutes of launching any channel, we found a frozen, unrecoverable picture.  The only way to restore viewing was to exit the channel and start again.  It left things completely unwatchable.  A few dozen channels you can watch or 100 you cannot watch?  This was not an improvement.
  3. The “interactive program guide” addition allows users to see program listings for up to 7 days. Customers can also configure the guide to display only their favorite channels, in order to avoid scrolling through the entire channel line-up.  That last feature is essential — it will take you 7 days of eternal tedium to scroll through hundreds of channels looking for something to actually watch.  Cable companies need to abandon the traditional “program guide” and deliver an improved service that answers this basic question: what do YOU want to watch.  If I am in the mood for mysteries, show me what I can see.  If I want one of those cheap “true crime” documentaries, let me select from a seedy list of those shows either on now or upcoming.  It no longer matters what is showing on each channel at any time.  We want program content, not a recitation of upcoming programming on the Yarn Channel.
  4. The ability to tune the set-top box from within the new guide in the app. Simply tap on a network logo within the iPad program guide or the “watch on TV” button within the program description to tune directly to the channel.  Playing around with this feature only showed one of my set top boxes — the DVR in the living room.  The one in the bedroom is apparently the bad child you want to forget.  It doesn’t show up at all.  This feature turns your iPad into a glorified remote control.  Its most useful function is to annoy your family as you change channels from another room.  Sick and tired of your significant other watching Design on a Dime when you could be watching Columbo?  Just change the channel on them.  Again and again.
  5. The new app theoretically allows you to remotely manage your DVR recordings.  I say ‘theoretically’ because it worked only inconsistently.  I repeatedly found recordings I wanted to “manage” were completely unmanageable with the app, exiting with an error message.

Time Warner’s control freak mentality over jailbroken versions of iPad no doubt deals with their nightmare scenario: you might be an “unauthenticated” cable cord cutter trying to watch their networks for free, or even worse, record them for later viewing.  It took all of a few hours for iPad enthusiasts to outwit the cable company and work around this roadblock.

Perhaps it’s wrong to complain loudly about a free app like this, but with all of the negative reviews and basic functionality problems, one wonders who beta tested this thing?

Big Brother: Hollywood & Your Internet Provider Will Be Checking Your Download Activity to ‘Protect You’

Stop the Cap! readers Tom and Scott both sent word that the music industry, Hollywood studios, and your Internet Service Provider have teamed up to begin inspecting your downloading activity looking for evidence you are grabbing illegal, copyrighted content from the Internet.

ISPs ranging from Comcast, Verizon, Time Warner Cable, Cablevision, and AT&T are installing the “Copyright Alert System,” an industry-approved “solution” to copyright theft of online content.  Your ISP will receive word if either the music or movie industry suspects you are trying to download an episode of your favorite TV show or latest Hollywood film from an “unauthorized” download site.  Then, the ISP will start sending you warnings or redirect your web browsing to Alert Purgatory, the place where you learn you are suspected of copyright theft, but haven’t yet been convicted for it.

If you don’t contact your ISP straight away to protest your innocence, your provider may then begin redirecting all of your web journeys to the copyright theft warning website and leave you there until you convince your ISP you are not doing anything wrong.

The voluntary agreement between service providers and copyright owners delivers very little to consumers, despite protestations to the contrary by the cable industry lobbying group — the National Cable & Telecommunications Association.

“Consumers have a right to know if their broadband account is being used for illegal online content theft, or if their own online activity infringes on copyright rules—inadvertently or otherwise—so that they can correct that activity,” said James Assey, executive vice president of the NCTA.

Innocent or not, consumers who wish to seek an independent review before their ISP redirects every web address to the enforcement page, can get one — for the low, low price of $35.

Where that money ultimately goes is anybody’s guess, and nobody yet understands the exact mechanism of how consumers can prove their innocence.

Stop the Cap! believes this system does not serve consumers well.  Copyright enforcement measures taken by the music and movie industry in the past have proven to be far from well-targeted, using a “sue first, ask questions later” approach that has cost some consumers thousands of dollars to settle threatened litigation that would have cost far more to defend in court — guilty or not.

