# TiVo, please, let us know about SDV fix status...



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

One simple question would be enough to get answered for now (well, and follow ups, but still ):

is the planned fix for this in development, or is it still just a vague concept? 

I just want to know that there is a viable solution for it, and not something they are considering doing but don't even know how yet...


----------



## demon (Nov 15, 2006)

Indeed. I don't think I'm in an area that'll be subject to SDV for awhile (most of the guys at my local cableco probably could barely spell it); but inquiring minds do want to know. The current talk is of a USB-attached dongle - how will it work? When can those affected get it? Will it be a purchased device, or will it be rented through the cableco?


----------



## cjhrph (Sep 11, 2003)

I hear you. I want to invest in a TivoHD, but am in a TWC area with SDV. Currently, there' only a few channels switched. I am fearful that once I get the machine alot more will go to SDV and I'll be left without. 


So, no sale for TIVO....


----------



## dubluv (Mar 3, 2006)

cjhrph said:


> I hear you. I want to invest in a TivoHD, but am in a TWC area with SDV. Currently, there' only a few channels switched. I am fearful that once I get the machine alot more will go to SDV and I'll be left without.
> 
> So, no sale for TIVO....


from what i've read to date, SDV seems to be for less watched channels, and major network HD and mainstream HD channels will not be SDV anytime soon. btw, for under $300 you can get your tivoHD now, if you wait til the next technology you'll never get anything. small risk, but great device. i love mine.


----------



## pkscout (Jan 11, 2003)

dubluv said:


> from what i've read to date, SDV seems to be for less watched channels, and major network HD and mainstream HD channels will not be SDV anytime soon. btw, for under $300 you can get your tivoHD now, if you wait til the next technology you'll never get anything. small risk, but great device. i love mine.


Simply untrue. If you've read this forum at all, you know TWC Hawaii is going SDV for all digital channels. And TWC here in RDU is going to do something very similar with the digital simulcast of the 1-99 channels. All those will be on SDV.


----------



## 1003 (Jul 14, 2000)

*Locally*
Comcast can be absolutely counted on to do whatever gets more of thier pathetic basic boxes or HD-DVRs in the field making rental fees. Converting several of the most popular basic channels to digital was thier first indication that they would be making these decisions based on getting as many customers as possible addicted to the cable box before regulations or improved technology comes along...


----------



## cdp1276 (Mar 25, 2003)

dubluv said:


> from what i've read to date, SDV seems to be for less watched channels, and major network HD and mainstream HD channels will not be SDV anytime soon. btw, for under $300 you can get your tivoHD now, if you wait til the next technology you'll never get anything. small risk, but great device. i love mine.


That's not true, take a look at the list of channels that I don't get with TW here in Rochester, NY. They also recently have added ESPN2 HD and ESPNU that I also don't get via CableCard. Those seem like mainstream channels to me. Plus the best part is that they have yet to deploy SDV here. So they are just blocking a bunch of channels it seems in prep for that to CC customers.

http://www.timewarnercable.com/rochester/products/cablecard.html


----------



## cjhrph (Sep 11, 2003)

So, the $64000 question is : 

If your in a TWC area, do you take the chance on buying the Series3 or HDTivo and just hope that the mystical device for SDV appears?


----------



## BrianAZ (Aug 13, 2007)

Has anyone found out what channels COX Phoenix will move to SDV? I've sent them an email myself and am awaiting a response. I hope the SDV solution arrives soon...


----------



## pkscout (Jan 11, 2003)

cjhrph said:


> So, the $64000 question is :
> 
> If your in a TWC area, do you take the chance on buying the Series3 or HDTivo and just hope that the mystical device for SDV appears?


Sort of. I bought an S3 before there was even a chance of SDV working. I get all the network HD OTA, so I just downgraded to standard/basic analog service and told TWC that until I could get all available channels with a CableCard device that they could shove it. My cable bill went down, we didn't really lose access to anything I wanted, and I felt like I had a small moment where I stuck it to "the man."

TWC adds HD channels so slowly that I feel confident that I'll be able to get an SDV dongle before they add any HD channel I really want (mostly Sci-Fi HD and HGTV-HD). I'd like to have ESPN/2-HD during college basketball season, but I can live without that.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

I second the request. I'm on Cox in Northern Virginia, and they are going to start implementing SDV next month. I have no idea what channels I'm going to lose as of now, but it would certainly be good to know that Tivo has my back.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

Revolutionary said:


> I second the request. I'm on Cox in Northern Virginia, and they are going to start implementing SDV next month. I have no idea what channels I'm going to lose as of now, but it would certainly be good to know that Tivo has my back.


 According to this post it's "crap" channels going SDV 1st. Hope Cox Orange County starts SDV similarly so perhaps we can buy time for Tivo to come up with a solution before some of the more mainstream channels go SDV:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=5468367&&#post5468367


----------



## riddick21 (Dec 12, 2006)

i have optimum iO from cablevision of westchester. I think their lines are fiber optic so does that mean they won't be using SDV?


----------



## vstone (May 11, 2002)

riddick21 said:


> i have optimum iO from cablevision of westchester. I think their lines are fiber optic so does that mean they won't be using SDV?


NO, almost all major cable companies have updated their lines to fiber optic. Tons of quality bandwidth, but they have to shaer it with broadband Internet access, On demand programming, etc.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

vstone said:


> NO, almost all major cable companies have updated their lines to fiber optic. Tons of quality bandwidth, but they have to shaer it with broadband Internet access, On demand programming, etc.


 Just to be clear, most cable companies are using Hybrid Fiber/Coax (HFC) networks. They have fiber all the way to local neighborhood nodes and then coax runs from the nodes to the homes (typically about 500-1000 homes per node).


----------



## BrianAZ (Aug 13, 2007)

moyekj said:


> Just to be clear, most cable companies are using Hybrid Fiber/Coax (HFC) networks. They have fiber all the way to local neighborhood nodes and then coax runs from the nodes to the homes (typically about 500-1000 homes per node).


Curious why they would not do fiber all the way? Just a cost concern?


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

BrianAZ said:


> Curious why they would not do fiber all the way? Just a cost concern?


Exactly, it cost a lot of money. You need to string the fiber on the poles or underneath the streets, then they need to install those marconi boxes or whatever they are using today. Search FTTN vs FTTH. Verizon FIOS is doing it.


----------



## drcos (Jul 20, 2001)

BrianAZ said:


> Curious why they would not do fiber all the way? Just a cost concern?


I believe we have a winner...
You are talking replacing how many separate cable runs, then you need ONTs for every house (or group of houses) to convert the optical to something your TV/box/cable modem can recognize...


----------



## puckettcg (Feb 10, 2006)

Just went to Verizon FIOS where SDV is not a risk, but also learned that they basically have done away with all analog (only 11 channels), and the guy who did the install said that Comcast is getting rid of all analog by 2009. From what I've heard, analog takes up a lot more bandwidth than Digital - seems that would be what the cableco's will do first. 

(unfortunately FIOS just became available in my neighborhood, and is still not available in most areas; and for those of you contemplating a switch, customer service is just as bad as Comcast but you do get more features, channels, for the money.)


----------



## vstone (May 11, 2002)

moyekj said:


> Just to be clear, most cable companies are using Hybrid Fiber/Coax (HFC) networks. They have fiber all the way to local neighborhood nodes and then coax runs from the nodes to the homes (typically about 500-1000 homes per node).


When they went to fiber optic here (Adelphia system circa 2001 or 2002) they replaced all of the cable on the poles. I just assumed it to be all optic fiber, but don't really know. Still have coax running from the pole to the house.

