# Who would buy (a/another) TiVo HD if it could do QAM mapping(HD locals w/o CableCARD)



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

Recently TiVoPony mentioned that QAM mapping only targets a small number of subscribers and that affects its priority. In discussing Free Space Indicator he also established some critieria that would make a feature appealing for TiVo to work on.

I'm curious how many people would buy a TiVo HD (or another TiVo HD) if it had the ability to do QAM mapping.

I don't want to get into tangent arguments about how to implement this.

Let's just say this feature allows you to record HD locals with full guide data w/o needing to lease CableCARDs.

This is not an either-or proposition. You might want to have your primary TiVo equipped with CableCARD to record encrypted programs, and offload the recording of shows on ABC, NBC, FOX, CBS, CW, PBS, etc. to the secondary TiVo. Most shows should be viewable on any TiVo in the house via MRV (assuming they are CCI=0x00)

The big deal is you would be able to buy a TiVo HD (pay for TiVo subscription) and just plug it into the wall and start enjoying TiVo functionality (HD locals) just like you can with an S1/S2. No need to contact the cable company and deal with extra fees, installation problems, billing problems, etc.

Keep in mind *you can do all the QAM mapping automatically with no user intervention* by taking advantage of PSIP. The FCC requires PSIP to be passed through but not every cable company does so. 47% of respondents who receive HD locals in the clear indicate they have useful PSIP. This approach has already been shown to work in the TWC Austin market. It basically involves convincing the guide provider, Tribune, to include guide data that matches the PSIP channel #s.

TiVoPony's post regarding QAM mapping priorities
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6149876#post6149876


TiVoPony said:


> Regarding the specific features you've asked about, the free space indicator is certainly the longest running request. Longevity does not equal priority though. *If that single feature would have sold more boxes and increased customer satisfaction for a significant portion of our subscribers, it would have been added years ago.* It may get in there one day, but when prioritized against other things, it's often pretty low on the list.
> 
> *Likewise, features such as QAM remapping* and M-Card S3 support *do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers.* That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers. But it is a consideration when trading off those features against others (M-Card for S3 is technically possible, but also technically very complex. We've learned that there is a lot of risk inherent in that development).


*Useful Links*

*Automatic QAM mapping via PSIP works already* (for TW Austin TiVo users) assuming you get Tribune to adjust their guide data
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=4979695#post4979695
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=5015029#post5015029

*47% respondents* who get HD locals in the clear indicate they *already have useful PSIP info* in the PSIP poll.
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=367744

*FCC requires PSIP passthrough when available from content provider*
http://w2.eff.org/IP/pnp/FCC_PnP_Ruling.pdf


> §76.640 Support for Unidirectional Digital Cable Products on Digital
> Cable Systems.
> ...
> (iv) *For each digital transport stream that includes one or more
> ...



*Previous QAM mapping discussion thread*
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=362736


----------



## AZ_Tivo (Jan 17, 2005)

I would not buy another THD (just because of QAM mapping) as I have one. 

If and when they come out with QAM mapping it should be a software change and existing THD owners would get it as well. So current THD owners won't need to buy one just because now THD can do QAM mapping. 

One may a second or third THD for MRV but that's a different story.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

To clarify, we are talking about a software feature that would be available to existing HD/S3 users.

The option to buy another TiVo HD is to see whether this feature is only useful for new customers or whether existing customers (which for the most part are already using CableCARD) would care about this feature. It wasn't meant to imply that QAM mapping would require new hardware.

In hindsight I should have included an option which tracked people who would be happier with their existing TiVo if QAM mapping was available since some people might be happier dropping their existing CableCARD if the only reason they got it was for channel mapping (and not for decryption) I guess you can just use the recommend to friend option if you fit into this category.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

AZ_Tivo said:


> I would not buy another THD (just because of QAM mapping) as I have one.


The question was, if you have one, would you get a second one (i.e., for a another TV) if you didn't have to go and get a(nother) CableCARD for it to work.

It's worth noting that, at least with Comcast, for a second TV with CableCARD you pay not only the CableCARD rental charge but also the "additional outlet" monthly charge. In my area, that's $8.90 a month. You don't have to pay that if you just use QAM.


----------



## DaveSt (Apr 7, 2008)

Hmm. Well let me put it this way. Up until I bought my HD, I had analog extended basic cable (with a Series 1). I had looked into digital cable and thought the picture quality was horrendously bad for the most part. So I took a vow that I would be dragged kicking and screaming into the digital cable universe and only by "force". 

Now then. I impulsively bought my HD a few weeks ago. I had not researched things thoroughly and didn't know about the QAM mapping issue, let alone the existence of this forum. Well of course I discovered immediately that the HD functionality of my new TiVo was basically crippled and useless. Found this forum, educated myself very quickly, and decided the only reasonable course of action was to get cable card(s). That of course forced me to make the leap to digital cable.

And the upshot is that, via my new TiVo, SD digital cable video quality is not near as bad as I had feared or expected. So I have it all now: Digital cable, more channels, TiVo with HD, and I still have my analog cable. This all ended up costing me about $40 a month more than I paid previously (I know the math may not seem right but that's how it works out, trust me). I'm getting a LOT more TV for that $40, esp. HD content. So in my mind the QAM thing is not a deal-breaker.

Now having said all that blah blah, I think it's a shame that the QAM mapping isn't there for basic HDTV services. That does blow. But it doesn't really bug me. Perhaps it should.

As an aside, the Comcast tech who installed my mstream card was extremely professional and knowledgable. That all went off without a hitch. If Comcast were to survey me, I would give a "10" to how the cable card thing went.

If I felt I needed a 2nd HD TiVo, I would definitely get the cable card, or more likely, wait for Series 4 to see what new features it brings.


----------



## AZ_Tivo (Jan 17, 2005)

aindik said:


> The question was, if you have one, would you get a second one (i.e., for a another TV) if you didn't have to go and get a(nother) CableCARD for it to work.
> 
> It's worth noting that, at least with Comcast, for a second TV with CableCARD you pay not only the CableCARD rental charge but also the "additional outlet" monthly charge. In my area, that's $8.90 a month. You don't have to pay that if you just use QAM.


and like I said just because of QAM one will not buy another THD. I could do MRV or OTA if I really wanted the same content on second THD.

BTW, is it really that hard to manually map the channels? I don't know as I am OTA only.


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

AZ_Tivo said:


> and like I said just because of QAM one will not buy another THD.


You won't, but "one" might. That would be the point of the poll.



AZ_Tivo said:


> I could do MRV or OTA if I really wanted the same content on second THD.


Assuming you didn't ever want to record more than two things at once, and assuming OTA was available at your location.

MRV, in HD, isn't exactly instantaneous either. And shows can't be MRV'd until they're done recording.



AZ_Tivo said:


> BTW, is it really that hard to manually map the channels? I don't know as I am OTA only.


Hard for whom? The user? It's impossible. The option doesn't exist. That's kinda the point of the thread - what if it did.


----------



## 1003 (Jul 14, 2000)

*If*
it was an easy process like Media Center:
Input 'mapped' channel number
Input OTA RF or cable 'channel' number
Input the text you want to appear in the onscreen guide
Select guide data you want associated with your mapped channel
Enjoy your mapped channel, until the Evil Cable Company arbitrarily changes channel location...


----------



## greg_burns (May 22, 2004)

DaveSt said:


> ...was to get cable card(s). That of course forced me to make the leap to digital cable.


Not true for everyone. I have cable cards with basic cable. Granted, I had got digital (for the cable cards) and then downgraded after 1 yr. But others claim you can get cable cards w/o digital cable. YMMV.

Would I have preferred not to had to get cable cards? You bet. But I am being charged very little for 2 cards (actually only being charge $3 for one, the other is free), so I am not complaining about a monthly cost.

The hassle of cable cards is definately preventing me from buying a second HD Tivo though.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

Nope, already have a series3. But it's a feature I would like to see.


----------



## Mars Rocket (Mar 24, 2000)

I'm already paying for cable service anyway, and the additional CableCard is like $2//month for me so I don't really care. Besides, my backup/second PVR is a MythTV box and it can do the mapping anyway.


----------



## hmm52 (Feb 25, 2008)

Since posting last night, I've read a number of posts here and given the topic more thought. I'm biased because of my circumstances, viewing/recording habits, provider, small # of people in house, and so on. If it had existed however, my poll response would have been:

"TiVo should provide a means for channel mapping clear QAM because the most basic utility, through OTA or cable, should be supported as a matter of principle."

It doesn't matter what the "target market" estimate is. TiVo's customers should have the right to choose whatever service package they want from their provider, not be forced into one because of the limitations of their DVR. We're paying substantial sums, unlike TVGOS, for the guide. It shouldn't have a gaping hole in it. 

