# Tivo - receives CableLabs verification



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Big milestone for the S3 ...

http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/downloads/OC_PNP.pdf

CableLabs Certified, Verified, and Self-Verified Cable Products
(...)
Tivo TCD648250A STB Verified


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Awesome! I'm sure this is one of the major unknowns in the process and it's good to have it over and done with. I wonder if they'll release any details such as whether or not they approved TTG and MRV of encrypted content?

Dan


----------



## elrcastor (Mar 7, 2004)

sweet!!!! Can't hardly wait.


----------



## TiVoPony (May 12, 2002)

This is indeed a very large milestone.

There are 444 separate tests required to receive CableLabs certification. Series3 passed on it's first go.

The entire Series3 team here at TiVo deserves a big round of applause. 

Second half of 2006.

Cheers,
Pony


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

TiVoPony said:


> The entire Series3 team here at TiVo deserves a big round of applause.


<applause>



TiVoPony said:


> Second half of 2006.


What you can't tighten that up a little now? 

Dan


----------



## hammer32 (Jul 4, 2001)

Great news, good job!


----------



## lajohn27 (Dec 29, 2003)

And the model number tooo...

TCD648250A .... Neat.


----------



## elrcastor (Mar 7, 2004)

TiVoPony said:


> This is indeed a very large milestone.
> 
> There are 444 separate tests required to receive CableLabs certification. Series3 passed on it's first go.
> 
> ...


*** Plans and throws the S3 team a wild party ***


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 27, 2001)

:up: :up: :up: 

Sweet!

Good job guys.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Hmmm.... The new dual tuner Series 2 unit is a TCD649180 and this is a TCD648250A. With only one number different in model number it would suggest, at least histoically, that they have very similar hardware platforms. Which means it's very possible they use the same encoder/decoder chip, which means that the new DT unit could not only do MPEG-4 but might also be able to downres HD content transfered from a S3 via MRV. (of course that's just speculation and I could also be completely wrong )

Dan


----------



## Globular (Jun 9, 2004)

TiVoPony said:


> This is indeed a very large milestone.
> 
> There are 444 separate tests required to receive CableLabs certification. Series3 passed on it's first go.
> 
> The entire Series3 team here at TiVo deserves a big round of applause.


Congrats! TiVo rocks!



TivoPony said:


> Second half of 2006.
> 
> Cheers,
> Pony


Calendar or fiscal '06? 

Which half of the second half? 

Thanks guys,
-Matt


----------



## lajohn27 (Dec 29, 2003)

Dan:

Good detective work man.. I hope you're right!

J


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

TiVoPony said:


> There are 444 separate tests required to receive CableLabs certification. Series3 passed on it's first go.


No offense ... I must admit this surprised me. I was personally 'interpreting' the second half '06 comments as meaning Tivo had failed CW41 and was having to re-submit for CW43. _Alot_ of very big, very technical companies don't pass their first CableLabs CW ...

Note: CableLabs Test Wave schedules can be found here:
http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/downloads/2006_TestWave.pdf

And just in case people are curious about the testing process ...
http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/downloads/UNI-DIR-ATP-I05-040629.pdf
http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/

A deserved applause for the S3 team indeed ... and not _just_ the techies.


----------



## btl-a4 (Dec 28, 2005)

I thought the unit was to have a 300 gig HD am I remembering wrong? witht the 250 at the end I would guess that means 250 gig. Could be a Beta unit and the production unit will be 300.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

btl-a4 said:


> I thought the unit was to have a 300 gig HD am I remembering wrong? witht the 250 at the end I would guess that means 250 gig. Could be a Beta unit and the production unit will be 300.


They mistakenly reported it as a 300GB unit at CES. However TiVoPony later corrected the report and said that it would actually have a 250GB drive. Although with the eSATA port you could easily add another 500GB and have a unit that holds about 80 hours of HD content.

Dan


----------



## ChuckyBox (Oct 3, 2005)

TiVoPony said:


> There are 444 separate tests required to receive CableLabs certification. Series3 passed on it's first go.
> 
> The entire Series3 team here at TiVo deserves a big round of applause.
> 
> Second half of 2006.


Nice job, all involved.

Pony, make sure your lawyers know about this -- E* has been making a big deal about how you didn't introduce any new products last year (despite a fairly steady stream of service enhancements). You've got two new boxes this year, the wireless adapter, and some major service enhancements -- play 'em up.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> I wonder if they'll release any details such as whether or not they approved TTG and MRV of encrypted content?


CableLabs keeps their lists of "approved outputs" pretty current. It's part of their licensing agreement(s):
http://www.opencable.com/downloads/CHILA.pdf
http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/downloads/DFAST_Tech_License.pdf

Basically, any encrypted content can only be output following the guidelines / technologies listed in the above document. Nothing real useful there to Tivo yet. So far the only things I see that could really be used for TTG/MRV would be:

DTCP - Although so far they've only approved 1394/DTCP which would seem a bit limiting. DTCP-IP would seem like a good way to go ... but DTCP-IP hasn't been technically approved yet AFAIK.