Do you have a feel whether or not 500 homes per node is small enough for SDV? I think I've seen smaller #'s (around 200?), but I really don't know.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

moyekj said:


> According to this post it's "crap" channels going SDV 1st. Hope Cox Orange County starts SDV similarly so perhaps we can buy time for Tivo to come up with a solution before some of the more mainstream channels go SDV:
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=5468367&&#post5468367


Thanks for pointing that out, as I hadn't seen the thread. It's an encouraging "first phase," but I'm still nervous about subsequent developments and Cox's commitment to keeping us informed.

Still, I've already eliminated all of those channels from my channel list anyway, so I've couldn't care less about losing them (the listed channels, anyway, as I don't get the Latino or international packages).


----------



## Mr. Coffee (Dec 2, 2005)

BrianAZ said:


> Has anyone found out what channels COX Phoenix will move to SDV? I've sent them an email myself and am awaiting a response. I hope the SDV solution arrives soon...


Well, considering we're still one of the major cities that *still * does not have On-Demand stuff, I'd be surprised if they went with SDV anytime soon.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

vstone said:


> When they went to fiber optic here (Adelphia system circa 2001 or 2002) they replaced all of the cable on the poles. I just assumed it to be all optic fiber, but don't really know. Still have coax running from the pole to the house.
> 
> Do you have a feel whether or not 500 homes per node is small enough for SDV? I think I've seen smaller #'s (around 200?), but I really don't know.


 Yes, for SDV to really be effective ideally smaller node sizes are needed (I think I've seen around 200 is the target as well)- and this is one thing that has worked against the widespread adoption of SDV which is a technology that has been around for several years now.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

Mr. Coffee said:


> Well, considering we're still one of the major cities that *still * does not have On-Demand stuff, I'd be surprised if they went with SDV anytime soon.


Your town is actually probably a good candidate for SDV then because the most likely reason you don't have onDemand is because your system is out of bandwidth, likely a 550Mhz system.


----------



## Mr. Coffee (Dec 2, 2005)

sfhub said:


> Your town is actually probably a good candidate for SDV then because the most likely reason you don't have onDemand is because your system is out of bandwidth, likely a 550Mhz system.


Actually, Cox Phoenix is at least a 750MHz system. That was from a Google search from 2005, so who knows now.

They've just never done it.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

Mr. Coffee said:


> Actually, Cox Phoenix is at least a 750MHz system. That was from a Google search from 2005, so who knows now.
> 
> They've just never done it.


 Your sig doesn't have your location so it wasn't clear what area you are in. Cox Phoenix is next in line after Cox Fairfax VA for SDV and is supposed to happen by the end of this year (i.e. soon):
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6470803.html
Hopefully they follow the lead of Cox Fairfax VA and put "crappy" channels 1st under SDV:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=5468367&&#post5468367

Note that besides SDV Cox is also beefing up it's network & equipment bandwidth in major locations to 860MHz - that work is about half complete in Orange County CA market but will continue through Jan 2009 here. As a result, some areas in Orange County already have more HD channels than other areas since they were put in >750MHz frequency range.

It looks like the SDV rollouts have been accelerated this year due to DirecTV aggressive push of HD channels - I just hope Tivo can get that so-called USB Dongle SDV solution in place before the end of 2008 when it looks like there will be many more affected by SDV including many Comcast markets.

I am somewhat prepared for worst case most improbable scenario - almost complete SDV of all channels. If that happens before Tivo has a solution I will use my Tivos for OTA only and probably go with Cox DVR for the rest of the channels. Sure hope it doesn't come to that...


----------



## BrianAZ (Aug 13, 2007)

I really hope the dongle is out soon (if anyone's reading this forum looking for potential testers, just let me know  ). I'm going to be quite irritated if the $600 I spent on the TivoHD + Service only gets me limited channels. 

I wrote Cox Phoenix support but they were clueless:

Thank you for your recent e-mail to Cox Communications. We apologize 
for the delay in our response.

We regret any miscommunication this matter may have caused. 
Regretfully, we do not have information pertaining to if and when we 
would be supplying the Switch Digital Video (SDV) service.

Thank you again for contacting us via e-mail. Please let us know if we 
can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,

Joe
E-Care Specialist
Cox Communications - Arizona


----------



## rcobourn (Nov 10, 2004)

BrianAZ said:


> Has anyone found out what channels COX Phoenix will move to SDV? I've sent them an email myself and am awaiting a response. I hope the SDV solution arrives soon...


For cripes sake, don't give them any ideas!


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

The silence from TiVo about the _availability_ of the dongle should be clear notice *not* to expect it to be "out soon".


----------



## CharlesH (Aug 29, 2002)

bicker said:


> The silence from TiVo about the _availability_ of the dongle should be clear notice *not* to expect it to be "out soon".


I agree. The fact that a specific (more or less) date was given for MRV/TTG would indicate to me that it has passed all testing and is pretty much in the final stage of being bundled up for shipment. OTOH, we have no clue as to where the SDV dongle is in the development process (or even if the hardware actually exists beyond prototypes). All we know is that NCTA has said that this is an acceptable solution from their point of view.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Since it seems TiVo people are at least monitoring this forum again now, I figured I should bump this thread, if only to get "We can't say anything about this." 

Looks like this will be a critical issue much sooner than I think anyone expected.


----------



## HamDoc (Sep 22, 2006)

I am of 2 minds about this. Either:
1. I will keep my STB or
2. Any tier that has a channel I can't get because of SDV will get cancelled along with a letter to Comcast stating that you are losing out on this much money from me because you went SDV. I would encourage others to do the same so that Comcast can see they may be wasting a lot of money. I still hope Verizon FiOS makes it here in time

HamDoc


----------



## ncbagwell (Feb 15, 2005)

pkscout said:


> And TWC here in RDU is going to do something very similar with the digital simulcast of the 1-99 channels. All those will be on SDV.


This is news to me. Do you know what the timeline is for this?


----------



## SCSIRAID (Feb 2, 2003)

ncbagwell said:


> This is news to me. Do you know what the timeline is for this?


TWC Raleigh/Cary Cablecards dont get the digital simulcast anyway so no net difference to us. Digital simulcast will surely move to switched space.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

Cox announced this morning that they will be carrying TBS-HD and CNN-HD.

This puts the list of HD channels that Cox has added or announced, that I won't be able to receive with my S3, at:

1. Discovery HD (ann.)
2. TLC HD (ann.)
3. Science Channel (ann.)
4. Animal Planet HD (ann.)
5. NFL-HD (launched)
6. TBS-HD (ann.)
7. CNN-HD (ann.)

Throw in the imminent addition of SciFi-HD and USA-HD, and I seriously have to think about my commitment to my S3. In terms of "what we watch," these channels carry as much content as the networks (if not more).

I'm only on a one-year service contract (largely because I thought something like this might happen), which will expire around Christmas. As much as it pains me, I just might have to put my S3 on the bench and get a Cox HD-DVR as a stop-gap until Tivo gets SDV figured out.


----------



## Grakthis (Oct 4, 2006)

Here's the thing... if there is a channel you want and it's in SDV, call your cable company and throw a fit (calmly, obv). Tell them you're a subscriber with cable cards and that the FCC requires that they support cable cards and that you do not consider this appropriate support. Ask them why they would deny a paying customer access to some channels simply because they choose to use a different cable box and ask them why they would implement a technology that they know will hurt a portion of their customer base. Remind them that the phone company TV services that are rolling out fully support cable cards (a small stretch).

If your cable company is larger than a mom & pop shop they will offer you a free cable box for a as much as a year to compensate.

I know that's not an optimal solution because our TiVo's still can't get those channels, but a year is probably long enough for this whole thing to get worked out one way or the other and you can suffer for that long.

If you're a first adopter type, like myself, you've suffered far worse things for the sake of being on the cutting edge and having the latest and greatest.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

Grakthis said:


> If your cable company is larger than a mom & pop shop they will offer you a free cable box for a as much as a year to compensate.