An option for manual remapping seems reasonable even if it was made tedious to do - 3 thumbs down, etc., etc. My first reaction to TiVo after 2years with Sonys - The UI was designed for Aunt Minnie from Topeka. The guide was designed by George Orwell. I've adjusted to it. Given that a quick & stable guide is the S3's best feature, I can understand TiVo not wanting to surrender much control of it to users. I'm sure most Sony DVR returns occurred because buyers were soon confronted with up to 600 channels to be edited, ordered, and possibly mapped. But TiVo should loosen their grip a little, for basic clear QAM first.

One bias - 3 months in and I still don't have an S3 with 2 tuners that can display all channels without tiling (pixelation); so my own priority is tuning at the moment. Not just locals for which antenna is reliably used.


----------



## Gregor (Feb 18, 2002)

Surely Tivo knows how many S3/HD are in use without cable cards as part of their population.

Since most of the HD allure for me is on non-network programming, cable cards are a must, and after the initial rough install periods, work great.


----------



## HomieG (Feb 17, 2003)

I am a bit surprised by TiVo's, and HDTV manufacturers, response to this. One would think it's a "no brainer" to have QAM mapping if the device has a QAM tuner. 

I suspect that perhaps TiVo's contract to supply DVR software to cable companies may have something to do with this, i.e. they don't want to PO a big customer, said big customer who makes money on every cable card and every "additional outlet", at least in theory they're making money on those, at minimum adds cash revenues.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

How are you going to gather all the votes from people who care so little about this to not even bother clicking on the thread to vote?


----------



## Phantom Gremlin (Jun 20, 2002)

bicker said:


> How are you going to gather all the votes from people who care so little about this to not even bother clicking on the thread to vote?


Most of these polls have this exact problem. Nothing different with this one. And since TiVo isn't going to ever do a damn thing about the QAM problem, there's no real need to gather votes anyway.

This poll is just a little harmless fun.


----------



## wildjoe (Nov 29, 2005)

I'm ditching cable all together and just going OTA. I think QAM mapping would be good for TiVo to implement, but I won't use it.


----------



## Saxion (Sep 18, 2006)

I answered "I would buy another" because I personally know 3 people who would buy a Tivo HD if it fully supported clear QAM.


----------



## hmm52 (Feb 25, 2008)

Gregor said:


> Surely Tivo knows how many S3/HD are in use without cable cards as part of their population.
> 
> Since most of the HD allure for me is on non-network programming, cable cards are a must, and after the initial rough install periods, work great.


If S3/HDs were fully functional clear QAM, rather than minimally so, the number would be different.

Most of what I record isn't network either. Cablecards haven't been much bother in 3 years using them in 3-5 devices. But that & OTA shouldn't be the only options for those with different preferences.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

Gregor said:


> Surely Tivo knows how many S3/HD are in use without cable cards as part of their population.
> 
> Since most of the HD allure for me is on non-network programming, cable cards are a must, and after the initial rough install periods, work great.


The number of people currently using S3/HD without CableCARD on cable has very little to do with the number of people who would like to use S3/HD without CableCARD. S3/HD is virtually useless without CableCARDs today.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Even though I have lifetime subscriptions, I would pay a one time fee for this functionality. I'm not so sure about how much, but definitely $20 per Tivo... maybe more.


----------



## AZ_Tivo (Jan 17, 2005)

mattack said:


> Even though I have lifetime subscriptions, I would pay a one time fee for this functionality. I'm not so sure about how much, but definitely $20 per Tivo... maybe more.


This may be a compelling factor for Tivo Inc. to start working on QAM mapping.


----------



## cableguy763 (Oct 29, 2006)

I would buy another since TW Austin does QAM mapping the correct way . Come on tax return.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Most of these polls have this exact problem. Nothing different with this one. And since TiVo isn't going to ever do a damn thing about the QAM problem, there's no real need to gather votes anyway.
> 
> This poll is just a little harmless fun.


umm, it is not a QAM 'problem' actually. 
Since you can get the correct mapping by getting cable cards or go with a 30$ OTA for those in a good reception area then this is really an *added feature*

so the poll question is correct and most likely the same one TiVo gathered data on in deciding if the clamor for this feature reaches a level of positively affecting the bottom line.

From the downward spiral thread and TiVopony's repsonse in there it sounds like TiVo has determined it would not and the fun little poll will most likely not change that.

have fun


----------



## inspron (Apr 15, 2007)

hmm52 said:


> Since posting last night, I've read a number of posts here and given the topic more thought. I'm biased because of my circumstances, viewing/recording habits, provider, small # of people in house, and so on. If it had existed however, my poll response would have been:
> 
> "TiVo should provide a means for channel mapping clear QAM because the most basic utility, through OTA or cable, should be supported as a matter of principle."
> 
> ...


I completely agree. I have a S2 for ages now, I'm ready to commit to a Tivo HD but I will not do so until they allow QAM mapping, even a crude method that requires some hacking. I really feel Tivo's position on this is one of arrogance. The same arrogance to price the Tivo S3 for $800 at the on set, only to later realize very few people would care for a Tivo at that price level. There are a great deal with people waiting in the wing for this major feature that should have been included from the get-go.


----------



## RobertHamilton (Jul 19, 2002)

My 14hr S1 is on it's 7th year. It has started to do weird stuff again (missing audio, funky glitching video and hd clicking). This means another set of hard drives (will be the 3rd set) or finally upgrading. I bought the HDTV the other night. I was ecstatic to find the QAM channels (all of the major networks and more). I guess I'll hold off on buying the HD TiVo until this feature is implemented. Hopefully, the hard drives hold out.


----------



## Saxion (Sep 18, 2006)

So far, over 60% of poll takers have expressed an interest in QAM mapping!

If those 72 people would write letters to TiVo, especially pointing out the _additional sales _TiVo would get with this feature, it would definitely get noticed. If you haven't done this already, see the "QAM mapping letter campaign" thread here.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

72 versus how many hundreds of thousands who have *not* express much interest in QAM mapping? You're fighting an up-hill battle. I think it is more important for you to get more folks interested in QAM mapping first, *before *trying to convince anyone that it is important to many people.

I want TiVo to deal with SDV first, and address some of the reliability and robustness problems we're encountering.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

inspron said:


> I completely agree. I have a S2 for ages now, I'm ready to commit to a Tivo HD but I will not do so until they allow QAM mapping, even a crude method that requires some hacking. I really feel Tivo's position on this is one of arrogance. The same arrogance to price the Tivo S3 for $800 at the on set, only to later realize very few people would care for a Tivo at that price level. There are a great deal with people waiting in the wing for this major feature that should have been included from the get-go.


wow- do you have any idea how much the QAM mapping moves around? Do you have any idea how much support cost TiVo would entail even with a "crude method"? Perhaps TiVo underestimates the market for QAM mapping like they underestimated the lower end market for an HD DVR. But it will take more than *62* sales to recoup the costs and have this show better ROI then say investing in making SDV work or the series 4 get to market.
Your great deal of people had better be 100,000


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> wow- do you have any idea how much the QAM mapping moves around? Do you have any idea how much support cost TiVo would entail even with a "crude method"? Perhaps TiVo underestimates the market for QAM mapping like they underestimated the lower end market for an HD DVR. But it will take more than *62* sales to recoup the costs and have this show better ROI then say investing in making SDV work or the series 4 get to market.
> Your great deal of people had better be 100,000


My local channels have moved once in a year.....

But *if* you are correct, they could make it a backdoor code and not support it....


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

ZeoTiVo said:


> But it will take more than *62* sales


If you really feel there are only 62 people in the world interested in buying TiVo with QAM then according to that broken estimating there are only 55 people who don't care.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

No, the math doesn't work that way. Apathetic people don't vote.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

Cool, so you agree with me.


----------



## Saxion (Sep 18, 2006)

bicker said:


> I want TiVo to deal with SDV first, and address some of the reliability and robustness problems we're encountering.


That's the difference between us...I don't actively campaign _against _those features (or any others you might think are important). I respect other people's opinions and interests; in fact I agree with you that SDV is very high priority and needs resolution ASAP. But one does not preclude the other, and there is room enough for multiple features and fixes to be worked on. It's not like the TiVo SW staff is one guy sitting in a basement working on one thing at a time...

I will say that there are not many missing features that are _provably resulting in lost sales for TiVo_. SDV is one, QAM guide data is another. I can't think of another...certainly not a free space indicator, not Rhapsody, not YouTube, not SwivelSearch or any of a hundred other niceties. Those are _good things_, but their absence does not result in _lost sales_. If you have to prioritize, that seems like a good place for a company to start.

Even if you have zero interest in QAM guide data, you should have an interest in increasing TiVo's user base...it makes for a stronger and healthier company that will be around longer to service _you_.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Saxion said:


> TBut one does not preclude the other


There is no reason to believe that.



Saxion said:


> I will say that there are not many missing features that are _provably resulting in lost sales for TiVo_. SDV is one, QAM guide data is another. I can't think of another...certainly not a free space indicator


I'll agree with you that QAM Mapping almost surely rides *a lot * higher than the free space indicator. :up:



Saxion said:


> Even if you have zero interest in QAM guide data, you should have an interest in increasing TiVo's user base...it makes for stronger and healthier company that will be around longer to service _you_.