WMDRM - If you can't fight 'em ... join 'em.

An approved technology that just recently showed up as approved ... and that I know absolutely nothing about ...

Encentrus CPDO - no clue what that's about:
http://home.businesswire.com/portal...d=news_view&newsId=20060320005785&newsLang=en

So anyway, for TTG/MRV for encrypted / protected content ... Tivo is either 1) going to have to use one of the approved technologies from the license agreement or 2) submit a technology of their own and get it aprroved or 3) get someone else to submit a technology they want to use and get it approved.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

TiVo already got TiVoGuard approved as a content protection protocol by the FCC, right?


----------



## Frankenstien (Feb 8, 2006)

TiVoPony said:


> The entire Series3 team here at TiVo deserves a big round of applause.
> Cheers,
> Pony


Congrats Series3 team! :up: :up: :up:


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

stevel said:


> TiVo already got TiVoGuard approved as a content protection protocol by the FCC, right?


As an approved output for content marked with the broadcast flag ... yes. However, that really doesn't mean squat to CableLabs.


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

The next question to be answered is: 
Will cable companies actively support this TiVo? 
Instead of promoting their own substandard versions?


----------



## ping (Oct 3, 2005)

JimSpence said:


> The next question to be answered is:
> Will cable companies actively support this TiVo?
> Instead of promoting their own substandard versions?


Doesn't really matter. All they need to do is give you a cablecard, which they must do by law. No other support is needed.


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

TiVoPony said:


> The entire Series3 team here at TiVo deserves a big round of applause.


We heartily agree. Please give them all the clap on our behalf.


----------



## vegasty (Dec 15, 2003)

YO Tivo get the series 3 out by july and the non hd dual tuners by may 1 and you can give yourselves another holiday each year ok.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

Congrats to the Series 3 gang, absolutely.

Now.... gimme?


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Simply *OUTSTANDING!!* Bring on the S3


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

getting closer...


Getting closer....


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

Anyone know the difference between "Certified" and "Verified"?


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

TiVoPony said:


> The entire Series3 team here at TiVo deserves a big round of applause.
> 
> Second half of 2006.


Hell, I'll give you all a big round of applause NOW if you tell us more about the Series3.


----------



## Gregor (Feb 18, 2002)

TiVoPony said:


> This is indeed a very large milestone.
> 
> There are 444 separate tests required to receive CableLabs certification. Series3 passed on it's first go.
> 
> ...


:up: :up:

Congratulations!


----------



## lajohn27 (Dec 29, 2003)

jfh3 said:


> Anyone know the difference between "Certified" and "Verified"?


From the cablelabs website..

"Non-Consumer Premises Equipment (non-CPE) or cable network element devices (e.g., CableCARD, CMTS) are determined to be Qualified rather than Certified because they are only purchased by cable operators and not the consuming public at retail. As used herein, the word Certification means Qualification for purposes of these non-CPE network products.

A separate process of Verification is performed for so-called Plug & Play devices; also called Unidirectional Digital Cable Products or UDCPs. Please see the UDCP area on the CableLabs Web site for more information."

Certification/Qualification is for items used by cable operators or installed at the consumer premises.

Verified is for consumer devices sold at retail in a plug & play environment. (I think)

The S3 would be a "Plug & Play" device.. and specifically a UDCP one at that.

Hence the difference.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 27, 2001)

Lets hope that getting this done on the first try means the box comes out in Q3 as opposed to Q4.


----------



## raianoat (Jan 27, 2004)

Nice job TiVo :up: :up: 
I can't wait!


----------



## Dajad (Oct 7, 1999)

Woop! Woop!

But PLEASE include at least one blaster/s-video input (or ideally an HDMI or component input) combo so us Canadians can buy a useable S3 with HDcapability while waiting for CRT mandated cableco support by cablecos!

Anyone know if a cablecard certified device will also work with two-way cablecards once that standard is finalized, or will that require an entirely different TiVo. The reason I ask is that my 'sources' in Canada seem to think that the cablecos may voluntarily support cablecard (without legal mandate) once the two-way standard is finalized.

...Dale


----------



## TiVoJerry (Jul 26, 2005)

I am constantly amazed at how fast you guys find out stuff like this. You truly put the "fan" in "fanatical"!


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

For Canadians, they aren't going to make an HD DVR with digital, in, especially just for the Canadian market. If they could, they would have. If you are happy with just S-video from your digital tuner, get the S2 or S2DT.

Watch though for a new universal security technology, where there is a programmable security unit built into in the aftermarket boxes. Personally, I'd expect TiVo to have one of those at CES 2009.

For Two Way cards (if/when they come), they will likely revert to a one-way mode in a one-way box.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

I hear that train a coming, coming around the bend. I aint seen HD since I don't know when............