Cox Northern Virginia has already offered cablecard customers a free STB for one year, or a free HD-DVR for 3 months.


----------



## Grakthis (Oct 4, 2006)

Revolutionary said:


> Throw in the imminent addition of SciFi-HD and USA-HD, and I seriously have to think about my commitment to my S3. In terms of "what we watch," these channels carry as much content as the networks (if not more).


Really? Am I missing some great programming somewhere in there?

Like, I think the only one of those I watch is the NFL Network and that's only for their 2-3 games a year they have exclusive broadcast to.


----------



## Grakthis (Oct 4, 2006)

Revolutionary said:


> Cox Northern Virginia has already offered cablecard customers a free STB for one year, or a free HD-DVR for 3 months.


Which isn't a terrible offer. Though, they should probably offer the HD-DVR for 1 year and I bet if you complained enough and made it clear that they were costing you DVR capability with your TiVo and not just a cable card in a TV they might offer you that.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

Grakthis said:


> Really? Am I missing some great programming somewhere in there?
> 
> Like, I think the only one of those I watch is the NFL Network and that's only for their 2-3 games a year they have exclusive broadcast to.


Gee, your mockery of my TV watching tastes is very helpful to the conversation. Thank you for your helpful thoughts. I appreciate the sense of superiority and derision that you convey. [edit because too cranky]


----------



## Dark Helmet (Sep 15, 2006)

Revolutionary said:


> Cox announced this morning that they will be carrying TBS-HD and CNN-HD.
> 
> This puts the list of HD channels that Cox has added or announced, that I won't be able to receive with my S3, at:
> 
> ...


Hold on a sec ... currently we get Discovery HD just fine. Are they going to SDV it?

I sent in a complaint a few weeks ago to the FCC ([email protected]) about Cox, CableCards, and SDV. I haven't yet received a reply, but it might be worthwhile for everyone else who is affected to send in a complaint as well; at the least, it can't hurt!


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

No, not Discovery HD Theater. I'm talking about the new HD simulcast of the regular Discovery Channel. See here for links.


----------



## BrianAZ (Aug 13, 2007)

Revolutionary said:


> Cox Northern Virginia has already offered cablecard customers a free STB for one year, or a free HD-DVR for 3 months.


This is to trade in your cablecard(s) I imagine?


----------



## Grakthis (Oct 4, 2006)

Revolutionary said:


> Gee, your mockery of my TV watching tastes is very helpful to the conversation. Thank you for your helpful thoughts. I appreciate the sense of superiority and derision that you convey. [edit because too cranky]


Errr.... I wasn't intending to sound like I was mocking your tastes. I was actually asking you what you watch on those channels.

Tone doesn't always carry though well on the internet I guess.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

BrianAZ said:


> This is to trade in your cablecard(s) I imagine?


The letter didn't mention anything about trading in the cards. Not sure why I would need to, since I rent them.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

Grakthis said:


> Tone doesn't always carry though well on the internet I guess.


Np. Guess I read more into it than you intended. Sorry 'bout that. 

If you really want to know, we watch:

Discovery: Mythbusters, Deadliest Catch, Dirty Jobs, (occasionally) Miami Ink
TLC: What Not To Wear, Trading Spaces, Little People Big World
USA: Monk, Psych, Burn Notice, Dead Zone, Law and Order:CI
SciFi: BSG, Stargate Atlantis, Dr. Who, Eureka
Animal Planet: Meerkat Manor
TBS: Baseball


----------



## StuffOfInterest (Jul 18, 2007)

As another Fairfax County resident, this is an issue that could very likely keep me from buying a TiVo HD. 90% of my TV watching probably falls on Discovery, TLC and SciFi (with a bit of BBC America). With Cox moving more and more of their content to SDV, and with no solution for the TiVo in sight, the value for going to TiVo HD grows less and less. All I can do now is hold out hope that the Cox-TiVo deal for TiVo on Cox boxes will bare fruit.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Looks to me like the fix is on the way according to this from TiVo.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

Bierboy said:


> Looks to me like the fix is on the way according to this from TiVo.


 That has been known since August, however the troubling part as usual is the timing of when that could possibly be available is very wide open:


> We expect the adapter to be available to consumers before switched digital becomes widely deployed.


 So it's open to a lot of interpretation what "widely deployed" means. Affected users will obviously argue it already is "widely deployed".


----------



## hiker (Nov 29, 2001)

I wonder who is going to supply this tuning resolver? Will it be purchased or something else the cablecos can charge us monthly rental?


----------



## ajwees41 (May 7, 2006)

Grakthis said:


> Here's the thing... if there is a channel you want and it's in SDV, call your cable company and throw a fit (calmly, obv). Tell them you're a subscriber with cable cards and that the FCC requires that they support cable cards and that you do not consider this appropriate support. Ask them why they would deny a paying customer access to some channels simply because they choose to use a different cable box and ask them why they would implement a technology that they know will hurt a portion of their customer base. Remind them that the phone company TV services that are rolling out fully support cable cards (a small stretch).
> 
> If your cable company is larger than a mom & pop shop they will offer you a free cable box for a as much as a year to compensate.
> 
> ...


Doesn't really matter when the phone company doesn't offer tv service in your area. Looking at what our local phone(Qwest) offers it's even less then what Cox which is what we have.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

HamDoc said:


> I am of 2 minds about this. Either:
> 1. I will keep my STB or
> 2. Any tier that has a channel I can't get because of SDV will get cancelled along with a letter to Comcast


We've decided that if it comes to this, we'll choose #1.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Grakthis said:


> Here's the thing... if there is a channel you want and it's in SDV, call your cable company and throw a fit (calmly, obv). Tell them you're a subscriber with cable cards and that the FCC requires that they support cable cards and that you do not consider this appropriate support. Ask them why they would deny a paying customer access to some channels simply because they choose to use a different cable box and ask them why they would implement a technology that they know will hurt a portion of their customer base. Remind them that the phone company TV services that are rolling out fully support cable cards (a small stretch).


Sorry, but this verges on "silly". It is one thing to express disappointment, and provide a short explanation of why, but until you go up the line, SEVERAL levels (not just one or two), the rest, including claims about what the FCC requires, is "beyond the agent's pay-grade". Let's not take our frustration with technology out on poor CSR and CSR supervisors -- doing so does nothing more than earn us worse and worse customer service.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

moyekj said:


> That has been known since August, however the troubling part as usual is the timing of when that could possibly be available is very wide open: So it's open to a lot of interpretation what "widely deployed" means. Affected users will obviously argue it already is "widely deployed".


Indeed. Folks have to reconcile themselves to the reality that the extent of deployment will have absolutely NO effect on when this device will become available. That's marketing patter. It can be true across a wide range of realities, and therefore, as an indicator of actual time-frame, is useless.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

hiker said:


> I wonder who is going to supply this tuning resolver? Will it be purchased or something else the cablecos can charge us monthly rental?


My best guess is that we can plan on this being a cable system rental, probably less expensive than CableCards. It is possible that some cable systems will include one with CableCard rental.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

Bierboy said:


> Looks to me like the fix is on the way according to this from TiVo.


That support page is at least a welcome sign of acknowledgement from Tivo.

But the premise that "Certain cable operators are using switched digital technology to add new niche channels or eliminate duplicate feeds of premium channels" is crap.

Sure, the channels that Cox has moved from digital to SDV are niche (international, shopping, Spanish language, "lifestyle"), but the channels that they are ADDING are not. Not to reiterate our list above, but CNN, USA, TBS, Discovery, TLC, Animal Planet, and SciFi are hardly niche (NFL and Science Channel are arguably niche).

I would feel a lot better if Tivo's only acknowledgement of either the problem or the eventual solution had a greater sense of urgency to it, rather than a blase "this could be a problem in the remote future for a few of our subscribers that are interested in unconventional, niche programming" attitude.