I think the fundamental issue is that I feel that advocates like you are grossly overstating the extent to which *real *potential customers are drive by the provision of/lack of this specific feature. My objections are, I feel, commensurate with that overstatement.


----------



## Saxion (Sep 18, 2006)

ZeoTiVo said:


> wow- do you have any idea how much the QAM mapping moves around? Do you have any idea how much support cost TiVo would entail even with a "crude method"?


But TiVo already has a "crude method"...it's called Manual Recording and is just as susceptible to QAM channels moving around. How is adding guide data making that situation any worse? In fact, one could argue that TiVo needs to fix the current "crude method" by not only supplying the missing guide data, but also detecting and handling QAM channel reassignments (perhaps by automatically re-scanning at night)...but that's a different feature request.

I will chime in & say that my market's local HD QAM assignments have not changed in well over 2 years. If your MSO often remaps your local HD QAM assignments, you are the exception, not the rule. The vast majority of people can rely on clear QAM for watching their local HD, and many, many people do just that without TiVo.


----------



## shady (May 31, 2002)

Zero priority for me


----------



## Saxion (Sep 18, 2006)

bicker said:


> I feel that advocates like you are grossly overstating the extent to which *real *potential customers are drive by the provision of/lack of this specific feature.


Can you please explain the logic or data by which you arrive at this conclusion?

I can explain the simple logic by which I arrive at the opposite conclusion. The market for clear QAM cable viewing is the intersection of 2 groups: those who only want to watch local HD channels, and those who cannot get all of them using an antenna (or who don't want to deal with the hassle of an antenna). Both of these groups are large. The first was so large that TiVo included the antenna input on the S3/HD. Imagine the relative cost to do this...both BOM and NRE. TiVo had good reasons to incur this cost, namely that there is a sizable market there. The second group is also large and caused by many factors...poor geography, poor unit location in apt/condo/dorm, multiple TVs in the house, difficultly wiring from rooftop antenna to TV location, rural residents, etc etc.

Just because _you _want more than local HD channels, and/or _you _can easily receive them all via antenna, doesn't change this logic at all.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Saxion said:


> Can you please explain the logic or data by which you arrive at this conclusion?


Read TiVoPony's messages; I know you'll arrive at the same conclusion if you put aside your personal preferences in this regard, such as that which prompts you to assign the descriptor "large" to the size of the market groups you've defined, despite the absence of the kind of data that TiVoPony, if he's doing his job, *actually **has*.

The logical reality is that the intersection is obviously smaller than the union, and then you add in the qualifier of those interested in a device where they would have to do the mapping versus getting the mapping provided and maintained for them via CableCard, and apparently, again, based on just watching what TiVoPony's said, the intersection of all three is very small.

QED.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

Great, we are all in agreement. Let's keep on voting.


----------



## Saxion (Sep 18, 2006)

bicker said:


> Read TiVoPony's messages; I know you'll arrive at the same conclusion


I have, and that is not what he said. He said it affects a small number of *current TiVo owners*. This is not surprising, since we are talking about *prospective TiVo owners.*



bicker said:


> based on just watching what TiVoPony's said, the intersection of all three is very small.


Again, that's not at all what he said. So, what other logic or data do you have? Is it reasoned and well-articulated, or just your gut feeling?


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Saxion said:


> I have, and that is not what he said. He said it affects a small number of *current TiVo owners*. This is not surprising, since we are talking about *prospective TiVo owners.*


And you insist that your information about that is better than Pony's, as well? -- that your predictions are better than those that drive TiVo's operations? Sorry, I don't believe that. I think they are better informed, and better positioned to make the correct decision.



Saxion said:


> So, what other logic or data do you have?


Your decision to dismiss what I've said is predictable: You _disagree _with me. What _else _would you say to such compelling indicators?  Prove you have better information and better insights than experienced professionals with data, or accept that you don't.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Saxion said:


> But TiVo already has a "crude method"...it's called Manual Recording and is just as susceptible to QAM channels moving around. How is adding guide data making that situation any worse? In fact, one could argue that TiVo needs to fix the current "crude method" by not only supplying the missing guide data, but also detecting and handling QAM channel reassignments (perhaps by automatically re-scanning at night)...but that's a different feature request..


not if TiVo is going to offiicially support QAM mapping withpout a cable card. TiVo will have to account for many situations in many markets or else advertise with silly disclaimers like (QAM mapping not avaialable in AZ)

and in all of this TiVo has indeed fixed the Crude method by the inclusion of Cable Card support which will map all those channels just fine and then all the guide data you need will be present. If someone is not willing to spend the bucks to have cable cards then why should TiVo believe they will spend the money on extra Tivo subscriptions.

PS - it is not if I believe the number is 62 or not - the number that counts is the one TiVo Looks at in determing what return they can expect on investing in the resources to make this happen - which are resources all through the chain at TiVo - not just a software guy. A fundemnetal flaw some make is assuming that a company works like hackers. A company does not and has to count all the testing, process, documenting, maintenance as otehr features are added, taking that ability forward to the series 4 and tru2way that perhaps works differently and so on.

So have the poll, have the fun, but if you expect the local HD to be mapped it will take a cable card(or 2) from your cable company and I doubt we will see that change naytime soon


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> If someone is not willing to spend the bucks to have cable cards then why should TiVo believe they will spend the money on extra Tivo subscriptions.


Ding ding ding ding!!! We have a winner!!!!

That's the whole issue in a nutshell.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

We all agree.

TiVo Sub + CableCARD fee >= TiVo Sub.

TiVo Sub + CableCARD order/install hassle >= TiVo Sub order/install hassle.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> not if TiVo is going to offiicially support QAM mapping withpout a cable card. TiVo will have to account for many situations in many markets or else advertise with silly disclaimers like (QAM mapping not avaialable in AZ)


Or just make it a backdoor code and not support it...



ZeoTiVo said:


> If someone is not willing to spend the bucks to have cable cards then why should TiVo believe they will spend the money on extra Tivo subscriptions.


1) Some small dink cable shops are not required to support cable cards.
2) I had Comcast out THREE TIMES to install cable cards, after the third time they told me I would have to wait three months because they 'ran out'. I guess I'm 'cheap' because I don't want to blow a weeks worth of vacation time and 6 months of my life trying to get the stupid company to install cable cards.
3) MANY people have had cable companies that simply can't get cablecards to work at all.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Adam1115 said:


> Or just make it a backdoor code and not support it...


Nor be able to capitalize on the work necessary to install the back door, in advertising or promotional material, and therefore garner practically no additional revenue as a result of that work.



Adam1115 said:


> 1) Some small dink cable shops are not required to support cable cards.
> 2) I had Comcast out THREE TIMES to install cable cards, after the third time they told me I would have to wait three months because they 'ran out'. I guess I'm 'cheap' because I don't want to blow a weeks worth of vacation time and 6 months of my life trying to get the stupid company to install cable cards.
> 3) MANY people have had cable companies that simply can't get cablecards to work at all.


The TiVo is the wrong device for people in those situations.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

bicker said:


> The TiVo is the wrong device for people in those situations.


Oh ok.

What is the right HD DVR device for cable customers who have difficulty getting working cablecards from their cable companies?


----------



## ilh (Dec 21, 2007)

I wish TiVo would spend 1&#37; of the effort bicker does in shooting down peoples' wishes. If they did, QAM mapping would already be finished.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Adam1115 said:


> What is the right HD DVR device for cable customers who have difficulty getting working cablecards from their cable companies?


You could try a cable company DVR, or do without. Not everything you want to have needs to exist and be available for you.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

ilh said:


> I wish TiVo would spend 1% of the effort bicker does in shooting down peoples' wishes. If they did, QAM mapping would already be finished.


Just keeping things real, dawg. Wishes are like... well you know the rest. The problem is that too many people distort wishes into expectations, and that's not constructive.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

bicker said:


> You could try a cable company DVR, or do without. Not everything you want to have needs to exist and be available for you.


You were the one who said 'tivo wasn't for me', I'm very happy with TiVo.

Wishing for a feature your TiVo, Car, Computer, house, ? doesn't have doesn't means I'm better off without....


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

ilh said:


> I wish TiVo would spend 1% of the effort bicker does in shooting down peoples' wishes. If they did, QAM mapping would already be finished.


Yes, for some reason he's really worked up about people wanting a certain feature.

So much that if you want to discuss any features you think might be useful, you shouldn't even use a TiVo.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Given your complaints, I said what I said. You keep trying to defend your assertions... what else can I conclude? 

If you're happy with your TiVo, then clearly TiVo is making the right choice doing what they're already doing. 

My point is that your assertions regarding the importance of what you say you think might be useful don't have merit.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

bicker said:


> Given your complaints, I said what I said. If you're happy with your TiVo, then clearly TiVo is making the right choice doing what they're already doing. My point is that your assertions regarding the importance of what you say you think might be useful don't have merit.