----------



## gthassell (Apr 22, 2003)

TRULY great news! Fantastic job TiVo!

I'm keeping a spot open and running an HDMI cable in a few weeks when I have the 40" Sony Bravia installed....

Can't wait for the Series 3!

TiVo - Take My Money PLEASE!!!!!


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

TiVoPony said:


> This is indeed a very large milestone.
> 
> There are 444 separate tests required to receive CableLabs certification. Series3 passed on it's first go.
> 
> ...


YAY! Congratulations.

I can't wait.....


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

For laymen, in non tech terms, what does this mean?


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

Turtleboy said:


> For laymen, in non tech terms, what does this mean?


Hopefully that they'll post a beta tester application


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Dajad said:


> Anyone know if a cablecard certified device will also work with two-way cablecards once that standard is finalized, or will that require an entirely different TiVo.


Two-way functionality depends on hardware / software in the host (DVR, Tivo, TV, STB, whatever). Two-way functionality is not contained in the CableCard itself. In fact, the cards for one-way and two-way devices are exactly the same.

So, the Tivo will keep working when the two-way standard is finalized. However, unless Tivo is building all the hardware into the box neccessary for two-way functionality (which I highly doubt) ... it will keep functioning as a one-way device. You won't get the two-way functionality (without getting a new box of course).


----------



## bstettin (Mar 10, 2004)

dt_dc said:


> Two-way functionality depends on hardware / software in the host (DVR, Tivo, TV, STB, whatever). Two-way functionality is not contained in the CableCard itself. In fact, the cards for one-way and two-way devices are exactly the same.
> 
> So, the Tivo will keep working when the two-way standard is finalized. However, unless Tivo is building all the hardware into the box neccessary for two-way functionality (which I highly doubt) ... it will keep functioning as a one-way device. You won't get the two-way functionality (without getting a new box of course).


My (apparently wrong) understanding was that the newly-approved "multistream" cablecard incorporated 2-way functionality. So does that mean that the only thing multistream adds over the current cablecard is the ability to tune 2 channels at once? And if your speculation that the S3 will not include 2-way functionality proves correct, does that mean that by using an S3 instead of a DVR supplied by the cable company I will have to give up on-demand channels and PPV?


----------



## amjustice (Mar 9, 2006)

bstettin said:


> My (apparently wrong) understanding was that the newly-approved "multistream" cablecard incorporated 2-way functionality. So does that mean that the only thing multistream adds over the current cablecard is the ability to tune 2 channels at once? And if your speculation that the S3 will not support a 2-way cablecard proves correct, does that mean that by using an S3 instead of a DVR supplied by the cable company I will have to give up on-demand channels and PPV?


It was my understanding that the Cable Card 2.0 also added the ability to do On-Demand and PPV. I am not sure that you guys have your specs right. I also thought that they had already figured out a standard for the new cards. Either way we might see a Series 3 before the Multi-stream cards are out on the market. I am fine with this since I dont use PPV or On Demand too much as it is. I will happily use 2 cable cards until the multi-stream is available.


----------



## segaily (Aug 3, 2003)

bstettin said:


> if your speculation that the S3 will not support a 2-way cablecard proves correct, does that mean that by using an S3 instead of a DVR supplied by the cable company I will have to give up on-demand channels and PPV?


Yes if TiVo does not support 2 way those of us who use a s3 instead of a cable box of some type will give up on-demand. It may or may not still be possible for us to order PPV over the phone. I will miss these things but I am very hopeful that TiVo will offer internet based downloads that are at least as good if not better then the cable on demand offerings.


----------



## amjustice (Mar 9, 2006)

segaily said:


> Yes if TiVo does not support 2 way those of us who use a s3 instead of a cable box of some type will give up on-demand. It may or may not still be possible for us to order PPV over the phone. I will miss these things but I am very hopeful that TiVo will offer internet based downloads that are at least as good if not better then the cable on demand offerings.


Wasn't 2 way going to be part of it all along?


----------



## segaily (Aug 3, 2003)

amjustice said:


> Wasn't 2 way going to be part of it all along?


I do not think they have ever said. They have said they wanted multi stream. A lot of people thought that to do multi stream you had to have 2 way. At this point it sounds like it might be possible to have multi stream without 2 way. Multi stream cards are backwards compatible so it may have been fairly easy for TiVo to design to support multi stream even before the spec was totaly competed. Trying to design your hardware to support 2 way before the spec was finished would have been much harder and riskier.


----------



## amjustice (Mar 9, 2006)

segaily said:


> I do not think they have ever said. They have said they wanted multi stream. A lot of people thought that to do multi stream you had to have 2 way. At this point it sounds like it might be possible to have multi stream without 2 way. Multi stream cards are backwards compatible so it may have been fairly easy for TiVo to design to support multi stream even before the spec was totaly competed. Trying to design your hardware to support 2 way before the spec was finished would have been much harder and riskier.