----------



## jmaditto (Jul 29, 2007)

Along the same lines

"We expect the adapter to be available to consumers before switched digital becomes widely deployed. "

It is widely deployed in my area now and is the sole reason I still have my 8300HD DVR from TWC in South Carolina.

It is promising to see mention of a solution. My guess is they are working overtime to get this resolved but they don't want to alarm the consumer or bring attention to the issue.


----------



## Saturn (Apr 10, 2001)

Here's my take:
Such a USB dongle would not be a trivial device. It would basically need to be a specialized (or possibly standard) cable modem that hooks into your cable feed. The MAC address of the modem would likely need to be linked to your account.

If TiVo can convince the cable companies to register such a device, I'd expect it to be around $100 if you can buy it.

If the cable companies insist on controlling (i.e. renting) such a device, they're going to drag their feet as long as possible. It WILL take an FCC mandate to get them to comply, and those mandates always have compliance dates attached, and those dates will get pushed back at least once. Don't expect such a solution before, say, 2010.

There's always the possibility of doing it entirely in software and talking back to the cable company via the Internet. While technically possible, there's a ice cube's chance in hell the cable companies will open up the right ports to make it accessible like that.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Revolutionary said:


> That support page is at least a welcome sign of acknowledgement from Tivo.
> 
> But the premise that "Certain cable operators are using switched digital technology to add new niche channels or eliminate duplicate feeds of premium channels" is crap.
> 
> ...


+1

This is becoming a real problem, and FAST. They will piss off a LOT of people by hiding it, letting people buy the product, subscribe, have CableCARDs installed and then finding out that, to take a current example, they can't get the baseball playoffs on TBS-HD.

This IS being widely deployed, right now.


----------



## sneagle (Jun 12, 2002)

Maybe this has been discussed elsewhere, but I thought the whole idea of cablecards was to open up the cable box industry to competition. Isn't SDV one way of circumventing that FCC mandate? Why is it being allowed? If the cable industry insists it is necessary to carry all the various channels, then a solution that works with cablecards should be mandatory. What am I missing?


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

sneagle said:


> Maybe this has been discussed elsewhere, but I thought the whole idea of cablecards was to open up the cable box industry to competition. Isn't SDV one way of circumventing that FCC mandate? Why is it being allowed? If the cable industry insists it is necessary to carry all the various channels, then a solution that works with cablecards should be mandatory. What am I missing?


Technically, it DOES work with CableCARDs... it's just that the box/TV/computer/etc that the CableCARD is in needs to be able to communicate with the cable company's equipment on the other side.

I think that's how they can get around this - SDV is not incompatible with CableCARDs, the TiVos just don't have 2-way communcation.

In effect, it's the same right now though, of course.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

sneagle said:


> Maybe this has been discussed elsewhere, but I thought the whole idea of cablecards was to open up the cable box industry to competition. Isn't SDV one way of circumventing that FCC mandate? Why is it being allowed? If the cable industry insists it is necessary to carry all the various channels, then a solution that works with cablecards should be mandatory. What am I missing?


There's been a lot of speculation about this, but my take is that the cableco's realize how bad it looks, so they are acting without FCC exhortation in order to avoid looking like bad faith actors. Resistance to the FCC rule at this stage is different than resistance at the rule-setting stage, where it pays to fight fight fight. Once the rule is in place, however, the FCC has the "big stick" of fines, suspensions, and other nasty business that can really screw up your bottom line. Hence CableLabs willingness to license this technology under the existing specs. If it looks like they are trying to skirt the open cable system, then they start down a risky path.



MickeS said:


> Technically, it DOES work with CableCARDs... it's just that the box/TV/computer/etc that the CableCARD is in needs to be able to communicate with the cable company's equipment on the other side.
> 
> I think that's how they can get around this - SDV is not incompatible with CableCARDs, the TiVos just don't have 2-way communcation.
> 
> In effect, it's the same right now though, of course.


This is what we call a distinction without a difference. SDV might technically work in conjunction with a CableCard device, but since there is no authorized license for a two-way cable card device, it is impossible for it to _actually_ work with any existing or pending cable card device. And since CableLabs holds the key to that licensing kingdom... it's very, very unlikely, should the FCC decide to press the issue, that the "technical" compatibility would save them. Hence, again, their willingness to get this all taken care of amicably and without FCC admonition.


----------



## Saturn (Apr 10, 2001)

Well, the reality of it is that:

1. Cable company STBs are basically free. For the most part, they give you one when you sign up for digital cable.
2. Additional boxes cost about the same as a cable card.
3. Most cable-card devices (TVs) are as dumb, or dumber than the cable company box.
4. Cable company DVRs are cheap to rent. Less than the cost of a monthly TiVo subscription.

So, to the average consumer, it is business as usual - you gotta have that stupid little box and use it to tune if you want all the channels and features. If you're willing to give up on demand and whatever channels are SDV, you can PAY for the privledge of using your TV's built-in-tuner. If you're willing to give up everything except in the clear channels, you can forgo the entire mess of a cable card experience.

The ONLY people that are seriously affected by SDV rollout is TiVo S3/HD owners and the few niche Media Center boxes with Cable Cards. To us, we lose something (the TiVo software) when we opt for the cable co's DVR. Everyone else gains something (guide data) by opting for the cable co's STB or DVR.

It is a big issue to TiVo, TiVo owners, and potential TiVo owners, as well as Microsoft. But as for consumers in general...meh. Now, with the right people behind the FCC, the cable companies could get more than a slap on the wrist for working against the spirit of the cable card mandate. Those people are not likely to be at the FCC for another, say, 14-15 months.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

Saturn said:


> Here's my take:
> Such a USB dongle would not be a trivial device. It would basically need to be a specialized (or possibly standard) cable modem that hooks into your cable feed. The MAC address of the modem would likely need to be linked to your account.
> 
> If TiVo can convince the cable companies to register such a device, I'd expect it to be around $100 if you can buy it.
> ...


CableLabs already voluntarily licensed the technology to make this happen under their existing cablecard licenses. It's already happening. They have more to lose than they do to gain by dragging their feet and being forced. This is about compliance with the existing open cable requirements -- if they resist and are wrong, they will have to pay AND comply. There is very little upside.

Also, given that most cable internet providers allow you (I'm pretty sure they have to, but CMIIW) to provide your own DOCSIS cable modem to access their system, there should be very little problem with this being a BYOD (bring your own dongle) system where they simply register the MAC ID for limited, specified access to their network. And since a perfectly sufficient cable modem costs way less than $100...


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

Saturn said:


> The ONLY people that are seriously affected by SDV rollout is TiVo S3/HD owners and the few niche Media Center boxes with Cable Cards. To us, we lose something (the TiVo software) when we opt for the cable co's DVR. Everyone else gains something (guide data) by opting for the cable co's STB or DVR.


Don't forget about the several million people out there who bought televisions with CC1.0 ports in them. It is irrelevant if they actually use them; they have the equipment and the equipment is mandated to have access. From the FCC's perspective, they are just as marginalized as Tivo and Media Center users.

Edit: WITHDRAWN. See below AND didn't notice "dumb TVs" in your list above.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

Saturn said:


> Well, the reality of it is that:
> 
> 1. Cable company STBs are basically free. For the most part, they give you one when you sign up for digital cable.
> 2. Additional boxes cost about the same as a cable card.
> ...


1. Not where I live.
2. A STB from my cable co. is about $6 more per month then a CableCard.
3. How are they dumber? Please explain.
4. Renting a DVR would cost me $30 more a month because it forces me to pay for digital channels. I can get CableCards at $1.99/month and the HD package at $9.99/month so it works out slightly cheaper to use TiVo.