YouTube videos cited for copyright enforcement claims may irritate those who uploaded them, but never put YouTube visitors at risk of the Copyright Alert System just for landing on one that a studio executive deemed copyright theft.  Forcing a consumer to pay $35 to defend themselves from watching that New Order music video from the 1980s is simply unacceptable.

Copyright theft is a serious problem, and we don’t blame content owners for seeking to protect what is rightfully theirs.  But as we have learned over the last 20 years, overzealous protection measures have always backfired.  Openly available, legally accessed content from sites like Hulu have put a major dent in illegal downloading of entertainment from torrent sites and file hosting providers.  It’s more convenient, and the studios sell well-tolerated advertising to help pay for the costs.

Solutions like that are far superior than spying on web traffic looking for “illegal downloads” using unknown mechanisms which could prove as unreliable as earlier copyright enforcement efforts.  In the past, profit-making companies with an incentive to identify “theft” have been hired to ferret out those suspected to stealing online movies and music.  With a financial motive to lean towards guilt before innocence, subscribers confront the very real possibility they’ll have to pay $35 to try and prove a negative – that they didn’t engage in illegal downloading.

Reason #438 AT&T and T-Mobile Should Not Be Allowed to Merge: What Rural Service Improvement?

Is this a T-Mobile priority coverage zone?

One of the “benefits” AT&T’s lobbying team claims will come with a merger between AT&T and T-Mobile is improved wireless service for rural America.

But an investigation into T-Mobile’s urban-focused coverage, and AT&T’s own recent rural past prove those claimed benefits simply don’t make any sense.

Although rural and small town America is increasingly aware of AT&T, that comes mostly from the company’s recent acquisitions, not from mass expansion projects to blanket rural America with AT&T iPhones.  AT&T has been on a shopping spree for smaller regional wireless carriers for the last five years, picking up resources through acquisition, not from independent investment.  But a buyout of T-Mobile will bring no new assets for AT&T’s presence in rural America.  It will simply reduce competition in larger communities the same way AT&T cut out competitors in rural markets.

Just ask customers of Dobson Cellular.  In 2007, AT&T bought the rural provider, doing business as Cellular One, for $2.8 billion dollars and converted customers to AT&T.  Dobson was the largest cell phone company around in Alaska and rural Michigan.  In fact, the company provided roaming capability to customers of AT&T and T-Mobile who ventured into the rural areas Dobson specialized in serving.

After the conversion, did service improve for the newly acquired AT&T customers?

“No way,” says ex-Cellular One customer Jim Duncan who lives in a former Dobson service area in Michigan. “AT&T ruined cell phone service when they got here with dropped calls and phantom busy signals, turning a friendly local-focused company into one where you are just an account number reaching some national call center.”

Acquired by AT&T in 2007

Duncan says AT&T never cared one bit about rural Michigan before buying Dobson, and in his view, still doesn’t.

“Smaller markets are an afterthought for AT&T and T-Mobile has zero impact (and customers) in my area, so I have no idea what great improvements a merger will bring to our part of Michigan that neither company paid much attention to,” Duncan says.

That same year, AT&T also grabbed spectrum worth $2.5 billion with its acquisition of Aloha Partners, which spent time at FCC auctions buying up 700Mhz spectrum and then eventually reselling it at a profit to wireless carriers.  AT&T didn’t just buy some of Aloha’s spectrum, it acquired the whole partnership.

Acquired by AT&T in 2008.

In April 2008, Edge Wireless customers in southern Oregon, northern California, southeastern Idaho and Jackson, Wyoming discovered they were well on their way to becoming AT&T customers, too.  AT&T acquired Edge and rebranded it AT&T. That hardly represents investment and dedicated expansion into rural Rocky Mountain states — AT&T simply bought up another company that did.