I would think they could probably fix it with a software update later though and there wouldnt be any major hardware differences between supporting it and not supporting it, thoughts?


----------



## bstettin (Mar 10, 2004)

segaily said:


> I am very hopeful that TiVo will offer internet based downloads that are at least as good if not better then the cable on demand offerings.


I can't see a download-based system working as well for HD content, at least not in the very near future. To download a movie in HD is going to require a lot of hard-drive space and a lot of time. On-Demand through the cable system seems to make much more sense for now, until the technology of downloading improves. I'd hate to lose that option.


----------



## amjustice (Mar 9, 2006)

bstettin said:


> I can't see a download-based system working as well for HD content, at least not in the very near future. To download a movie in HD is going to require a lot of hard-drive space and a lot of time. On-Demand through the cable system seems to make much more sense for now, until the technology of downloading improves. I'd hate to lose that option.


My question is, if you set it up in Tivo why would you need On Demand anyways. Is there content available on demand that wouldnt be on at some point in time. Just a thought.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

bstettin said:


> So does that mean that the only thing multistream adds over the current cablecard is the ability to tune 2 channels at once?


The only thing multistream cards add is the ability to decrypt multiple streams (channels) at the same time ... yes. Technically, "tuning" the channel(s) is up to the host (DVR, Tivo, STB, TV, whatever). The card is only decrypting the streams the host sends to it. Also, multistream cards aren't limited to 2 channels. Part of the handshaking between the host and the card involves the card telling the host how many streams it can handle.


bstettin said:


> And if your speculation that the S3 will not include 2-way functionality proves correct, does that mean that by using an S3 instead of a DVR supplied by the cable company I will have to give up on-demand channels and PPV?


I don't know about "give up" ... but yes, if Tivo doesn't implement two-way functionality in the S3 then the S3 would not be able to access VOD. You also would not be able to order PPV from the Tivo. You _should_ be able to order PPV via phone, web, or even another cable box and view it on the Tivo ... but I wouldn't state this as a certainty. Ordering PPV on-line and then viewing on one-way CableCard products works well on my cable system ... YMMV.

As noted above ... I don't think there's been anything definitive from Tivo about whether (or not) they will support two-way functionality. I (personally) am highly doubtful they will ... others seem to think it a possibility.


----------



## bstettin (Mar 10, 2004)

amjustice said:


> My question is, if you set it up in Tivo why would you need On Demand anyways. Is there content available on demand that wouldnt be on at some point in time. Just a thought.


I certainly agree that having Tivo LESSENS the need for on-demand. But sometimes you find out about a show after its last airing, and the on-demand option is still there for you. Also, I'm sure the cable companies will soon have HD versions of their current PPV movie channels, which offer lots of recent films that have not yet (and may never) air on any cable networks. And sure, as with the current SD-PPV offerings, you could just rent them, but it's nice to be able to order them up on impulse.


----------



## bstettin (Mar 10, 2004)

dt_dc said:


> The only thing multistream cards add is the ability to decrypt multiple streams (channels) at the same time ... yes. Technically, "tuning" the channel(s) is up to the host (DVR, Tivo, STB, TV, whatever). The card is only decrypting the streams the host sends to it. Also, multistream cards aren't limited to 2 channels. Part of the handshaking between the host and the card involves the card telling the host how many streams it can handle.I don't know about "give up" ... but yes, if Tivo doesn't implement two-way functionality in the S3 then the S3 would not be able to access VOD. You also would not be able to order PPV from the Tivo. You _should_ be able to order PPV via phone, web, or even another cable box and view it on the Tivo ... but I wouldn't state this as a certainty. Ordering PPV on-line and then viewing on one-way CableCard products works well on my cable system ... YMMV.
> 
> As noted above ... I don't think there's been anything definitive from Tivo about whether (or not) they will support two-way functionality. I (personally) am highly doubtful they will ... others seem to think it a possibility.


Thanks for all the good info, dt_dc. Your posts are always illuminating.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

bstettin said:


> Thanks for all the good info, dt_dc. Your posts are always illuminating.


Everything is available at the CableLabs site ... although I must admit it's rather daunting to go through:
http://www.opencable.com/


----------



## segaily (Aug 3, 2003)

bstettin said:


> I can't see a download-based system working as well for HD content, at least not in the very near future. To download a movie in HD is going to require a lot of hard-drive space and a lot of time. On-Demand through the cable system seems to make much more sense for now, until the technology of downloading improves. I'd hate to lose that option.


I am not sure why you think this. A downloaded HD movie would take up no more space on your TiVo then one you recorded off of your cable. It will take a while to download, but if I give up 2 hours of space and always have a movie ready for me who cares.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

amjustice said:


> I would think they could probably fix it with a software update later though and there wouldnt be any major hardware differences between supporting it and not supporting it, thoughts?