----------



## SCSIRAID (Feb 2, 2003)

Revolutionary said:


> Don't forget about the several million people out there who bought televisions with CC1.0 ports in them. It is irrelevant if they actually use them; they have the equipment and the equipment is mandated to have access. From the FCC's perspective, they are just as marginalized as Tivo and Media Center users.


But those TV's are not likely to have a USB port and the required intelligence to manipulate the 'tuning resolver'. Even if one did... the manufacturer would have little motivation to do the firmware to implement it.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

SCSIRAID said:


> But those TV's are not likely to have a USB port and the required intelligence to manipulate the 'tuning resolver'. Even if one did... the manufacturer would have little motivation to do the firmware to implement it.


True... so nevermind!


----------



## Saturn (Apr 10, 2001)

rainwater said:


> 1. Not where I live.
> 2. A STB from my cable co. is about $6 more per month then a CableCard.
> 3. How are they dumber? Please explain.
> 4. Renting a DVR would cost me $30 more a month because it forces me to pay for digital channels. I can get CableCards at $1.99/month and the HD package at $9.99/month so it works out slightly cheaper to use TiVo.


A TV is generally just a tuner. Some more advanced ones provide guide data, but those are few and far between. A standard cable box will give you a guide as well as access to OnDemand so you can use it like a pseudo DVR. Besides the extra box and the hassles of making sure it is on and the TV is on the right input, etc, there's very little downside of using a cable box with a TV.

That's what I meant by "dumb." Lacking features dumb.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

bicker said:


> Indeed. Folks have to reconcile themselves to the reality that the extent of deployment will have absolutely NO effect on when this device will become available. That's marketing patter. It can be true across a wide range of realities, and therefore, as an indicator of actual time-frame, is useless.


Yep, and TiVo needs to test this against a wide range of realities with the direct involvement of a wide range of cable companies. Given the glitches and potholes of getting cable card working I would not expect this to be a couple weeks of testing type thing.

No way could TiVo estimate a timeline with reasonable accuracy with all the parties with their hands on this. Marketing speak to try and convey they understand the urgency and need is all that is left.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Revolutionary said:


> Sure, the channels that Cox has moved from digital to SDV are niche (international, shopping, Spanish language, "lifestyle"), but the channels that they are ADDING are not. Not to reiterate our list above, but CNN, USA, TBS, Discovery, TLC, Animal Planet, and SciFi are hardly niche (NFL and Science Channel are arguably niche).


How many subscribers are already affected by cable systems putting CNN, USA, TBS, Discovery, TLC, Animal Planet and Sci Fi on SDV, as compared to the total number of subscribers? Until a significant number of subscribers (defined by them, not by us here) are affected, expect those very few who are to be completely ignored. And TiVo has said that we shouldn't "expect" a resolution until just before the problem becomes widespread (which is another number defined by them, not by us here).



Revolutionary said:


> I would feel a lot better if Tivo's only acknowledgement of either the problem or the eventual solution had a greater sense of urgency to it, rather than a blase "this could be a problem in the remote future for a few of our subscribers that are interested in unconventional, niche programming" attitude.


So would I, but I don't see how that would be to TiVo's benefit.


----------



## Saturn (Apr 10, 2001)

Revolutionary said:


> Also, given that most cable internet providers allow you (I'm pretty sure they have to, but CMIIW) to provide your own DOCSIS cable modem to access their system, there should be very little problem with this being a BYOD (bring your own dongle) system where they simply register the MAC ID for limited, specified access to their network. And since a perfectly sufficient cable modem costs way less than $100...


I will eat my hat if when/if can plug my spare Motorola Surfboard into my S3 and get SDV. Technically, it is possible. I'll believe it when I see it though.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

MickeS said:


> This IS being widely deployed, right now.


This lack of consistency in the use of the English language is really the crux of the problem. I am very confident that "widely deployed" in that statement means, without equivocation, "a substantial percentage of TiVo owners are affected by it" with "substantial" being a number somewhere in the neighborhood of 20%-30%. It will be years before SDV affects that many TiVo owners.


----------



## Saturn (Apr 10, 2001)

bicker said:


> This lack of consistency in the use of the English language is really the crux of the problem. I am very confident that "widely deployed" in that statement means, without equivocation, "a substantial percentage of TiVo owners are affected by it" with "substantial" being a number somewhere in the neighborhood of 20%-30%. It will be years before SDV affects that many TiVo owners.


Chicken and egg problem though. Many people will NOT become TiVo owners BECAUSE their area has SDV. Others will discontinue being TiVo owners / subscribers when their area converts to SDV for the majority of channels.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

Revolutionary said:


> CableLabs already voluntarily licensed the technology to make this happen under their existing cablecard licenses. It's already happening...


it that all a fact?

the wording in the FCC filing isn't clear to me that it is absolutely being done right this minute. The say stuff like "under this approach" , "Licensing and testing of this optional feature will be provided under the existing....."

There's not any HARD statements like "all major cable operators have committed to supporting this feature and the license modifcations and testing suite required are under development now and will be complete by such and such a date"

No lawyer- so what does the FCC filling actually say? Is it a proposed solution or a solution that will be a voluntary standard that MSO's can choose to support or a bonafide done deal that all the big players will be supporting shortly?


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Saturn said:


> Chicken and egg problem though. Many people will NOT become TiVo owners BECAUSE their area has SDV. Others will discontinue being TiVo owners / subscribers when their area converts to SDV for the majority of channels.


Actually, that's not "chicken and egg" -- that's a self-healing machine.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

bicker said:


> This lack of consistency in the use of the English language is really the crux of the problem. I am very confident that "widely deployed" in that statement means, without equivocation, "a substantial percentage of TiVo owners are affected by it" with "substantial" being a number somewhere in the neighborhood of 20%-30%. It will be years before SDV affects that many TiVo owners.


I agree with your % numbers (i'd probably even think Tivo goes higher)- but I think your timeframe is a bit slow. Last I read Comcast was figuring on getting a third of their systems SDV in 2007/8. So that's 33% of 25% of pay tv people in the US. So right there you are at 8% of the US. Cablevision has SDV on all their systems now- granted they are much small than comcast but they are a big player in NYC- the largerst DMA- so that's probably another 2-3% of the national base right there. So between those 2 we're at 10% rather quickly. Add in Time Warner and then whatever cox and anyone else does and you could get to 20% of head ends with SDV sometime in 2008.

Or perhaps be by "affected" you mean pissed about it? Right now cablevision for an example uses it for foreign channels- so the number of people that know and car will be much smaller then those that have SDV on their head ends. So if you factor that in it would be much smaller amount of people who "care".


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

bicker said:


> How many subscribers are already affected by cable systems putting CNN, USA, TBS, Discovery, TLC, Animal Planet and Sci Fi on SDV, as compared to the total number of subscribers? Until a significant number of subscribers (defined by them, not by us here) are affected, expect those very few who are to be completely ignored. And TiVo has said that we shouldn't "expect" a resolution until just before the problem becomes widespread (which is another number defined by them, not by us here).


Oh, well if Tivo says we shouldn't expect it then I will just have to wait.

Unapologeticaly, I will not resign myself to the TCF motto of "whenever Tivo gets to it is fine by me." Taken together, my posts here express to Tivo (and anyone else who may be reading) that I will not defer to their judgment as to when this is a problem warranting their attention. They may ignore me all they like, just as you may - I am not "demanding resolution." I *am* insisting that I am dissatisfied with the level of anxiousness with which Tivo _appears_ to be addressing this problem, and that I will chose content over convenience if my dissatisfaction continues.

Do I think that this threat makes a bit of difference to Tivo? No. But I don't really care; while I'd love for Tivo to gain subscribers and stay in business, _I'm in this for my benefit, not for Tivo's._


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

Saturn said:


> I will eat my hat if when/if can plug my spare Motorola Surfboard into my S3 and get SDV. Technically, it is possible. I'll believe it when I see it though.