There are lots of useful features that my TiVo now has that it didn't have before, many of them were discussed on here years before they happened.

There's nothing wrong with people thinking a feature would be incredible useful to them and hoping TiVo implements it.

Just because it's not useful to you in your situation doesn't mean you should bash everyone who could use it....


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

And there is nothing wrong with someone objecting to that assertion. Let it go.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

bicker said:


> And there is nothing wrong with someone objecting to that assertion. Let it go.


59 times, in two thread.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Adam1115 said:


> 59 times, in two thread.


Gosh, cyber stalking now. You've sunk pretty low, Adam. Regardless, it is not a single message more than the messages I was replying to.  At least I was objecting within the topic. You're just wasting bandwidth *****ing because you don't like my replying to your assertions. Get over it. Please.


----------



## Saxion (Sep 18, 2006)

bicker said:


> Ding ding ding ding!!! We have a winner!!!!
> 
> 
> ZeoTiVo said:
> ...


Wow, have you two never heard of S3/HD owners using ATSC tuners? It's like you think non-CableCARD using S3/HD owners don't exist. TiVo _absolutely _caters to people who don't want to spend money on CableCARDs (or cable).


----------



## Saxion (Sep 18, 2006)

bicker said:


> And you insist that your information about that is better than Pony's, as well? -- that your predictions are better than those that drive TiVo's operations?


I never said that either, but you have an uncanny ability to put words in people's mouths. There are multiple reasons why TiVo might not want to add guide support for clear QAM channels that have nothing to do with the size of the market. Not wanting to rock the boat with the cable industry is one.

Lack of guide support does not mean TiVo has decided the market for this is insignificant. That is fallacious logic.

You say that the number of people interested in this feature is tiny. Back it up with some logic or data.


----------



## Saxion (Sep 18, 2006)

bicker said:


> Gosh, cyber stalking now. You've sunk pretty low, Adam.


Adam, please ignore such inappropriate comments, and keep on posting.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Saxion said:


> Wow, have you two never heard of S3/HD owners using ATSC tuners?


There isn't a single S3/HD owner using ATSC tuners to receive cable signals. *Not a single one.*

_If you're not going to keep up with the discussion and stay on topic, then I'll be quick to highlight your irrelevancies._


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Saxion said:


> I never said that either, but you have an uncanny ability to put words in people's mouths.


You're just avoiding the inevitable conclusion drawn from your own statements. Back-pedal if you wish.



Saxion said:


> You say that the number of people interested in this feature is tiny.


BULL. I didn't say that. I cannot remember the last time I used the word "tiny".  If you're going to ***** about what I post, then ***** *about what I post*.


----------



## Saxion (Sep 18, 2006)

bicker said:


> BULL. I didn't say that. I cannot remember the last time I used the word "tiny".


Oh my gosh, I'm so sorry! You used the words "very small" instead of "tiny"! I see the vast, incalculable difference between them now! How could I have been so careless with your words? "Tiny" isn't "very small" at all, they are like atoms to galaxies! Thank you so much for the thesaurus lesson!


Saxion said:


> You say that the number of people interested in this feature is tiny very small. Back it up with some logic or data.


Still waiting...


----------



## Saxion (Sep 18, 2006)

bicker said:


> If you're not going to keep up with the discussion and stay on topic, then I'll be quick to highlight your irrelevancies.


Sorry if the logic became too complex for you; it can be a bit confusing, so I'll help you sort it out. ZeoTiVo made the argument that showing an unwillingness to pay for CableCARDs implies an unwillingness to pay for a TiVo subscription. You agreed with him with a humorous "Ding ding ding ding!!" post. I pointed out that people who get their HD over ATSC tuners instead of cable/CableCARDs also show an unwillingness to pay for CableCARDs, yet they all subscribe to TiVo (and TiVo certainly supports them with a full HW and SW feature set), thus disproving ZeoTiVo's assertion.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

So you do realize where you went off the rails and yet *you still don't realized that you did go off the rails.* You are un-believable. Read through your last message --- maybe a few dozen times will be enough to see your error.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

ZeoTiVo said:


> If someone is not willing to spend the bucks to have cable cards then why should TiVo believe they will spend the money on extra Tivo subscriptions.





Saxion said:


> Wow, have you two never heard of S3/HD owners using ATSC tuners? It's like you think non-CableCARD using S3/HD owners don't exist. TiVo _absolutely _caters to people who don't want to spend money on CableCARDs (or cable).


hehe - I actually have a TiVo HD hooked up to an OTA antenna and no cable cards. I pay only for extended basic cable as i got basic digital free by signing up for VOIP and ending up in triple play deal. I am exactly the target for your feature request.

the thing is I am not big in HD yet. My TV downstairs is a 36 inch TUBE SD TV. It shows the analog picture great. I have The TiVo HD upstairs on a 19inch LCD HDTV I got free by buying a Samsung washer and dryer.

So sure I would perhaps use the QAM mapping feature if I saw something on those channels I wanted to record. I would thank TiVo for the feature and certainly talk about it in positive terms in the forum. the thing is, from TiVo incs. perspective, I would not spend anymore on TiVo simply because it had the QAM mapping. It would be like UNBOX to me. A useful service but a limited service. If I really wnated to record straight from digital I would get the cable cards and get the full service - much like I use NETFLIX and get the full amount of time I want to have to watch a movie.

So I do not object to you wanting it - but I do bring reality to those declaring that TiVo is missing sales by saying that is not the FULL analysis such as TiVo has most likely done. When all the costs are tallied against all the possible revenue and then compared to other possible projects TiVo can work on - QAM mapping falls down the list considerably. We have that from TivoPony.

So if you want QAM mapping then you will need to get an OTA antenna or else get on your cable company's case to get the cards installed properly. If even the FCC and TiVo help line can not get the cards in properly then that is a small subset. If you have a cable company that does not have to support cable cards then you need to get on the franchise authority to get someone in who will. but these cases are not enough to get a positive revenue going for TiVo and even adding the ones who just dont feel like getting cable cards but want to record the unencrypted digital channels it still is not enough.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Saxion said:


> I pointed out that people who get their HD over ATSC tuners instead of cable/CableCARDs also show an unwillingness to pay for CableCARDs, yet they all subscribe to TiVo (and TiVo certainly supports them with a full HW and SW feature set), thus disproving ZeoTiVo's assertion.


It does nothing to disprove my assertion at all. you want to record digital then get an OTA or cable cards - anyone that does not work for is a very small subset and not a large market segment like OTA is.

rest assured TiVo had a very positive ROI by adding in the ability to record 2 OTA channels at the same time.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

Great, we all agree.

Some people will buy because of this feature, some people won't.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> So I do not object to you wanting it


And to be clear, I also do not object to anyone _wanting_ it, either.


ZeoTiVo said:


> but I do bring reality to those declaring that TiVo is missing sales by saying that is not the FULL analysis such as TiVo has most likely done. When all the costs are tallied against all the possible revenue and then compared to other possible projects TiVo can work on - QAM mapping falls down the list considerably. We have that from TivoPony.


That's exactly what I've been trying to say. :up:



sfhub said:


> Great, we all agree.


I wish that was true.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

sfhub said:


> Great, we all agree.
> 
> Some people will buy because of this feature, some people won't.


ah - but I do not agree

*some few* will buy becasue of this feature - *many will not buy *and many more would not even care about the feature


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

We all agree.

Some can be many, many can be some.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

sfhub said:


> We all agree.
> 
> Some can be many, many can be some.


sorry - do not agree with that either


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/some


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

sfhub said:


> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/some


and used in a sentence...
if you tried to persuade others in some business meeting to spend some money on a feature because some would pay for it, then you better have some resumes ready as you will be looking for some other job as some in the meeting would not like how unspecific the word some is.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

so you do agree then?


----------



## 1003 (Jul 14, 2000)

*Does anyone really know*
if TiVo does or does not react properly to PSIP data or if Evil Cable Companies willfully remove this critical data from the stream. TiVo lineup specialists have stated the Clear QAM does not work because there are no standards from the FCC.

This FCC link seems to indicate that Evil Cable Companies must not strip PSIP (or other useful elements) from the broadcast signal.



> From FCC page
> *Content of Signals Subject to Mandatory Carriage *
> 
> Program-related. A cable operator would be required to carry the following material carried on a digital television signal because it could be considered program-related under the WGN factors: (1) closed captioning, (2) V-chip data, (3) Nielsen ratings data, and (4) channel mapping and tuning protocols (PSIP).


At the moment I really want to know who to complain to/about. If my local Evilcastic Cable is stripping the PSIP data that TiVo would make use of it gives me some direction. The emperical reports about sucessful reception of TWC Austin when data is present leads me to believe that TiVo is ready once the PSIP data is properly in the cable stream as mandated.