Under the current spec, at a minimum the following hardware would be required to support two-way functionality which is not required for a one-way product:
1) OOB QPSK modulator
2) DOCSIS modem
3) CPU capable of running OCAP stack (or preferably, an OCAP SoC)

There's also some requirements which, while technically not required for two-way functionality ... is required by CableLabs for two-way hosts. This includes 1394, certain reserved buttons on the remote, etc. Not sure how the verification process would work for a product that wasn't fully compliant ...

And finally, the two-way negotiations between the interested parties (CEA, NCTA, etc.) are still on-going so ... everything is subject to change. Although, of course, certain changes are more/less likely than others.


----------



## segaily (Aug 3, 2003)

amjustice said:


> I would think they could probably fix it with a software update later though and there wouldnt be any major hardware differences between supporting it and not supporting it, thoughts?


As a firmware engineer in the networking industry. I have been in plenty of hardware design meetings were we debate if we are going to try to support a standard that is not yet final. If you try and fail you have added cost to every board you sell for nothing. If you do not try you will not support the feature. It all comes down to how much money you think having the feature will make you verses how likely you think the spec will change to something that would need a hardware change and not just a software change. I have no idea what TiVo decided but will not be surprised wither way.


----------



## bstettin (Mar 10, 2004)

segaily said:


> I am not sure why you think this. A downloaded HD movie would take up no more space on your TiVo then one you recorded off of your cable. It will take a while to download, but if I give up 2 hours of space and always have a movie ready for me who cares.


I didn't mean to suggest that a downloaded movie would take up more drive space than a recorded one; rather that (admittedly like a recorded movie), it would take up significant drive space, as opposed to an on-demand movie, which is stored on the cable company's server and takes up NONE of my drive space. So, yes, I want to use my Tivo to grab things off TV when I'm not around to watch them live, but I also like having the additional option of VOD/PPV, which allows me to pick from a very long list of content, call it up instantly, and not have to figure out what to erase from my Tivo to make room for it.

As I suggested, I expect to see the day when movie downloads are as quick as music downloads are now, and compressed in a manner that requires very little drive space. But we ain't there yet.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

amjustice said:


> Is there content available on demand that wouldnt be on at some point in time.


Yes, there is. Most of the time when I use my cable VOD it's for content that either 1) isn't available on a linear channel or 2) isn't available on a linear channel that I pay for (there's some free VOD stuff from channels that are in extended tiers I don't subscribe to).


----------



## ADent (Jan 7, 2000)

TiVoPony said:


> Second half of 2006.
> 
> Cheers,
> Pony


Us old timers will take that to mean Halloween.


----------



## Gene S (Feb 11, 2003)

amjustice said:


> My question is, if you set it up in Tivo why would you need On Demand anyways. Is there content available on demand that wouldnt be on at some point in time. Just a thought.


I don't need the VOD for Tivo, I just need it to have a 2-way card. My cableco (TimeWarnerCable) has moved to SDV (Switched Digital Video). I'm not entirely sure what all it does. I just know because of it they now have the capacity for 1000's of channels. And to enable the Tivo to receive the channels that are part of SDV I need to have a 2-way card.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

This is great news. My OTA is slowly dying, not sure if it's a tree growing in or else a bad HDtivo tuner. But the signal is more unreliable now and a series 3 may be what the Doctor ordered this summer


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Gene S said:


> I don't need the VOD for Tivo, I just need it to have a 2-way card. My cableco (TimeWarnerCable) has moved to SDV (Switched Digital Video). I'm not entirely sure what all it does. I just know because of it they now have the capacity for 1000's of channels. And to enable the Tivo to receive the channels that are part of SDV I need to have a 2-way card.


Yes, switched broadcast (aka switched digital, SDV, SDB) is going to be fun ...

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=3671934&highlight=switched#post3671934

No, current one-way products won't recieve switched broadcasts. Two-way products will ... but ... recording those switched broadcast channels is going to be very difficult for Tivo-provided software to do under the current specs.

The CEA is trying to get a better solution for switched broadcasts:
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518185152

In the mean time, Time Warner is pushing out switched digital, with Cox looking like the second mover ... alot of industry buzz for SDV ...fun fun.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

dt_dc said:


> Yes, switched broadcast (aka switched digital, SDV, SDB) is going to be fun ...
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=3671934&highlight=switched#post3671934
> 
> ...


So if I understand this correctly, *and I hope I don't*, the forthcoming S3 will not work on a *switched* cable network. If you can, and don't mind, please help me understand this in greater detail.

Thanks


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

How is it possible that cable companies could put out something like this that breaks the CableCARD standard so badly? The whole point of CableCARD was so that MSOs couldn't force people to use their converter boxes.

Dan


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

DCIFRTHS said:


> So if I understand this correctly, *and I hope I don't*, the forthcoming S3 will not work on a *switched* cable network. If you can, and don't mind, please help me understand this in greater detail.