I will allow you to needlessly eat your hat if you think that I stated that the solution will amount to plugging your "spare Motorola Surfboard into [your] S3." I made no such ridiculous suggestion.


----------



## Saturn (Apr 10, 2001)

Revolutionary said:


> I will allow you to needlessly eat your hat if you think that I stated that the solution will amount to plugging your "spare Motorola Surfboard into [your] S3." I made not such ridiculous suggestion.


You said a perfectly sufficient cable modem costs "way less than $100." If TiVo were to support a standard cable modem as a "dongle" via USB, why not the ubiquitous Motorola Surfboard? If they are NOT going to allow standard cable modems to be used as a dongle, then I strongly suspect it will cost around $100 IF they allow you to buy them outright and don't force you to rent them from the cable company in addition to the cable cards.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

MichaelK said:


> it that all a fact?
> 
> the wording in the FCC filing isn't clear to me that it is absolutely being done right this minute. The say stuff like "under this approach" , "Licensing and testing of this optional feature will be provided under the existing....."
> 
> ...


1. You're right, my use of "licensed" was not exactly accurate, given the "will be licensed" language of the filing. But a statement in this type of filing is effectively notice to the FCC of future actions that the FCC can expect, so it's much more solid than "we are committed to finding a solution and licensing the technology at some point."

2. All major cable companies don't have to individually committ to supporting the solution. NCTA is telling the FCC that this technology will be an addendum license under the existing cablecard-specific licensing from CableLabs to the UDCP manufacturers. Thus, cable operators will be required to support the technology as an implementation of CableCard -- in the interest of maintaining the open cable ecosystem.

3. I will only note that the NCTA filing says that "cable industry has worked with CE companies such as TiVo to arrive at a solution," but that licensing and testing need to be finalized. (But it also says in footnote 69 that testing will likely be minimal).


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

Saturn said:


> You said a perfectly sufficient cable modem costs "way less than $100." If TiVo were to support a standard cable modem as a "dongle" via USB, why not the ubiquitous Motorola Surfboard? If they are NOT going to allow standard cable modems to be used as a dongle, then I strongly suspect it will cost around $100 IF they allow you to buy them outright and don't force you to rent them from the cable company in addition to the cable cards.


I referenced the cost of a cable modem as an illustration that the technology is not that expensive. Of course it will have to be a unique specification to meet the licensing requirements...

But heck, for all I know it will cost $100. I was only suggesting that we don't _know_ that it will be prohibitively expensive and that it seems like it doesn't have to be based on existing DOCSIS products. I certainly did not mean that an existing DOCSIS product _would_ be the solution.

As for renting them, I doubt that, but only based on the language of the FCC filing. They are licensing the technology *to the UDCP manufacturer*. That suggests that the equipment will have to be provided by the UDCP manufacturer (i.e., Tivo). On the other hand, the filing says that the "tuning resolver" will be "supplied to the UDCP consumer." So the license could cover firmware/software changes needed to make the resolver work, but the resolver is supplied by the MSO.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Saturn said:


> It WILL take an FCC mandate to get them to comply, and those mandates always have compliance dates attached, and those dates will get pushed back at least once. Don't expect such a solution before, say, 2010.





Revolutionary said:


> CableLabs already voluntarily licensed the technology to make this happen under their existing cablecard licenses. It's already happening. They have more to lose than they do to gain by dragging their feet and being forced. This is about compliance with the existing open cable requirements -- if they resist and are wrong, they will have to pay AND comply. There is very little upside.





MichaelK said:


> the wording in the FCC filing isn't clear to me that it is absolutely being done right this minute. The say stuff like "under this approach" , "Licensing and testing of this optional feature will be provided under the existing....."





Revolutionary said:


> But a statement in this type of filing is effectively notice to the FCC of future actions that the FCC can expect, so it's much more solid than "we are committed to finding a solution and licensing the technology at some point."


BTW, interesting point of comparison.

In the middle of debate / disagreement over 1) deficiencies in the (current) agreed-upon CableCard specs, regs, and licensing; 2) two-way functionality; 3) the "integration ban" and cable attempting to get it dropped, delayed, waived, whatever ...

Cable and CE manufacturers come to a technical proposal for addressing certain CableCard deficiencies that have been highlighted by some CE manufacturers (especially Tivo). The solution will 1) potentially be backward compatible with existing equipment; 2) be an optional addendum to the existing UDCP/DFAST license agreement; 3) require finalization of the specs, licensing agreements, testing environments, etc.; 4) however, the underlying technical approach has been agreed to.

2007 and the SDV USB dongle? Nope, 2003 and multistream CableCards.


> http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6514082191
> Before the Federal Communications Commission
> In the Matter of: Commercial Availability of Navigation Devices
> CS Docket No. 97-80
> ...





> http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6514287279
> Before the Federal Communications Commission
> In the Matter of: Commercial Availability of Navigation Devices
> CS Docket No. 97-80
> ...


*September 5, 2003*
CableLabs issues first draft(s) of MultiStream CableCard specs (card, interface, security, etc.)
http://www.opencable.com/downloads/specs/OC-SP-MC-IF-C01-050331.pdf
http://www.opencable.com/downloads/specs/OC-SP-MCCP-IF-C01-050331.pdf
etc.

*March 9, 2004*
Last significant changes to MultiStream CableCard specs.
http://www.opencable.com/downloads/specs/OC-SP-MC-IF-C01-050331.pdf
http://www.opencable.com/downloads/specs/OC-SP-MCCP-IF-C01-050331.pdf
etc.

*March 17, 2005*
FCC directs cable operators to regularly report (every 90 days) on status of efforts to develop and deploy Multistream CableCards noting "the development and deployment of a multistream CableCARD as crucial to the introduction of an array of next generation digital products" and that "Comcast and Time Warner have committed to 'making multi-stream CableCARDs available for [unidirectional digital cable products] on an expedited basis'".
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6517519493

*March 31, 2005*
MultiStream CableCard specs have been closed, finalized into SCTE specs, and integrated with all the other assorted OpenCable specs.
http://www.opencable.com/downloads/specs/OC-SP-MC-IF-C01-050331.pdf
http://www.opencable.com/downloads/specs/OC-SP-MCCP-IF-C01-050331.pdf
http://www.opencable.com/downloads/specs/OC-SP-CC-IF-C01-050331.pdf
http://www.opencable.com/downloads/specs/OC-SP-CCCP-IF-C01-050331.pdf
etc.

*September 30, 2005*
CEA submits proposed regulations to the FCC that (among other things) would require cable operators to support MultiStream cards in CE devices 
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518185152

*October 3 2005, December 29, 2005*
NCTA reports to FCC that Multistream CableCard test tools are being developed and implemented with expectation that "multistream CableCARDs will be widely available for use in commercially-available devices by mid-2006 and will be supported by MSOs."
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518165405
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518191777

*March / April 2006*
NCTA reports to FCC CableLabs qualification for a MultiStream CableCard (to Scientific Atlanta) announced with expectation that "multi-stream CableCARD devices will be widely available for use and commercially available by mid-2006 and will be supported by MSOs."
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518332453
http://www.cablelabs.com/news/pr/2006/06_pr_mcard_sa_040606.html

*June / July 2006*
CableLabs qualification for a Multistream CableCard (to Motorola) announced with expectation that "Multistream CableCARDs will be available from major MSOs within the next few months."
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518372521
http://www.cablelabs.com/news/pr/2006/06_pr_motorola_070606.html

*November 13, 2006*
CableLabs and CE manufacturers announce that they have reached an agreement for the final licensing, testing, and verification procedures for M-UDCPs (multistream unidirectional CableCard hosts). Optional M-UDCP DFAST addendum published. Optional M-UDCP testing documents published. Testing schedule announced (with first wave for M-UDCP verification for the Q1 2007 cert wave).
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518607998
http://www.cablelabs.com/news/pr/2006/06_pr_mcard_udcp_111306.html
http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/
http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/downloads/M-Host_UNI-DIR-PICS-I03-070510.pdf
http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/downloads/TP-ATP-M-UDCP-I03-070510.pdf
http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/downloads/DFAST_Amendment1.pdf
etc.