Information from TiVo sources here seems to make mapping a low priority, possiby because they have no need to do anything if thier business partners were actually held accountable and provided PSIP data as required.

As an experiment today I tried both Cable and OTA on an ATSC tuner in a TV to compare signals and determine if PSIP data is really and truly present.

All OTA channels appear to have channel mapping, closed captioning, program ratings and program title data. Cable seemed to have proper closed captioning information as required. No ratings information was present on on any programs including several Y-14 programs in order to trigger V-Chip limits this signal is required. Not certain how I could actually test presence of Nielsen data or if I would really care. Cable appeared to have limited PSIP channel mapping but they are not correctly related to actual programming but may be thrown in as 'chum' or possibly they are just oversights by those who are 'rigging the game' against consmers. 

*CABLE/OTA EXPERIMENT SCORECARD
OTA*
CC - YES
Ratings - YES
Nielsen - ?
PSIP - YES
*Cable*
CC - YES
Ratings - NO
Nielsen - ?
PSIP - NO
*CONCLUSION*
Apparently there is data that is being carefully and purposefully removed from the OTA stream. Removed data is not the closed captioning information that would certainly cause the FCC to immediately notice and respond harshly. The data removed appears to be the one element that creates the need for Cable Cards or other Evil Cable Company hardware to receive the signals they are required by the FCC to provide. Providing these channels to eet FCC rules and regulations while making it difficult to easily tune the signals as intended seems to be the long term game plan for cable companies. Moving HD channels in a 'shell game' or 'hide and seek' fashion in order to keep customers addicted to renting overpriced cable hardware is still the obvious answer.

While I cannot and will not publically accuse my Evil Cable Provider of willful deception, filing a complaint including this test data with the FCC and local franchise authority seems to be my next logical step...

Wondering if others have tried such an experiment, and if they were able to get changes by Evil Cable Companies as a result...


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

Another place you should investigate is your local cable thread on AVS

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=45

You can ask around to see if anyone is getting PSIP.

Sometimes it is a local head-end configuration issue and other areas with the same cable company are getting PSIP.

PSIP stripping you will probably need to complain to FCC and have your cable company work from the top down.

If you can find a CSR that knows what PSIP is then they can contact the head-end and get it fixed (if it is an isolated problem), however finding one that knows about PSIP is hard to do.

You'd be in better luck if they were stripping CC. There are no end of lawyers willing to sue for ADA-related issues and that usually gets things moving pretty quick.


----------



## 1003 (Jul 14, 2000)

sfhub said:


> You'd be in better luck if they were stripping CC. There are no end of lawyers willing to sue for ADA-related issues and that usually gets things moving pretty quick.


*Thanks*
for the tip. Posted an inquiry there and I hope to get some information to confirm/deny the PSIP situation.

I'm hoping that the lack of ratings data for V-Chip implementation will get enough interest to help shine the light of truth on EvilCastic Cable Company practices...


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> ah - but I do not agree
> 
> *some few* will buy becasue of this feature - *many will not buy *and many more would not even care about the feature


I don't think anyone outside this thread is even aware of this feature. It's too technical a feature to promote. Everyone I ask is clueless. Whenever I try to explain it to someone, their eyes either glaze over or they look at me like I'm crazy. They usually say, "why would someone buy an HD DVR and only get a tenth of the HD channels?"

So how could this feature significantly increase sales? Almost no one knows about it or understands it. This thread doesn't even have 100 votes for this feature.

My cable company finally knows what an S3 is. And they are instructed to say, "You will have to rent CableCards for that. And you still won't get all the available HD programming. If you want all available HD programming, you'll want to use our DVR instead." And they would be right on both counts, as they have SDV and missing/incorrect PSIP data.

HR20/21 still doesn't have dual live buffers, even though that feature has a much bigger thread than this one does. And yet somehow D* continues to do well.


----------



## socrplyr (Jul 19, 2006)

I understand why this is not a high priority for Tivo (part 2), but lets think about how I see it first (part 1):

1) My argument
For this feature you have to think about how you use a Tivo and what it does. It allows you to better utilize the the content that you receive. Personally for me with a DVR the number of channels that I need to receive is considerably diminished. Growing up we never had anything but the local channels (paid $15 a month to TWC), so I am relatively happy with the content provided there (we are too far out to get OTA reception). Sometimes I wish I got a soccer channel or comedy central, but I just don't watch enough TV to justify the cost (>$50 a month). Especially if I can take full advantage of the channels that I do receive. I can get all the content that I really need for <$30 (worst case $13 to tivo and $17 to TWC). So basically the tivo definitely makes watching TV cheaper for me.
The catch? Basically I can't get HD in this case. TWC provides me the HD channels with this package, but the Tivo provides me no guide. Also, the TWC refuses to provide me with a cable card for this type of plan although I have not pushed the issue with them. (You have to really remember the real purpose of the cable card is encryption, but does give channel mappings as well.)

2) Tivo's argument
There are several things to consider here.
a) Tivo needs to tread carefully to not tick off the cable companies. While there are mandates they also need cooperation to provide good services.
b) The feature is hard to market. I can only imagine the explanation on the side of the box.
c) If the feature was successfully marketed the audience may not be that great. Not that it couldn't be large but many cable customers are used to having tons of channels and it is hard to change habits so there are only a few times when they wouldn't want to be able to decode encrypted channels.
d) This method won't be perfect unless Tivo gets cable companies to somehow publish the channel mappings. This is an uphill battle, because the cable cos will just say "isn't this why we have cable cards?" (Forgetting that those are really for decryption.)
e) The only possible positive here is it might prepare for the future. At some point here the cable companies are going to change their channels over to all be digital. They may be willing to leave many of the unencrypted if there is enough outcry from the subscribers (who don't want to have a box at every tv). So basically when that move happens it might be an opportunity for tivo to become a DVR converter box for older TVs and operate basically like the S2 without a cable box. I am only hopeful on this point, but I have a feeling that everything will wind up encrypted except the locals and only because of the govt mandate.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

socrplyr said:


> d) This method won't be perfect unless Tivo gets cable companies to somehow publish the channel mappings. This is an uphill battle, because the cable cos will just say "isn't this why we have cable cards?" (Forgetting that those are really for decryption.)


Passing through PSIP is an FCC requirement. It may still be an uphill battle, but there are regulations to use to convince your cable company.

It is imperfect in the sense that those who do not have useful PSIP cannot use an automatic PSIP mapping feature, but those that do can.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

sfhub said:


> so you do agree then?


no and I never will

some gems are green
many gems are green

the two are not interchangeable and only one statement above is correct.
----------------------------------------------
some people will pay/get extra sub for QAM mapping
many people will NOT pay/get extra sub for QAM mapping

in this case both statements above are correct.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

sfhub said:


> Passing through PSIP is an FCC requirement. It may still be an uphill battle, but there are regulations to use to convince your cable company.
> 
> It is imperfect in the sense that those who do not have useful PSIP cannot use an automatic PSIP mapping feature, but those that do can.


and unfortunately this is a large roadblock for TiVo. The FCC has been disinclined to enforce regulations around this and it would just be another cost for Tivo to get the FCC to get everything running according to standards.

not wanting to be a downer but this is just the state of clear QAM at the moment. 
Now on a positive note I think we might see a better implementation of all this in the series 4 and tru2way given the assumption that the cable companies do want to support being able to send unencrypted digital and more easily get off the analog bandwidth hog.


----------



## junior15 (Nov 23, 2001)

After reading through this thread and seeing the heated comments, I wasn't sure I wanted to wade in, but I saw only one post that was somewhat similar to my situation.

I just moved into a new apartment with Cox cable. Looking at their cable TV offerings, I could pay as little as ~$20 for Basic cable and up to ~$100 for HD/Digital TV including an HD DVR. Since I really like my Tivo and really don't care for any of the cable company provided DVRs I've seen, I decided I really didn't like the idea of needing a STB from Cox. So I was left with the option of getting a TivoHD and cable cards, or doing without the Digital and HD TV. I decided to go with just the expanded cable TV which costs me ~$40 per month. To get cable cards and HD channels from them, I have to pay about $7 for digital service, then more for the HD service, then more for the cable cards (I would have to get two since Cox doesn't support the M-Cards). In the end, it would cost me about $40 per month just to get HD channels from Cox. I decided I don't need HD that much.

Since my S1 Tivo and ReplayTV are a little on the old side (they don't have dual tuners, they don't support MRV, and they are a little slow), I have thought about replacing one of them. But, I don't want to buy a non-HD DVR because it seems like a waste to not get HD if I'm buy a new DVR. On the other hand, why spend the money on an HD DVR if I can't record HD? What if a newer one comes out before I get HD and I like it better? If I could get a TivoHD that could record the HD channels that I can currently receive on my TV (without the need to pay for additional service and hardware from Cox), then I would be buying a TivoHD. As it stands, until one of my DVRs dies, I won't be buying a TivoHD.