A few SDV primers ...
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA438690.html?display=Broadband+Week
http://ct-magazine.com/archives/ct/1105/1105_buildingaswitched.htm

But basically, normal linear cable channels are always broadcast on a single channel ... all the time. A switched channel isn't. There's a pooled bunch of channels ... when you want a channel the STB sends a message up to the head-end, and the head-end tells your STB which of those channels to join. One-way CableCard products don't have the ability to do this ... so ... no switched broadcast channels for them.

Bandwidth savings come in because in a typical node (250-500 homes ... maybe less as cable reduces node size) some of those switched channels aren't going to be in use / watched ... so ... the 'pooled' set of channels can be much smaller than the full set of channels.

But even with a two-way implementation, switched broadcast is going to be problematic for Tivo. Because of the way two-way functionality and OCAP are specced ... the OCAP-based guide from your cable company, and OCAP-based navigation software from your cable company, and OCAP-based DVR software from your cable company, and all the other OCAP-based software that gets downloaded from the cable company onto a two-way box knows about the switched channels and how to access them and how to record them. But CE-provided software such as Tivo's ... doesn't really have a way to access these channels (except by turning everything over to the cable-provided software).

The CEA is trying to get some changes into the CableLabs specs to address / change this ... but unless they do so switched channels are going to be impossible to get with a one-way product and even with a two-way product problematic to access via CE provided software (such as Tivo's).

A few years ago ... switched broadcast was just one of the (many) things cable was looking at to increase capacity. There's always lots of ways to increase capacity on a cable plant ... all with their own advantages and disadvantages. However, now ... switched broadcast is seeing deployments and significant traction in cable:
http://www.ct-magazine.com/archives/ct/0306/0306_switchedbroadcast.htm


Dan203 said:


> How is it possible that cable companies could put out something like this that breaks the CableCARD standard so badly? The whole point of CableCARD was so that MSOs couldn't force people to use their converter boxes.


Things change. There's always something "on the horizon" "coming around the corner". Analog cable ready products can't get digital channels. One-way digital cable ready can't get things that require two-way functionality. There's always going to be some things two-way products can't do. You can't lock cable into a limited set of technology now and forever. You can't build a box now that has every possible feature set in it ...

More in some of the MPEG4 thread(s):
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=3669874&&#post3669874

BTW, if the S3 had Firewire ... switched broadcast wouldn't concern me so much. Once the two-way negotiations are done and two-way products start coming out you could buy a fairly cheap two-way STB. Hook it up to the Tivo via Firewire and the Tivo could control it via A/VC and you'd be all set. Without Firewire though ... and without the changes the CEA is trying to get ... switched broadcast is going to prove very problematic if it starts getting significantly deployed.


----------



## ping (Oct 3, 2005)

Boy, that is disappointing. Looks like a fairly simple way to lock people back into your STBs and still satisfy your cablecard requirements.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

So what happens to someone who is using a one-way device on a switched based system? Do they just get whatever channel their neighbor is tuning on a given switched channel? Or do they just not get anything at all?

Dan


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> So what happens to someone who is using a one-way device on a switched based system? Do they just get whatever channel their neighbor is tuning on a given switched channel? Or do they just not get anything at all?


Depends on the implementation. You might not be able to get any switched channels. You might be able to finagle a way to pick up the channels your neighbors are watching. Then again, even if you can pick up the channels your neighbors are watching ... they might not be very usefull. For example Switched_Channel_A might be on pooled QAM_Channel_100.1 as your neighbor is watching it. 5 minutes into the show, Switched_Channel_A goes to QAM_Channel_100.2 ... and Switched_Channel_B shows up on pooled QAM_Channel_100.1. Your neighbors leased box (or OCAP-based two-way box) handles the tranition fine and he never knows ... he's just watching Switched_Channel_A. Since cable controls the software (both on their own boxes and on OCAP-based bi-directional boxes) there's all kinds of goofy / non-conventional / non-standard stuff that they can do that their software can handle.

A switched digital solution may be different cable plant to cable plant ... and may evolve / change over time.


----------



## Steve_Martin (Jul 18, 2004)

I'd like to know too.

I'm all for new technology rollouts, but it seems that CableCard support is just barely getting off the ground and now they are talking about changes that make it obsolete already!

Isn't this similar to a trunked radio scheme?


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

But wait ... there *might* be a solution for SDV. Cablelabs and the CEA are *discussing* the problem. There *might* be a way for *future* unidirectional products to access switched channels. Then again, the solution would *probably* involve a hardware component only be applicable for *future* products ... it *probably* wouldn't apply to *existing* products.

People wonder why it's taken so long for a CableCard Tivo. Well ... this (and other similar issues) is exactly the kind of garbage Tivo has to deal with / plan for / think about.

Do they worry about SDV? Maybe the trials and deployments won't work out so great and it'll be just another piece of technology on the cable scrap heap. Or, maybe it'll only be limited to a few channels on a few plants for a long time. Then again, SDV may really take off quick ... and soon. Perhaps a good solution is just around the corner ... then again, perhaps not. Perhaps there will be a solution for existing products ... then again, perhaps not.