*March, 2007*
CableLabs verifies a TiVo DVR as the first UDCP with an M-Card interface
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6519734668

*June 9, 2007*
FCC issues a Request for Comments and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking including (among other things) the CEA's proposed rules (from September 30, 2005) requiring cable operators to support MultiStream cards in CE devices
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-120A1.pdf

*July 7, 2007*
Cable companies deploying their own boxes that use MultiStream CableCards. CableCard manufacturers have stopped manufacturing single stream CableCards.

*????? ??, ????*
Tivo can actually make a CableCard box depending on MultiStream CableCard availability ... one that doesn't require the extra expense of multiple CableCard slots. Other manufacturers (Digeo / Moxi, or TV manufacturers with PIP) actually start deploying products that rely on MultiStream functionality. MultiStream CableCards are widely deployed, available, and usable in CE devices. Consumers can actually buy MultiStream CableCard products with some reasonable assurances that they won't be paying the cable company 2x for support compared to what their neighbor pays for his (single tuner) TV without "YMMV ... different cable companies ... different expectations". Etc.

Sorry for the trip down memory lane.


----------



## BrianAZ (Aug 13, 2007)

dt_dc said:


> BTW, interesting point of comparison.
> 
> In the middle of debate / disagreement over 1) deficiencies in the (current) agreed-upon CableCard specs, regs, and licensing; 2) two-way functionality; 3) the "integration ban" and cable attempting to get it dropped, delayed, waived, whatever ...
> 
> ...


*

WOW! How long did it take you to post all that?*


----------



## acvthree (Jan 17, 2004)

Probably not that long for dt_dc. He is very familiar with the issues around cable card and dealing with cablelabs.

Al


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

acvthree said:


> Probably not that long for dt_dc. He is very familiar with the issues around cable card and dealing with cablelabs.
> 
> Al


dt_dc is always a welcome source of useful information :up:


----------



## Saxion (Sep 18, 2006)

I think it was dt_dc's point that it took 4 years to get from general discussions about M-Cards to where we are today. SDV dongle? Let's hope not...


----------



## TiVoMonkey (Jan 12, 2002)

cdp1276 said:


> That's not true, take a look at the list of channels that I don't get with TW here in Rochester, NY. They also recently have added ESPN2 HD and ESPNU that I also don't get via CableCard. Those seem like mainstream channels to me. Plus the best part is that they have yet to deploy SDV here. So they are just blocking a bunch of channels it seems in prep for that to CC customers.
> 
> http://www.timewarnercable.com/rochester/products/cablecard.html


He meant "mainstream" as in highly watched channels, and not "mainstream" because ESPN happens to be in the name. ESPNU and ESPN2 HD are not highly watched channels.

Local channels and channels that are watched by most people all of the time, ie. ESPN, HBO-East, will not be switched. There would be no point.

You do not save bandwidth when there is at least 1 person watching a channel on a node all of the time. Cable companies have obviously been running the statistics on what channels are watched when and where. They will not dedicate expensive resources to switching channels that are always watched in all nodes.

Sure, you'll miss some channel or another because it goes to SDV, but you're going to be missing it because it doesn't have a large enough audience to designate dedicated channel to.

But when TiVo does get "the dongle" out, you'll have SDV to thank for more HD channels being available for you to record on your TiVoHD.

But since the FCC is forcing cable to hold onto analog until 2011, instead of 2009 for OTA broadcasts, you can partially blame the FCC for pushing cable towards SDV for bandwidth savings.

And you can bet that SDV is the last thing that cable wants to do. Because it costs MONEY to implement. And they can raise rates a little, because they always do every year. But they can't raise rates enough to cover the cost of converting to SDV in the short amount of time they'd like to recover that money.

If cable could just eliminate analog and move to all QAM, you can bet they'd do that first, to extend having to upgrade to new technology at some point.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

MichaelK said:


> I agree with your % numbers (i'd probably even think Tivo goes higher)- but I think your timeframe is a bit slow. Last I read Comcast was figuring on...


The easy bit is -- not every TiVo S3 subscriber has Comcast (or Cablevision or Cox or TWC). One step further -- not every TiVo S3 subscriber has cable. Some actually only use OTA. Clearly, the percentage of "TiVo/Comcast" subscribers affected will be higher than the overall percentage. TiVo, however, will invariably focus SOLELY on the overall percentage. Third -- not every subscriber is adversely affected by SDV. So far, in the systems where SDV is already deployed, the channels SDV'ed are ones that I personally don't care about at all, so as a result, I wouldn't count for that percentage. If Comcast is smart about what they SDV (and they may even change their direction to become smart before wider deployment, if they haven't decided to be smart yet), they can really keep the impact of SDV low for a good long time.



MichaelK said:


> ... and you could get to 20% of head ends with SDV sometime in 2008.


And if you're off by 1%, and they only adversely affect 19% of TiVo subscribers, and/or if the threshold is at the top end of my range (30%), then it WILL be years until "a substantial percentage of TiVo owners are affected by it". 



MichaelK said:


> Or perhaps be by "affected" you mean pissed about it?


What I mean is irrelevant. We're trying to interpret what TiVo means by what they wrote. That's ALL that matters. And I'll bet that they surely wouldn't care about people who aren't adversely affected enough to care.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

bicker said:


> What I mean is irrelevant. We're trying to interpret what TiVo means by what they wrote. That's ALL that matters. And I'll bet that they surely wouldn't care about people who aren't adversely affected enough to care.


I interpret that TiVo has no meaning whatsoever. So interpret what they will mean and when they will decide on a meaning, and whether it will ever become necessary to decide, and what would make it necessary.............


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

TiVoMonkey said:


> You do not save bandwidth when there is at least 1 person watching a channel on a node all of the time. Cable companies have obviously been running the statistics on what channels are watched when and where. They will not dedicate expensive resources to switching channels that are always watched in all nodes.
> 
> Sure, you'll miss some channel or another because it goes to SDV, but you're going to be missing it because it doesn't have a large enough audience to designate dedicated channel to.
> 
> ...


Frankly, SDV could be used with quite a lot of channels in some situations where there are not many customers per node in a system.

What is this 2011 thing?

I think a lot of cable is very interested in doing SDV. SDV has the potential to lead to lots of revenue/profit for cable.


----------



## cdp1276 (Mar 25, 2003)

I too hope we have a solution in the near term for SDV. However my area under TimeWarner has yet to deploy SDV (but says in Nov) but will soon. My issue is why they are blocking a # of channels to me via CableCard's and what I can do about it? I've opened a FCC case, never heard anything, talked to the president of the area, he says he will ask corporate but has no clue. How can they get away with this and can we get TiVo on the case?


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

What is this about 2011 and analog channels from cable?They need to drop these ASAP. What is the point of dropping OTA analog if cable companies can't drop it until 2011? That will just force people to a cable company instead of getting an OTA tuner.


----------



## drew00001 (Jan 13, 2007)

This is the first I have heard about 2011 requirment. What analog channels do the cablecos have to keep? 

If the cablecos only have to keep locals or basic cable, there should still be room for HD content to expand significantly . . . but cablecos would have to make the decision which analog expanded basic channels to remove, etc.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

If they go all digital, they are not affected by 2011.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

Most cable companies have to "dual carry" many channels through 2011 (one analog version, one digital) to accomodate the absolutely enormous number of cable customers who just have analog cable via a cable-ready television set (or Tivo, VCR, etc).