I'm not sure how many other people there are out there that are in the same situation that I am so I'm not sure how many people would benefit from Tivo adding this feature. Before this weekend, I didn't even know that cable companies would broadcast HD channels in the clear to people that weren't subscribed to HD service. I have a feeling there are quite a few other people out there that have no idea either (though I have no hard data to back that up). Since this "service" isn't advertised, I would guess that most people just assume that they have to sign up for HD service to get HD channels without an antenna.

If anybody knows of another way for me to record these HD channels on my Tivo, I would love to hear about it.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

junior15 said:


> After reading through this thread and seeing the heated comments, I wasn't sure I wanted to wade in, but I saw only one post that was somewhat similar to my situation.


 not heated by me. I know it is hard to see the emotion, if any, behind a post but I am just replying with what I see as the facts. It is concise and I see no rreason for smileys but there is not heat from me.



> I'm not sure how many other people there are out there that are in the same situation that I am so I'm not sure how many people would benefit from Tivo adding this feature. Before this weekend, I didn't even know that cable companies would broadcast HD channels in the clear to people that weren't subscribed to HD service. I have a feeling there are quite a few other people out there that have no idea either (though I have no hard data to back that up). Since this "service" isn't advertised, I would guess that most people just assume that they have to sign up for HD service to get HD channels without an antenna.
> 
> If anybody knows of another way for me to record these HD channels on my Tivo, I would love to hear about it.


I am in the same boat. I got digital free as part of a triple play deal. I am waiting for the next generation of HD TVs that can talk abck to cable company so had no need for cable cards yet.

I got a 30$ OTA antenna and have the guide data for most of the digtal locals in the clear and this works for me until I dive into digital deeper.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

ZeoTiVo said:


> and unfortunately this is a large roadblock for TiVo.


47% of those who get HD locals in the clear responded they already have useful PSIP info in the PSIP poll, so no roadblock for those people.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=367744


----------



## 1003 (Jul 14, 2000)

*Identifying*
this as a 'major roadblock' simply reinforces just how deeply TiVo, Inc is into the Evil Cable Companies pockets.

Cable Cards are not a necessity for clear QAM and getting cards for a 'basic' lineup 'non-digital' customer from my EvilCastic franchise is really not an option. Getting away with removing the mapping/program information while the FCC chooses not to respond, simply emboldens the cable company criminals...


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

sfhub said:


> Passing through PSIP is an FCC requirement. It may still be an uphill battle, but there are regulations to use to convince your cable company.


And beyond that the regulation doesn't specify what PSIP should specify, the mapping to the cable channel (i.e., 804) or the mapping to the OTA channel (i.e., 4-1). If I recall correctly, one "works" and the other, equally reasonable approach, "doesn't".


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

Tribune guide data supports both major.minor and major-only style channel #s within the same guide as evidenced by the OTA guide on zap2it and on the guide TiVo HD folks using OTA see and use.

Please recall where you got the impression it doesn't work if it is major.minor otherwise the evidence we see is that the guide data can support both major.minor and major-only in the same guide.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

sfhub said:


> 47% of those who get HD locals in the clear responded they already have useful PSIP info in the PSIP poll, so no roadblock for those people.
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=367744


so what should TiVo inc. tell the other 53%?


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

Same thing they tell people who can't get CableCARDs from their cable company.

Same thing they tell people who don't have broadband about Amazon unbox.

Same thing they tell people who want to use their old non-TiVo USB wireless adapter with TiVo HD.

Same thing they tell people who want to use their own non-WD drive with eSATA on TiVo HD.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

JJ said:


> *Identifying*
> this as a 'major roadblock' simply reinforces just how deeply TiVo, Inc is into the Evil Cable Companies pockets.
> 
> Cable Cards are not a necessity for clear QAM and getting cards for a 'basic' lineup 'non-digital' customer from my EvilCastic franchise is really not an option. Getting away with removing the mapping/program information while the FCC chooses not to respond, simply emboldens the cable company criminals...


oh, I completely agree that the FCC should enforce the regulations and get ALL the cable companies to provide standardised PSIP data. If the FCC did then the QAM mapping would most likely have been part of the initial feature set.

However I feel TiVo has far better things to spend resources on than getiing the FCC to enforce a reg it obviously has no interest in enforcing


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

sfhub said:


> Same thing they tell people who can't get CableCARDs from their cable company.
> 
> Same thing they tell people who don't have broadband about Amazon unbox.


so now we cut the potential revenue by 53%?? you really do just want your feature no matter the cost to TiVo, huh?


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

Added useful links section to first post answering some questions that came up.

*Useful Links*

*Automatic QAM mapping via PSIP works already* (for TW Austin TiVo users) assuming you get Tribune to adjust their guide data
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=4979695#post4979695
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=5015029#post5015029

*47% respondents* who get HD locals in the clear indicate they *already have useful PSIP info* in the PSIP poll.
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=367744

*FCC requires PSIP passthrough when available from content provider*
http://w2.eff.org/IP/pnp/FCC_PnP_Ruling.pdf


> §76.640 Support for Unidirectional Digital Cable Products on Digital
> Cable Systems.
> ...
> (iv) *For each digital transport stream that includes one or more
> ...



*Previous QAM mapping discussion thread*
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=362736


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

ZeoTiVo, you are entitled to your opinion.

One person, one vote.

Keep voting.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

I still find it very amusing that something like "Swivel Search" is a very important feature to Tivo and has presumably good ROI (I can't figure exactly how that could be other than perhaps a marketing ploy to use as a distinguishing feature) compared to many other requests such as ones discussed here. Obviously I don't fit into the customer base Tivo things they are targeting for that and many other features that I find totally useless.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Swivel Search leads to add-on revenue from Unbox.


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

The reason I don't care to much about this in all honesty. Is because the area I am there is very little on Clear Qam that I would watch anyways. ALL 100% of the HD programing in my area requires the cable card & not on Clear Qam. So its a moot point for me.

HOWEVER.... Just as there are many that don't even want cable service and use OTA only. I do understand that there are some that don't even want to use cable cards. I do feel for ya.. and wish the best.

TGC


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

ZeoTiVo said:


> so now we cut the potential revenue by 53%?? you really do just want your feature no matter the cost to TiVo, huh?


The 53% is a wildly made up number anyways, since it's really "53% of people who know what the hell clear QAM is and are motivated enough to come to a website and post about it", which is completely different than "53% of Tivo subscribers" or "53% of potential Tivo subscribers".

Tivo's already done the business analysis, and doesn't see a business case for spending the resources on this. Trying to change that based on a discussion and poll in a web forum is about as fruitless as tilting off at windmills (or arguing the semantic difference between "some" and "many" on that same web forum). Go ahead and do it all you want, but it isn't going to make a lick of difference.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

GoHokies! said:


> Tivo's already done the business analysis, and doesn't see a business case for spending the resources on this. Trying to change that based on a discussion and poll in a web forum is about as fruitless as tilting off at windmills


hey! You smeeked me


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

BobCamp1 said:


> Almost no one knows about it or understands it. This thread doesn't even have 100 votes for this feature.


Passed 100 now.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

sfhub said:


> Passed 100 now.


your third one is a little iffy though.

If it said ONLY reccomend it if it had QAM mapping maybe it would hold up better- even then that does not mean there is a demand or sale there - just people saying they would mention the feature to others BUT not use it themselves


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

sfhub said:


> Passed 100 now.


That's nice.

Still doesn't compare in any way to any form of real market research.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

Cool, re-stating the obvious of every TC poll.

Would you care to contribute some form of real market research?


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

sfhub said:


> Would you care to contribute some form of real market research?


Yah, TiVo has said they are not looking at QAM mapping, TiVo sees no benefit to the bottom line in it. I am betting they have some market research behind that.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

I hope it isn't the same market research group that they used for the original S3 

It seems like a lot of busy work for what basically amounts to a request to Tribune for a guide change to add some channels.


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

sfhub said:


> Cool, re-stating the obvious of every TC poll.
> 
> Would you care to contribute some form of real market research?


You're the one treating the results as if they are a major groundswell of public opinion that's going to change Tivo's mind.

Like Zeo said, it's been done and decided.



sfhub said:


> I hope it isn't the same market research group that they used for the original S3


I don't know, it was pretty darn successful for a high end product that was never intended for the mass market.



> It seems like a lot of busy work for what basically amounts to a request to Tribune for a guide change to add some channels.


If you really think that, than you completely misunderstand the nature of the problem and the solution.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

GoHokies! said:


> If you really think that, than you completely misunderstand the nature of the problem and the solution.


I believe you misunderstand how automatic mapping via PSIP works.

It has *already* been shown to work with guide changes at Tribune for the TW Austin market.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

GoHokies! said:


> You're the one treating the results as if they are a major groundswell of public opinion that's going to change Tivo's mind.


Show me where I have done that.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> Yah, TiVo has said they are not looking at QAM mapping, TiVo sees no benefit to the bottom line in it. I am betting they have some market research behind that.