Also in 2008, AT&T snapped up Centennial Communications, a considerable-sized regional player in the central United States.  Centennial delivered service in less urban areas in Indiana, Ohio, and Michigan in the north, and Louisiana, Texas, and Mississippi in the south.  One million customers, Centennial’s spectrum and name all became part of AT&T.  Did service improve for Centennial customers with that merger?

“Overall, it stayed the same when it was Centennial and switched to AT&T,” says our reader Kevin, who now lives in Ft. Wayne, Ind.  “We did get access to the iPhone, but along with it came AT&T’s infamous dropped calls and lousy customer service.”

Acquired by AT&T in late 2008.

Kevin switched to Verizon Wireless earlier this year.

“If I was the FCC, I wouldn’t approve this merger because it promises nothing for rural America or anyone else,” says Kevin. “AT&T had a presence in Indiana before they bought Centennial, so all the deal did was reduce competition in this state.”

Centennial’s service areas were not exactly among T-Mobile’s priority coverage areas, either.

Acquired by AT&T in 2011?

“T-Who?,” Kevin asks.  “We’re aware of them now, but I don’t know anyone who has service with them.”

The real unanswered question is what AT&T is doing with all of the rural spectrum it already owns, controls, or has acquired.  How will an acquisition of an urban-focused carrier help deliver improved service in the rural markets both companies have traditionally ignored?

Answer: It won’t.

[flv width=”480″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WANE Ft Wayne Centennial Joins ATT 10-09 and 02-10.flv[/flv]

WANE-TV in Ft. Wayne, Ind., covered the merger of Centennial and AT&T back in 2009 and early 2010.  Fort Wayne was the home of a major regional office for Centennial.  (4 minutes)

 

Verizon’s Buffalo Bamboozle: WNY Data Center Never Materializes, and Why It Never Would Have

Economically-challenged western New York will take any new high-tech jobs it can find, which is why local politicians threw parties when Verizon announced interest in building a multi-billion dollar data center on the shores of Lake Ontario, in the Niagara County community of Somerset.

Covered last fall by Stop the Cap!, the project would have created up to 200 high-paying jobs, representing a feather in the cap for economic development efforts upstate cities have been engaged in even before the Great Recession.

Verizon’s Wish List

Just a few things seemed to be standing in the way, according to Verizon’s lobbyists.  Among them, an unfavorable piece of legislation that was pending in 2010, introduced by Assemblyman Richard Brodsky (D-Westchester) and Senator Brian X. Foley (D-Blue Point).  New York Assembly Bill 2208/Senate Bill 7263 came in response to watching Verizon selling off pieces of its landline network to Frontier Communications, and both Albany politicians did not want to see a repeat of that in New York State, unless Verizon shared the wealth with ratepayers in the form of credits on their monthly phone bills (or expanded broadband rollout in rural areas of the state).

That bill languished and eventually failed to be adopted by the legislature, so Verizon ultimately had few worries from Albany.  But Verizon’s wish list grew longer even as the fall days grew shorter.

The proposed site for Verizon's data center in Somerset, N.Y., which will now continue to offer a clear view to Lake Ontario. (Courtesy: WIVB-TV Buffalo)

The company sought a 20-year payment-in-lieu-of-taxes, or PILOT agreement, getting Verizon off the hook for high New York State taxes — particularly western New York’s property taxes, recognized as the highest in the nation.  The company would also be able to obtain cheap hydropower, an important proposition in an area charged some of the highest electricity rates in the country.  Verizon even sought a sales tax exemption on building materials and technology to be used inside the new data center.  That’s nothing to sneeze at either, considering Niagara County’s 8% sales tax rate.

In all, Verizon would have saved at least $330 million if their wish list of taxes waivers and benefits was approved.

With the help of state senator George Maziarz (R-Newfane), Verizon seemed well on its way to winning those concessions from the state.

And Then Came The Neighbor Across the Street, Ms. Mary Ann Rizzo

As the state worked to fulfill Verizon’s checklist, all seemed on track to break ground until one Somerset resident in her 70s, Ms. Mary Ann Rizzo, began asking some hard questions.