Round and round and round ...

From comments to the FCC from the CEA:



> 11/30/05
> http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518185152
> 
> Protection of the Consumer Investment
> ...





> 03/31/06
> http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518332570
> 
> Other issues that the parties have agreed to discuss include possible updates to future unidirectional products


The CEA and Cablelabs have "agreed to discuss possible updates to future unidirectional products". Boy ... doesn't get more definitive than that huh?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I wonder if it would be possible for CE devices to "talk" to the head end via TCP/IP over the net rather then DOCSIS? That would make the Series 3 unit a lot more future proof.

Dan


----------



## bstettin (Mar 10, 2004)

dt_dc said:


> if the S3 had Firewire ... switched broadcast wouldn't concern me so much.


Do we know for sure at this point that the S3 *won't* have Firewire? I was hoping it would, as a means to feed HD Tivo recordings to a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD recorder. Without Firewire, archiving HD recordings to disc won't be possible, right?


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

bstettin said:


> Do we know for sure at this point that the S3 *won't* have Firewire?


Since I do not work at Tivo ... I know nothing for sure about Firewire and the S3.

AFAIK, the "prototype / demo" at CES did not include Firewire. However, I do not think Tivo has said anything definitive one way or the other.


bstettin said:


> I was hoping it would, as a means to feed HD Tivo recordings to a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD recorder. Without Firewire, archiving HD recordings to disc won't be possible, right?


I wouldn't say "won't be possible". For example, you could possibly use TTG to transfer to a PC and burn to a HD optical format. Or perhaps Tivo will come out with something you could MRV to and burn ... or, well, all kinds of _possible_ things you could do with Ethernet and / or USB.

But, yes, Firewire would seem to give you one of the quickest / easiest (and CableLabs-approved) ways of of archiving in a non-proprietary way.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> I wonder if it would be possible for CE devices to "talk" to the head end via TCP/IP over the net rather then DOCSIS? That would make the Series 3 unit a lot more future proof.


Always possible. But you gotta get cable companies to support it. Also, performance would likely be a problem. Perhaps worst ... NAT / DHCP and firewalls would be problematic. Finally, relying on something cable wouldn't be using themselves is always asking for trouble.

Hard to know without seeing the "technical solution, not yet reduced to a technical standard" the CEA has proposed ... but my guess is they are talking about including a QPSK OOB modulator, some extra info in the OOB channel data, and a simple / standard messaging system that could be used for switched channels. Boxes that didn't have the QPSK OOB modulator would, unfortunately, be SOL.

The original CableCard host specs actually called for a 'simple' two-way system that used QPSK OOB messenging for a few standard things like VOD and iPPV ... without a full OCAP / DOCSIS implementation. OCAP / DOCSIS was optional and to be used for future / undefined / advanced functionality. This got scrapped (in favor of mandated full OCAP / DOCSIS) ... but ... some CEA members would (very much) like to see it brought back.

Edit: spelling


----------



## old64mb (Apr 11, 2005)

dt_dc said:


> But, yes, Firewire would seem to give you one of the quickest / easiest (and CableLabs-approved) ways of of archiving in a non-proprietary way.


Crossing my fingers that firewire does work, or with a DVHS recorder I simply won't be buying this unit. In a year or two I'm sure we'd see something, but given I have an archival solution already, it's not worth it.

Oh well. Only applies to about 1% of HD users.


----------



## kb7oeb (Jan 18, 2005)

I also hope the S3 has firewire/1394 but I doubt it will. It could be implemented so well too. Hook up your D-VHS deck (or future hd optical disk burner) and hit save to VCR, the vcr automatically turns on, switches to the digtal input and starts recording and stops right when its done, you could probably even watch something else while the recording is transfered. I think a standard D-VHS tape hold somewhere around 44GB

I don't think switched video will be a deal breaker yet, the places I have read about that have implemented it are moving the least viewed channels over. The post I read a while back said they kept HBO on for everyone but moved the west feed over to switched.



Dajad said:


> But PLEASE include at least one blaster/s-video input (or ideally an HDMI or component input) combo so us Canadians can buy a useable S3 with HDcapability while waiting for CRT mandated cableco support by cablecos!


Both connections are uncompressed video, its very expensive to encode uncompressed HD.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Steve_Martin said:


> Isn't this similar to a trunked radio scheme?


Yes ... the basic underlying idea of switched broadcast is very similar. Dynamic / shared / on-demand bandwidth instead of fixed / broadcast bandwidth.


Steve_Martin said:


> I'm all for new technology rollouts, but it seems that CableCard support is just barely getting off the ground and now they are talking about changes that make it obsolete already!


When was the last time you bought any technology that someone, somewhere wasn't talking about something to possibly make it somewhat obsolete?