Especially since a marketing manager said so. And there is no evidence that TiVoPony has ever lied to us, or (ahem) blown smoke at us either. If he said it, there is no rational basis on which to question it exception hard, cold market research to the contrary.

I realize that people who *want* the truth to be different find that _frustrating._

My mother had very sage advice when I found myself in similar circumstances, "Suck it up!"


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

sfhub said:


> I believe you misunderstand how automatic mapping via PSIP works.
> 
> It has *already* been shown to work with guide changes at Tribune for the TW Austin market.


What you are now overlooking, for whatever reason is that TiVo sells in more than the TW Austin market and by your own prior post it is known that the PSIP data is not consistent in all areas and for some has changed around since they started noticing it.

A hack was tried to do a manual mapping and did not get to the desired result due to difficulties.

For TiVo to do this for all series 3 models is not just adding some guide data and the more you try and make it that the more unrealistic your thread becomes


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

ZeoTiVo said:


> What you are now overlooking, for whatever reason is that TiVo sells in more than the TW Austin market


Exactly, the guide data for the other markets can be added.

It is known that some markets have useful PSIP and others don't. Automatic mapping via PSIP is for those that have useful PSIP.

TiVo tells Tribune to honor requests for PSIP-based guide data. People who have useful PSIP make requests to Tribune just like when they are missing channels today. People who don't have useful PSIP don't need to make any requests and they will see no change.

Adding guide data works for automatic mapping via PSIP. It has been shown to work. The hack you mention is a pointless red-herring. It involved manual, not automatic, mapping by sending your OS image to some third party.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

sfhub said:


> What's the big deal? TiVo tells Tribune to honor requests for PSIP-based guide data. People who have useful PSIP make requests to Tribune just like when they are missing channels today. People who don't have useful PSIP don't need to make any requests and they will see no change.


Ok, this all makes sense to you somehow so I will not make anyone read more of this


----------



## hmm52 (Feb 25, 2008)

I've been following this discussion and would like to offer a somewhat different perspective on the issue. On one side is the assertion that a software implimentation of QAM mapping wouldn't increase revenues or customer base; it could introduce even more bugs to an unprofitable company that already has its hands full resolving more important product functions. On the other side is the claim that there is a market for a 3rd party DVR with clear QAM utility; a market hard to judge because such devices are rare and most consumers are ignorant of existence of this cable option altogether; without channel mapping the DVRs are near useless for clear QAM; that it must be supported on a legal basis and as a matter of principle. If enabling this would bring the imminent demise of TiVo, then forget it obviously. Clear QAM users will always be a small minority of TiVo S3/HD owners. But however we use these DVRs, all of us will continue to be a tiny minority of cable subscribers overall and I think there's good reason to support the subset for each of our own long term interests. If patience is sufficient, consider some points drawn mostly from my personal history with cable Tv.

With Sony DVRs and Comcast, I got a lot of use out of clear QAM. Manual mapping was easily accomplished. All channels including local HDs, except for premiums, were available digitally. Assignments moved only once during this period, when Comcast dropped non local analogs. I suspect that clear QAM digitals were narrowed to locals after I switched providers in 11/06. 

For at least the last six months with them, Phila. Comcast flagged every one of their channels CCI:0X02 - including the locals. Not right but that's the way it stayed through the last day. The Sonys don't do MRV or transfers to PC, but multiple recordings on the same channel (tennis ESPN2) became a pain as intervening recordings on a different channel had to be set up to avoid "recording denied by content provider"; the same thing Comcast told me repeatedly; it was out of their control.

While not inexpensive, the Sony DVRs were viable products - HD capable, 250-500gb hard drives, free guide, cablecard, clear QAM, and OTA utility. It's likely that Sony lost money on them, for lack of effort. The production run lasted less than 4 months, I believe. Product promotion was almost non existant. They just appeared then disappeared from various store shelves. The TVGOS system was a little awkward, buggy sometimes, but I'd be surprised if it wasn't the content and provider box sides of the corporation that told the CE side to kill the project. Sony hasn't manufactured a stand alone mass market HD DVR since then. A worthwhile consumer base was never established.

A switch to Verizon brought relief from 0X02 - CCI:0X00 across the board for their own STB's utility. But the Gemstar TVGOS data was missing from their converted analogs. It is debatable whether they are required to provide this and if is technically possible at reasonable cost. The fact is that they have always delivered analog VBI CC data, but never Gemstar's and never will do so. They've run out the clock on that.

With four different cablecard devices, 3 Sonys and a Toshiba, I didn't see one macroblock in the first 8 months with Verizon. That changed July/August last year when the Toshiba began tiling/pixelating badly. It peaked in November when half of all channels on Toshiba were a disaster; some small issues with Sonys. Never an issue in first 8 months, it has been an ongoing one since then. S3 is the most sensitive. Though told that central office has been the problem, it's a combination of Phila. VHO and COs. For the routine tiling, VZ leaves it at the door of Toshiba and TiVo. Case closed.

From the beginning Verizon clear QAM has been restricted to locals, music, and obscure special interest channels. Last November VZ Phila. made a change in their transmission parameters whereby it became impossible for many device brands to tune the local HDs; only in SD. Of six that I have with QAM tuners, only an LG DTV/CADTV receiver can do so. While it isn't crystal clear that SD delivery only falls short of regulations, it certainly has ticked off a lot of customers. A telco, and not a member of ATSC, Verizon Phila. acknowledges the issue in some fashion. But for the last 6 months their response has remained: "We are aware of the problem and are working for a solution."

Notice a pattern yet?

Though I haven't seen much discussion of it here or anywhere, Verizon has made plain their long term strategy. Unless there has been a very recent adjustment, they intend to have in place a request-and-send IPTV system nationwide by 2010. They have plenty of available bandwidth to add QAMs in VHOs and COs to greatly increase HD channels. And it wouldn't be expensive compared to all network costs. That isn't their plan however. With request-and-send IPTV, much more can be offered without much increase in QAMs. The name of the game for the provider's average consumer wiil be total number of channels, especially HDs - just as it's megapixels, LCD and body size, without much regard to lens and sensor, to the majority of camera purchasers. Verizon's management has also made it plain that a (the?) major benefit of their new system will be the ability to monitor every customer's viewing habits so that direct targeted advertising can be delivered specifically to each subscriber.

My fears about cable Tv in the future should be obvious. Symbiotic relationships have formed on every level. What really is to prevent cable providers from acquiring content on restricted arrangements, to everybody's benefit except the end users? We'll sell you this content at such and such a price but you have to deliver it on our terms - via request-and-send SDV or IPTV with advertising that end users cannot skip over or fast forward through. Third party devices are to be discouraged by the technical implimentation of these systems. Sound appealing? I'm not a lawyer but it seems to me that the only rulings that are solid and widely enforced have to do with OTA broadcasting and VCR recordings of analog signals. Everything else is at least open to debate or has not uncommonly lacked enforcement. It would seem CCI:0X03, for VOD & PPV, could never be applied to SDV or IPTV. Yet I've already seen breaches that I thought not possible.

So clear QAM, and its mapping, affect a tiny minority. All TiVo users put together are a tiny minority. Perhaps it's time to take a stand on subset minority issues before a box is delivered to your door which takes away something that you really care about. 


my 2 cents


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

If I understand what you're saying... it is that people should be sure they're happy with what they're buying it, as it is offered (before it is purchased/delivered), rather than expecting it to someday do something different. If so, I agree.


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

It sounds like he is talking about a slippery slope of losing more and more functionality because nobody takes a stand on the issues affecting minority users and also pointing out that TiVo users as a whole are a minority so what a TiVo user considers an important issue can be considered a minor issue for the market as a whole. If you lose TTG because everything goes CCI=0x02 how many overall PVR users are really affected? Very small minority.

It appears to be the WW2 we should have done something earlier argument.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

"Taking a stand" is irrelevant, unless it means "paying for things that have features that you need, and not paying for things that don't have features you need."


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

sfhub said:


> I believe you misunderstand how automatic mapping via PSIP works.
> 
> It has *already* been shown to work with guide changes at Tribune for the TW Austin market.


If it were that simple (and that's a big "if", the only thing more deluded than thinking that getting Tivo to convince Tribune to make these kinds of changes across their entire network for free is going to happen is thinking that Tivo is going to spend a penny on a feature that will not benefit (or even be noticed) by the vast majority of their users.



sfhub said:


> Show me where I have done that.


One needs look no further than the first post of the thread to the cheerleading "get out the vote" efforts and trumpeting the "more than 100 people" to see that. Why else would you have created this thread? Surely you don't expect me to believe that you created this thread to show Tivo that their market research was correct and that they shouldn't pursue clear QAM mapping, do you?


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

GoHokies! said:


> One needs look no further than the first post of the thread to the cheerleading "get out the vote" efforts and trumpeting the "more than 100 people" to see that. Why else would you have created this thread?