Rizzo owns 116 acres of land across the street.  She wondered what kind of impact a multi-billion dollar project like this would have on her and other neighbors, and wanted the state to complete due diligence on an environmental impact review that somehow magically got cut short within five weeks of the application being filed.

She hired attorney Art Giacalone to make sure New York State was following its own procedures in approving the largest project ever proposed for Niagara County in more than a half century.  Giacalone found a lightning-fast approval by Somerset town officials and one of the fastest reviews by state officials he’d ever seen.

Rizzo filed suit, but it was dismissed by a judge back in January.  Rizzo’s attorney filed a notice of appeal, and Verizon’s attorneys asked the court to speed up the process, something the Rochester judge hearing the case refused.

Within days of that, Verizon announced it was pulling the plug on the data center in Somerset, and Maziarz promptly laid blame at the feet of Ms. Rizzo.

Maziarz - 'It's all that woman's fault.'

The Misdirected Blame Game

“It just shows you how one person who owns property across the street, doesn’t even live on the property, but just owns property across the street has killed this up to $5 billion project,” Maziarz said.  “She is totally responsible for [Verizon’s] decision.”

That set local talk radio afire as local residents vilified Rizzo, as did some in the Buffalo and Niagara Falls press.

Verizon said it was considering taking its data center to Wyoming instead.

While Rizzo was in court and Maziarz was spending time cutting red tape for Verizon, the company acquired Teremark, a very large provider of data hosting services and cloud storage.  So large and important that Verizon touted the acquisition as providing at least $500 million in “synergies,” allowing cost-cutting and Verizon to transfer some of its data center needs to Teremark facilities, which is exactly what happened.

Nope, it's not being built in Laramie, Wyo. either.

In fact, while Verizon was complaining about New York’s foot-dragging, company officials were planning to close several of Verizon’s existing data centers, making the need to break ground for a new one on the shores of Lake Ontario unnecessary.

Wyoming officials rolled out a similar red carpet for Verizon, with Gov. Matt Mead budgeting $14 million towards a data center incentive package.  That’s a considerable sum for a state with only a half-million residents.

This week, we learned Wyoming was the second state to be left behind by Verizon, who abandoned plans for the data center proposed near Laramie.

“As a result of the acquisition, we do not have plans at this time to build a data center in Wyoming,” Verizon spokeswoman Lynn Staggs told the Laramie Boomerang. “The Terremark acquisition, announced earlier this year, provides Verizon with the chance to accelerate its data center and cloud strategy.”

In other words, Verizon bought its own solution.

Even if New York delivered on all of the legislative and tax abatement changes Verizon wanted, and Ms. Rizzo never existed, Verizon would still not be spending time on the beach at Somerset or wandering the wide open spaces of Laramie.  But they might have walked away with some nice deregulatory parting gifts without having to show a thing for it — gifts that the state of Wyoming already budgeted for companies like Verizon, all for a data center they won’t build.

A tip for rational living: Before handing everything a large telecommunications company wants on a silver platter, get the commitment in writing and be prepared to rescind those offers if the company pulls out.

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Buffalo Media React to Verizon Data Center Project Canceled 3-2011.flv[/flv]

Watch as Buffalo’s TV newscasts opened the floodgates for a wholesale blame game over a failed multi-billion dollar project Verizon was unlikely to ever build after acquiring Teremark.  (WGRZ/WIVB/WKBW)  (15 minutes)

Media Fail: While American Networks Ignore AT&T/T-Mobile Merger, Russia Today Exposes the Truth

[flv width=”490″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/RT ATT Buys Support from Non-Profits 6-10-11.flv[/flv]

It’s a bad day for American television journalism when Russian State Television manages to tell viewers the facts about the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile that American networks ignore.  Russia Today is Moscow’s external television service, and delivers English language news to a global audience.  Public Knowledge’s Art Brodsky gets to tell RT viewers the real facts about dollar-a-holler groups advocating for AT&T,  a story American networks might not want to share with AT&T ad dollars at risk!  (7 minutes)

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!