The FCC is considering an “Unlock The Box” proposal that would require TV providers in the United States to provide their content in a way that would let you access the channels you pay for on something other than a cable box. But the TV industry has been arguing that the proposal is unnecessary because providers are already working toward a future where you don’t need to buy a dedicated cable box.

Now Comcast is taking a big step in that direction. The cable giant is launching an Xfinity TV Partner program that lets subscribers watch their shows using an app on a Roku or a 2016 Samsung Smart TV. You don’t need to rent a cable box.

xfinity partner

In a blog post, Comcast Senior Vice President Mark Hess says customers will get the same Xfinity TV guide, live and on-demand content, and cloud DVR features that they would get from a cable box.

And that’s a key difference between the approach Comcast and other TV providers are taking and the one that’s actually advocated in the FCC’s Unlock The Box proposal.

That’s because the proposal as it stands means you wouldn’t have to use Comcast’s TV guide or user interface. Instead, third-party hardware and software companies would be able to re-package it in different ways that could be faster, offer better search features, or other changes.

So unlocking the box could give consumers more choice not just in the hardware they use, but also in how they interact with content. But TV providers worry that giving up control of the user guide, position of channels in the lineup, and other elements would weaken their ability to negotiate deals with content creators. So they’re fighting back and offering up “Eliminate The Box,” app-based alternatives like the one Comcast just announced.

Both sides of the debate envision a future where you might not have to rent a cable box anymore… but another key difference is that one approach would be regulated, while the other is strictly voluntary.

Comcast’s Mark Hess argues that the launch of the Xfinity TV Partner program shows that FCC’s proposed regulation is unnecessary. But the announcement comes about a month after Verizon announced plans to shut down its FiOS TV apps for smart TVs and Xbox game consoles.

The FCC is accepting comments on the proposal through April 22nd (use procedure number 16-42 to leave a comment).

Comcast says while Roku and Samsung are two of its first partners, the Xfinity TV Partner program is open to others. Roku and Samsung TV users will be able to start using Comcast apps in lieu of cable boxes later this year.

Want to know more about the debate over the future of TV delivery in the United States? I dug into this issue for the LPX podcast recently. You can find more details on web page for that episode, or just click the play button below to listen:

Support Liliputing

Liliputing's primary sources of revenue are advertising and affiliate links (if you click the "Shop" button at the top of the page and buy something on Amazon, for example, we'll get a small commission).

But there are several ways you can support the site directly even if you're using an ad blocker* and hate online shopping.

Contribute to our Patreon campaign


Contribute via PayPal

* If you are using an ad blocker like uBlock Origin and seeing a pop-up message at the bottom of the screen, we have a guide that may help you disable it.

Subscribe to Liliputing via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 9,543 other subscribers

9 replies on “Comcast to let you watch cable TV without a cable box (using Roku or other supported smart TVs)”

  1. This is seemingly just streaming, which is not the same. For one thing, your ISP (including a lot of Comcast areas) may have caps. For another, streaming is not as reliable as having a locally recorded version of a program. No way would I give up a real DVR for a Cloud DVR, even if the Cloud DVR allowed you to avoid commercials.

  2. Wait around for these scum private monopolies to do the right thing? No, this is not a debate or choice. Get rid of the stupid boxes which are destructive to the environment, create all kinds of pollution and waste. Make the guide open standards with viewer right to change the guide as they want.

  3. In this same vein, there’s no longer any real reason to maintain the local/regional monopoly that cable providers enjoy. You still need some internet infrastructure, so your internet provider gets to enjoy a monopoly for a little while longer.’ll be interested in seeing how they can justify that going forward.

    1. I’d be delighted if the FCC would challenge state bans on municipal broadband services. There is absolutely no reason why the “free market” can’t handle a little competition from the public sector. If my city can provide more reliable broadband at a lower cost than the private DSL and Cable providers, so be it.

      1. Civics-101: Letting the rule-makers compete with those they make the rules for is a recipe for corruption. And another thing: when was the last time Big Government did anything efficiently and cheaply?

        1. “Big governments” in every western nation other than the US provide national healthcare services to their *entire* population (with similar health outcomes) at a far lower cost than the private US system, and have been doing so for decades already. Mobile phone competition has thrived in the EU under a stricter regulatory framework that has also helped to drive down prices for the consumer compared to the hands off approach in the US.

          Also, providing a regulatory framework that protects consumers from price gouging in an industry where the barrier for entry for the competition are extremely high is exactly the type of thing the government should be doing.

          1. In this case, the government is the entity responsible for erecting the barriers to entry for the market in the first place.

  4. Verizon on the other hand still can’t even provide all the local channels (CWTV) with their app.

Comments are closed.