Go back and look at the post you responded to. I responded to someone who said there were fewer than 100 votes. I made no other comment. You created the rest based on your own assumptions.

The thread was created to see what people really think about QAM mapping. I want to see where people stand regardless of whether they are for or against. This is for TC consumption and discussion. I have no expectations of TiVo.

Show me where I said what you claim. You can't, because I haven't.

In case you have forgotten what you wrote, show me where I said anything like "groundswell of public opinion that's going to change Tivo's mind." I haven't said vote to change TiVo's mind. I haven't even said vote for the feature. I've only maintained people should keep voting what they feel.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

So we all agree: This vote has no real meaning. It doesn't indicate that there is any significant "public" desire for this feature, and therefore the only reliable indicators we have in that regard is TiVoPony's statements. 

Glad we cleared that up.


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

bicker said:


> So we all agree: This vote has no real meaning. It doesn't indicate that there is any significant "public" desire for this feature, and therefore the only reliable indicators we have in that regard is TiVoPony's statements.
> 
> Glad we cleared that up.


:up:

I love it when we all agree on something!


----------



## sfhub (Jan 6, 2007)

Obviously there has always been agreement on all the QAM threads.


----------



## hmm52 (Feb 25, 2008)

sfhub said:


> It sounds like he is talking about a slippery slope of losing more and more functionality because nobody takes a stand on the issues affecting minority users and also pointing out that TiVo users as a whole are a minority so what a TiVo user considers an important issue can be considered a minor issue for the market as a whole. If you lose TTG because everything goes CCI=0x02 how many overall PVR users are really affected? Very small minority.


Exactly. And worse. I listed the anecdotes to illustrate the fairly rapid erosion of functionality of my DVRs, whether I needed all the functionality or not. In my case OTA reception and cablecards work well, for the most part. While I am annoyed and concerned by some practices of the providers - non-conforming local HD in the clear signals, TVGOS data missing from analog, 0X02 flagging for every channel, and so on, these haven't been life or death issues. There have been workarounds. So far.

I am very apprehensive about what is over the horizon, with request-and-send systems. If it is left up to market research alone, then it becomes just a matter of maximizing revenue streams while maintaining relative contentment among the majority of cable subscribers. Most of the ones that do recording use provider boxes and have nothing invested in a DVR. Archiving is probably not much of a priority. These boxes haven't had a great track record for reliability or ease of use. So I can't see the majority raising much complaint when their DVR is swapped out for a box that can reliably retrieve any program from a greatly expanded range of channels, even if it is loaded with unavoidable advertisements based on household viewing habits. In this scenario 3rd party DVR users will likely be negatively impacted, at minimum.

My words about taking a stand applied to all possible functionality and free use issues on both the cable and TiVo sides of the equation. The best course of action might be to set up TiVos (bug free ones) for all our representitives in Washington. That's a market worth cultivating.


----------



## 1003 (Jul 14, 2000)

*Politicians*
often refer to a 59/41 percent victory as a 'mandate'. Why would this be different...


----------



## aindik (Jan 23, 2002)

JJ said:


> *Politicians*
> often refer to a 59/41 percent victory as a 'mandate'. Why would this be different...


Because it's not about percentages. It's about dollars, which translate from raw numbers of people, not percentages.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

hmm52 said:


> My words about taking a stand applied to all possible functionality and free use issues on both the cable and TiVo sides of the equation. The best course of action might be to set up TiVos (bug free ones) for all our representitives in Washington. That's a market worth cultivating.


I understand what you are saying and all the examples you list I have either heard of or strike me as being in the same vein as what I have heard of. No arguments on the change is coming and the WWII analogy is appropriate.

however from my perspective I have managed to be in 2 betas of IPTV on my PC and use Netflix DVD rental and their streaming service. NOTE - all download services currently have their video quality issues which will get better with time. I leave that to the side. Also the amount and type of content

SYNC TV - I like it, easy to use download service
but yes - DRM keeps it on my PC and I found no hack for the MARLIN DRM samsung, Sony anmd others are using - so I can not transfer to my TiVo and watch on big screen. 
What will come next hear is a slew of CE gadgets to use the SYNC video on a pay as you play service much like iTunes except not limited to apple tech. No ads yest since it is a pay service for premium and some stuff free - like Babar the Elephant all 6 seasons.

Hulu - I like this service better - all streaming so no space concerns and the stuff is free and they inject 30 sec ads into the stream. I actually like the 30 sec ad I have to watch over having to use a remote to bypass ads on the TiVo. Now if iy moves up to 1 minute or more then yuck - but if free and I pay no cable bill then ads are not a bad thing to me -_especially_ if they can target them so the30 sec spots actually have some relevance to ME.
Again of course it is PC based and I would have to hook my PC to TV or else Hulu will figure out how to do a box on the TV, etc..

Netflix streaming - the web interface for getting the content just keeps getting better - now they find anything in my DVD queue that can be streamed and put them on a second tab in my queue list. The streaming always goes well on my decent PC and decent broadband connection.
I think content owners are afraid to make deals becasue netflix does so well at this.  The streaming boxse/DVD players to hook up straight are being worked on as I type.
I pay a monthly fee and get all the content I can watch at various useage levels. If this is bondage - put me away for life.

UNBOX is the only one I have trouble with - but that is becuase of the 24 hour viewing window on my TiVo DVR. that is a silly onerous restriction and it will hurt UNBOX in the long run - they certainly get none of my money while Netflix does.

so anyway I am not seeing this horrible specter of IPTV quite the same as you. Sure ads will be the main money behind entertainment - you want good entertainment - it costs money to make. But the free market will also factor in. Netflix offers me streaming as part of my service, why? becasue they are smart enough to know they need to keep customers and this is a great way to do it while moving forward into the new IPTV world. They understand they are competing with UNBOX and others even if the competition does not even use DVDs.

Now Blu ray disc are harder to RIP - and all of the above services do not let me do anything "3rd party" with the content - DRM will keep getting in the way and will protect revenue streams - but yet somehow I keep getting more content for less money and easy enough to wtach whenever -that is what consumers want - so that is what will be the end state. I do not forsee prisons and high costs.


----------



## hmm52 (Feb 25, 2008)

The more ways that people like you use to acquire content, the better it will be for the rest of us. Alternative technologies and services put some pressure on providers to offer a broader package. Probably the most effective way to "vote" on all of these issues.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin (Jun 20, 2002)

bicker said:


> Especially since a marketing manager said so. And there is no evidence that TiVoPony has ever lied to us, or (ahem) blown smoke at us either.


Just to be clear, you must mean that TiVoPony hasn't blown smoke at us *on this issue.* He has blown plenty of smoke at us regarding M-cards for the S3.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Just to be clear, you must mean that TiVoPony hasn't blown smoke at us *on this issue.* He has blown plenty of smoke at us regarding M-cards for the S3.


no he hasn't. Whne TiVo thought they could deliver M-card for S3 then yes that is what he posted then when it became clear it would not be something that could be delivered in that exact same thread/post he clearly stated the issues TiVo inc was having and it did not put TiVo in the best light at all but he gave us the straight scoop all the same. You should see a Grief Counselor about this S3 M-card issue and let it out. It seems to be eating at you right now.


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Just to be clear, you must mean that TiVoPony hasn't blown smoke at us *on this issue.* He has blown plenty of smoke at us regarding M-cards for the S3.


Can't let that one go, can you?


----------



## hmm52 (Feb 25, 2008)

hmm52 said:


> ...So clear QAM, and its mapping, affect a tiny minority. All TiVo users put together are a tiny minority. Perhaps it's time to take a stand on subset minority issues before a box is delivered to your door which takes away something that you really care about.


Several posters have read this as a "WWII" comparison. That was not my intent, particularly in gravity.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

hmm52 said:


> Several posters have read this as a "WWII" comparison. That was not my intent, particularly in gravity.


I just saw the similarity in a "0ne piece at a time" being taken away so no one got upset enough, fast enough. I never thought you put the same gravity on it as the Human Tragedy during WWII


----------



## hmm52 (Feb 25, 2008)

In terms of system technology and consumer demand in a market, a recent post in the AVS Sony forum caught my eye. The poster wondered why the choice is limited to one (TiVo) here when he can find " 2 dozen models of HD DVRs in a store in Japan". The assumption is that they aren't limited - to OTA or otherwise.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

hmm52 said:


> In terms of system technology and consumer demand in a market, a recent post in the AVS Sony forum caught my eye. The poster wondered why the choice is limited to one (TiVo) here when he can find " 2 dozen models of HD DVRs in a store in Japan". The assumption is that they aren't limited - to OTA or otherwise.


Completely different market. The Japanese will not hesitate to buy a $1000 cell phone, a cell phone where the carrier has total developmental control. I don't know about DVRs, though. But they just love their gadgets (and I loved designing gadgets for them -- cost is almost no object).

Americans, on the other hand, are cheap. As the presence of this thread indicates. Not that there's anything wrong with that.


----------

