• by David Goetzl  @dgoetzl, July 1, 2013

It looks as if Intel will pull the plug soon on its efforts to create a version of the traditional cable service. There are a number of reasons to do so, but the most immediate may simply be a new CEO wanting to deploy resources elsewhere.

Brian Krzanich, who took the role in May, seems intent on finding ways for Intel to insert more of its technology into smartphones and tablets. The potential growth there is obviously enormous -- and working with mobile would avoid the tussling with increasingly confident content companies a TV service would require.

Details have been murky about Intel’s intentions in TV, though the Wall Street Journal reported in February a launch date was scheduled for later this year. But that was before Intel apparently started realizing cable operators have built moats around their businesses, and networks don’t want to upset the current ecosystem that makes them increasingly wealthy. Translation: They could be wary of selling content to Intel.

From a tech standpoint, Intel apparently has built some sort of set-top box that can blow away incumbents with search features and other functions. It would work with TV in the living room, while the Intel service presumably would also stream programming online.

An Intel executive said in February the set-top box will offer a camera and facial recognition technology that can determine who is watching. That would allow more relevant programming to be offered, according to the Journal. Also, social TV would be extended in some fashion, with the opportunity for family members to appear onscreen Skype-like and exchange commentary about what they’re watching.

But Intel’s “we surrender” moment -- when the company acknowledged the problems of acquiring content and launching a potential challenge to Comcast or DirecTV -- may have come Friday, when Krzanich sounded awfully bearish on the prospect. In light of how troublesome it can be to get a Viacom or Disney to sell it content, he reportedly said, “We believe from a technology standpoint we've built a game-changing device … We are trying to evaluate what do we do now, and how do we best utilize this technology -- and what is our business model. We are just being cautious.”

As mentioned, Krzanich may have begun hemming and hawing because he believes better opportunities lie in areas more within the company’s core competencies. At the end of the day, Intel may move toward a licensing model where it offers its TV technology to cable and satellite operators.

But the technology may just fall under the umbrella of too much too soon, or too much ever. A camera determining who’s watching in order to offer appealing programming options seems a bit much, even for those who love technology. Operators are already focusing on recommendation engines that may not feel as much like Big Brother.

Intel’s would-be struggle makes what Google has done more impressive by launching its Google Fiber distribution service in Kansas City, which is expanding into other markets. The company has been willing to meet content companies’ prices, though there are some differences from the Intel initiative.

Notably, it isn’t looking to upend the traditional model of what cable operators do, just do it better. It isn’t looking to inspire a generation of cord-cutters, perhaps soothing content companies. Google's TV service doesn’t have some element looking to make all TV mobile and available on the go. Google also differs by offering broadband service, which is faster than traditional offerings, with a free option.

Google also has not pursued an a la carte model, looking to acquire programming and offer only the most popular channels so consumers pay less. In efforts to upend the traditional bundle, Intel may have proposed a system that networks felt was a no-go.

In February, though, the Journal reported Intel Media head Erik Huggers indicated content providers have been part of Intel’s development process from early on.  So, if Intel is able to persevere and launch a robust TV service, it would go down as a surprise. But it is too bad for consumers. Choice is welcome as prices rise. (It’s been disappointing from a consumer advocate perspective that Google hasn’t tried to compete much on cost.)

For years, Dish Network portrayed itself as the bargain option in the distribution business. The company's marketing would tout its attractive pricing. Now, the company is looking to win on technology. Much has been written about its battles with networks over a feature that automatically removes commercials. But it’s been heavily promoting its Dish Anywhere service that allows a customer to watch live and recorded TV outside the home.

There would seem to be an opening in the market for a provider to take the former Dish mantle as the one with the most attractive pricing. But a company steeped in technology like Intel isn’t going to go that route. In the TV business, it looks like it will be Intel Outside.