# Cox flareWatch beta brings IPTV with 60 HD channels, cloud DVR for $35 monthly



## Athlon646464 (Feb 23, 2007)

Cox flareWatch beta brings IPTV with 60 HD channels, cloud DVR for $35 monthly

While everyone tries to figure out what the future of TV looks like, Variety reports Cox Cable has crossed over to offering internet TV service to customers in Orange County. flareWatch beta testers can buy a Fanhattan Fan TV set-top box for $99 (up to three per household) and sign up for a TV package that features 90 live TV channels (60 in HD) and includes the usual favorites like ESPN / ESPN2, AMC, CNN, Nickelodeon and TNT, with video on-demand coming soon. DVR recordings take place in the cloud, with 30 hours of storage available for each subscriber.

Full Story Here









_Engadget_


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Again, is this available across the board, or only to existing Cox customers? If it's restricted, I don't see the point.


----------



## coolman302003 (Jun 2, 2008)

SayWhat? said:


> Again, is this available across the board, or only to existing Cox customers?


According to the fine print at the bottom of http://watchflare.com/ > _flareWatch is available only to Cox High Speed Internet subscribers with Preferred tier or higher who reside in Orange County, CA service area._


----------



## trdrjeff (Dec 3, 2007)

That would be quite do-able for me, someone thinking of 'cord cutting'


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

^ But that's the problem. It's not accomplishing that if this is only available to existing Cox cable subscribers. It's just saying that those already paying Cox can pay them more for this option.

Now, if Cox were to make this available to anyone nationwide whether they're in a Cox service area or not, THAT would be doing something towards cord cutting.


----------



## Athlon646464 (Feb 23, 2007)

^^^

_"flareWatch is available only to Cox High Speed Internet subscribers with Preferred tier or higher"_

If I'm understanding this correctly, you don't need to subscribe to their cable, just their internet. ('Preferred tier' is their fastest internet, and is $54 per month in Providence.)

So, if you live in a Cox area and already have their internet it might make sense for you.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

^^ But if you have Cox Internet, you're in a Cox service area. I'm talking about people like me out in the boonies with no access to cable, where satellite is our only option. Something like this might be competition for Dish and Direct.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

SayWhat? said:


> ^^ But if you have Cox Internet, you're in a Cox service area. I'm talking about people like me out in the boonies with no access to cable, where satellite is our only option. Something like this might be competition for Dish and Direct.


But how would they offer it to you if you don't have cable service to begin with?


----------



## Athlon646464 (Feb 23, 2007)

^^^
Agreed. 

Intel is planning something similar nationwide. If they do something similar to this Cox deal, Intel could be your answer some day.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

TheRatPatrol said:


> But how would they offer it to you if you don't have cable service to begin with?


You can have internet without having cable service from Cox.


----------



## bidger (Nov 19, 2005)

SayWhat? said:


> Now, if Cox were to make this available to anyone nationwide whether they're in a Cox service area or not, THAT would be doing something towards cord cutting.


Unlike satellite, cable is territorial and the likelihood of Cox offering this, or most any other cable co., as a standalone service is remote.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Athlon646464 said:


> ^^^
> 
> _"flareWatch is available only to Cox High Speed Internet subscribers with Preferred tier or higher"_
> 
> ...


A new customer Fios *triple* play in this area, before monthly hardware charges, is currently $79 plus tax. That includes 340 channels (90 HD), if you agree to commit for 2 years.

You can also get a similar deal from Cablevision.

Two DVRs and a STB from each of them runs about $50/month, IIRC, wiht no upfront charges.


----------



## trdrjeff (Dec 3, 2007)

I already have Cox internet here, if I were to "cord cut" I would not go without internet. That's why I put it in quotes, it's not really cutting all cords...


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

bidger said:


> Unlike satellite, cable is territorial and the likelihood of Cox offering this, or most any other cable co., as a standalone service is remote.


That's what we need to get past. We need to break that way of thinking.

But, I'm also opposed to the notion of regions for DVDs and geo-blocking of streaming from other countries.


----------



## Athlon646464 (Feb 23, 2007)

Steve said:


> So it's a $114/month *double* play with 90 channels and up to $300 in up front hardware costs? Unfortunately, not much of an incentive for cord-cutting, IMHO.


Wouldn't it be $89 ($54 + $35)?



trdrjeff said:


> I already have Cox internet here, if I were to "cord cut" I would not go without internet. That's why I put it in quotes, it's not really cutting all cords...


Cord cutting means you would get everything through your internet connection, so of course you would not go without internet.

The term 'cord cutting' refers mostly to cable TV, satellite TV and land line phone systems (in other words, traditional systems).


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Athlon646464 said:


> Wouldn't it be $89 ($54 + $35)?


Right you are. I must be getting dyslexic in my old age.  I swapped the 60 channels with the monthly charge.

Fixed my post.


----------



## Athlon646464 (Feb 23, 2007)

:grin:

Happens to me all the time, my friend. Thank goodness for spell checkers!


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

How does this affect your data cap?


----------



## Athlon646464 (Feb 23, 2007)

studechip said:


> How does this affect your data cap?


I don't think they'll have one for these customers.......


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

bidger said:


> Unlike satellite, cable is territorial and the likelihood of Cox offering this, or most any other cable co., as a standalone service is remote.


But with this being an IPTV product....the customer wouldn't need to live in a Cox territory. They could just use their existing ISP. Same thing that D* did when they offered NFLST Online to non-D* subscribers.


----------



## Athlon646464 (Feb 23, 2007)

Justin23 said:


> But with this being an IPTV product....the customer wouldn't need to live in a Cox territory. They could just use their existing ISP. Same thing that D* did when they offered NFLST Online to non-D* subscribers.


For this particular one you'll need to be a Cox internet sub.......


----------



## Justin23 (Jan 11, 2008)

Athlon646464 said:


> For this particular one you'll need to be a Cox internet sub.......


I understand that you will need to have Cox Internet for this service. The post I quoted in my response said that the likelihood of a cableco offering this as a standalone was small...

My point was that with an IPTV product, territories don't matter.


----------



## Athlon646464 (Feb 23, 2007)

Technically 'territories' do matter with nearly all streaming services. If you live outside of an area Cox serves you won't be able to get the service being discussed here, obviously.

But even huge services like Netflix and Hulu are unavailable in some countries for example, and their offerings can vary from region to region as well. Most IPTV products are usually restricted in some way regardless of where you live.

I'm looking forward to seeing how that Intel service evolves.

http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/206040-can-intel%E2%80%99s-web-tv-compete-with-dish-and-directv/


----------