Details, implications, etc...
http://cedmagazine.com/Article-Digital-Transition-Losing-Proposition.aspx


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

HDTiVo said:


> I interpret that TiVo has no meaning whatsoever.


I could buy into that interpretation.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Re: 2011 / analog channels

Cable companies are free to go all digital / no analog any time. There is no FCC requirement to keep analog channels through 2011.

What the FCC is requiring is that *if* a cable company carries any analog channels, they must *also* carry an analog version of any must-carry stations (through 2011, subject to review / renewal).

My local encumbant cable company carries a grand total of two must-carry stations.

But anyway, cable companies are free to go all digital / no analog any time ... they're just not being allowed to drop the analog must-carry stations while keeping other analog stations.


----------



## Revolutionary (Dec 1, 2004)

dt_dc said:


> Re: 2011 / analog channels
> 
> Cable companies are free to go all digital / no analog any time. There is no FCC requirement to keep analog channels through 2011.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I should have clarified. By "most," I meant "all cable companies that can't afford to switch every subscriber to digital service." Which, if you read the article that I linked, is probably all of them -- or at least all of the national providers.



CedMagazine.com said:


> The fact is the cable industry actually cant afford for analog to go away in little more than a year. So the FCCs three-year extension compelling operators to continue with analog signals is both a reprieve and a deadline. It gives operators that much more time to convert to digital themselves, and do so more gradually, in three years rather than one.


dt_dc: What are the must carry channels?


----------



## Joybob (Oct 2, 2007)

HDTiVo said:


> Frankly, SDV could be used with quite a lot of channels in some situations where there are not many customers per node in a system.
> 
> What is this 2011 thing?
> 
> I think a lot of cable is very interested in doing SDV. SDV has the potential to lead to lots of revenue/profit for cable.


This may be a really stupid question but how exactly does 'saving bandwidth' lead to higher profits? They already have the coax cable laid out and the hardware for streaming the video; besides saving some money on electricty I don't see how this can make them more profits.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

Joybob said:


> This may be a really stupid question but how exactly does 'saving bandwidth' lead to higher profits? They already have the coax cable laid out and the hardware for streaming the video; besides saving some money on electricty I don't see how this can make them more profits.


 By making more bandwidth available they can add more video services (like HD channels), more VOD offerings, better internet speeds, more phone services, etc. attracting more customers and hence profits.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Joybob said:


> This may be a really stupid question but how exactly does 'saving bandwidth' lead to higher profits? They already have the coax cable laid out and the hardware for streaming the video; besides saving some money on electricty I don't see how this can make them more profits.





moyekj said:


> By making more bandwidth available they can add more video services (like HD channels), more VOD offerings, better internet speeds, more phone services, etc. attracting more customers and hence profits.


What he said.

Its about rededicating  bandwidth for other purposes as opposed to saving  bandwith.


----------



## drcos (Jul 20, 2001)

Revolutionary said:


> dt_dc: What are the must carry channels?


This refers to 'local' channels and is due to a ruling back in the 70s when TCI (remember them?) was dropping local (non-network) channels on some of their systems to accomodate the early cable channels which brought them more revenue.

Must-carry applies to local stations who request this status from the cable company (local stations that request to be carried on a local head-end must be carried by the cable company).
This does not apply to low-power stations, and stations that require retransmission consent (the station wants the cable company to pay for the channel).

There are other explanations on the net to be found, but this is kind of it in a nutshell.


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

Okay, so perhas someone can bottom line this for me please. I subscribe to Cablevision IO in New Jersey and am considering buying a second S3. Is the likelihood that I'll be okay, or is there a good probability that within a year or so the two units will be essentially worthless?


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

One of the two. It is verly like that no one here -- no one anywhere, perhaps -- can give you a reliable answer. Cablevision execs, themselves, may not yet have made that decision.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

ADG said:


> ... Cablevision IO in New Jersey and am considering buying a second S3. Is the likelihood that I'll be okay, or is there a good probability that within a year or so the two units will be essentially worthless?


There is a good probability that at some point the two units will be *worth less * and at some point thereafter *worth more*.

BTW, I think on your system your S3 is already worth less, but maybe not noticeably less to you.


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

HDTiVo said:


> There is a good probability that at some point the two units will be *worth less * and at some point thereafter *worth more*.
> 
> BTW, I think on your system your S3 is already worth less, but maybe not noticeably less to you.


You know, I'm a pretty bright guy - but I haven't got a clue what you're trying to say.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

ADG said:


> You know, I'm a pretty bright guy - but I haven't got a clue what you're trying to say.


You'll lose some channels to SDV  , then the thingy will come out and you'll end up with lots more channels because of SDV. 

Don't you already have some SDV channels on your system? I was thinking probably nothing you'd care about yet.


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

I'm not aware of any SDV channels as of this time. I don't even know how I'd know if I do have any.


----------



## Lensman (Dec 22, 2001)

As I mentioned in another thread, I'm a Cablevision customer in Hoboken. They were going to switch everyone to digital cable but last I heard from an installer, it looks like we're keeping the analog stations for a while because of obstinate old people.

I'm buying a second S3 as soon as MRV is turned on and reviews start trickling in.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

ADG said:


> I'm not aware of any SDV channels as of this time. I don't even know how I'd know if I do have any.


As far as I know, Cablevision of Westchester uses switched technology to deliver the foreign language channels, some of the sports packages and obviously, all of the on-demand channels. Everything else is available using CableCARDS.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

Lensman said:


> As I mentioned in another thread, I'm a Cablevision customer in Hoboken. They were going to switch everyone to digital cable but last I heard from an installer, it looks like we're keeping the analog stations for a while because of obstinate old people.
> 
> I'm buying a second S3 as soon as MRV is turned on and reviews start trickling in.


Going all digital does not necessitate that the channels are switched.


----------



## Grakthis (Oct 4, 2006)

bicker said:


> Sorry, but this verges on "silly". It is one thing to express disappointment, and provide a short explanation of why, but until you go up the line, SEVERAL levels (not just one or two), the rest, including claims about what the FCC requires, is "beyond the agent's pay-grade". Let's not take our frustration with technology out on poor CSR and CSR supervisors -- doing so does nothing more than earn us worse and worse customer service.


So go up the line?

I don't really see you're point. I say "call and complain" and you say "well, that's silly. The people at the lowest level won't be able to do anything."

Ok? So don't complain to the people at the lowest level then. This is not rocket science.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Sure, go up the line... but the point is to start at the lowest level where there is a reasonable expectation that the person has purview. The problem is that such people aren't available at the other side of a 24 hour toll-free number. And while I'll agree that this isn't rocket science, by how often people take the lazy approach and abuse low-level CSRs when they're really upset about arguably reasonable business decisions made by higher-ups, you'd think it is rocket science.


----------



## Grakthis (Oct 4, 2006)

bicker said:


> Sure, go up the line... but the point is to start at the lowest level where there is a reasonable expectation that the person has purview. The problem is that such people aren't available at the other side of a 24 hour toll-free number. And while I'll agree that this isn't rocket science, by how often people take the lazy approach and abuse low-level CSRs when they're really upset about arguably reasonable business decisions made by higher-ups, you'd think it is rocket science.


I agree. Be polite but firm with low level CSRs. Yelling at them does nothing. In fact, being polite but firm all the way to the top is the best way to get results.


----------



## kg08854 (Feb 26, 2008)

I have optimum and I am still waiting for a tuning adaptor to be availible. TIVO support tried to be helpful but was not. Any one have any word on this?


----------



## hurl03 (Nov 1, 2007)

kg08854 said:


> I have optimum and I am still waiting for a tuning adaptor to be availible. TIVO support tried to be helpful but was not. Any one have any word on this?


Tuning adapter available tomorrow 4/7 at walk in centers. confirmed this with cable card support last week.


----------