Cable is constantly talking about lots of things that could be problematic for existing UDCPs. 1024QAM, AVCs (MPEG4/H.264 etc.), expanded RF (1+GHz, 3+GHz), IPTV and other NGNA initiatives, etc. Talking, talking ... lots of talking. Want to stay cometitive ... add more channels ... you gotta do something.

Existing UDCPs wouldn't be able to handle any of these. The thing is, neither would existing cable boxes. Cable can't suddenly roll out MPEG4 overnight ... becuase they currently don't have any MPEG4 boxes themselves. If Comcast was to suddenly switch their digital channels over to MPEG4 they'd have to buy several million new boxes and toss out several million old boxes. No, most of these things can only happen slowly. For example, Comcast might switch some VOD over to MPEG4 ... then maybe Extra Innings-HD or Full Court Press-HD or things people are willing to get a new box for. Want these new services? You need a new MPEg4 box. But the majority of cable will be MPEG2 for a long long long time with any change to any AVC happening very slowly ... over time ... and starting with a few niche / new things ... and lots of advance warning to the CE companies and consumers.

Just look at analog cable. Analog cabe hasn't exactly dissapeared overnight with the advent of digital cable. I think Time Warner had their first digital cable plant in 1996 and they were talking about it long before that. Hard to argue that the analog cable ready TV I bought in 1996 has been obsolted suddenly. Although ... over time ... more and more channels drop off analog and switch to digital ...

That's the thing about switched digital. Existing cable boxes can handle switched digital. That's one of the things that makes it very attractive to cable. It does require alot of infrastructure work ... but, it's alot of shared costs with VOD, Time Warner's Start Over, Cablevision's RS-DVR, and alot of other cable initiatives. That's why cable is talking more and more about switched broadcast ... and less and less about 1024QAM, AVCs, 3+GHz, etc.

Personally, I'd prefer cable increase bandwidth by dropping the analog channels quicker and switching over to digital. But untill digital sub penetration is higher ... that's difficult for cable too. People gripe whenever an analog channel gets moved over to digital. If digital sub rate was higher ... the costs of switched digital wouldn't be as attractive as dropping analog channels. Always trade-offs ...


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

kb7oeb said:


> I don't think switched video will be a deal breaker yet, the places I have read about that have implemented it are moving the least viewed channels over. The post I read a while back said they kept HBO on for everyone but moved the west feed over to switched.


No ... probably not yet. Time Warner is the only company actively rolling it out. Cox has done trials and "might" be doing something "later this year" ... or maybe not. Other companies are just "looking" / "watching".

So far, AFAIK, Time Warner has limited switched broadcast to:
1) Digital simulcast channels. So, the analog channel is available un-switched to UDCPs.
2) A few niche channels ... mostly foriegn-language channels.
3) Starting April 1, alternate timezone premium channels (if you're on the east coast ... HBO-West, SHO-West, etc.)
4) Sports packages ... League Pass, Extra Innings, Center Ice, etc.

I'd be surprised if the digital music channels don't go (or haven't already gone) switched too.

Maybe SDV will remain limited ... or at least remain limited for quite some time. Heck, maybe it'll prove problematic and get scrapped altogether. At the very least, the most popular channels aren't likely to go switched because you don't get any bandwidth savings for channels that are always being watched.

But with switched broadcast being available on existing cable STBs ... and most of switched digital's expenses being shared with VOD and other deployments ... it has the _potential_ for being more.

Time Warner trialed switched digital in Texas with 170 channels ... and their main lesson?


> Operators can save 12 to 15 channels of 6 MHz, but it's not for those who want to take baby steps. "*Go big or go home*," was his (Paul Brooks, senior network architect in Time Warner's advanced technology group) concluding advice.
> 
> http://www.bigbandnet.com/news/inTheNews/2005/news_062705a.php


But in the end ... yes, right now ... it's just _potential_.


> Readers understandably tire of hearing that "this is the year of ______." (Fill in your favorite, emerging technology.) It's an expression that has a way of being repeated, year after year.
> 
> Unlike multiple industry movements that glacially earned acceptance and implementation, however, switched broadcast (also known as switched digital video) has a plausible claim to that title. Just over three years past its most preliminary trials, it enters 2006 with commercial-stage deployments underway in multiple sites and considerable industry momentum behind it.
> 
> http://www.ct-magazine.com/archives/ct/0306/0306_switchedbroadcast.htm


Although, even Time Warner's limited implementation I'm not too fond of because:
1) I'd like the S3 to record the digital simulcast channels (less space, better quality), instead of having to encode the analog channels
2) Some of those niche channels that are prime for switching (CSPAN, Government Channels, etc) I actually watch. In fact, one of the reasons I like Tivo is because I find / watch / record things off niche channels I wouldn't use otherwise.
3) Alternate time-zone channels can be very useful for conflicts. Although, the content is usually repeated (endlessly) on the main channel so ... not such a big deal.
4) I don't sub or care about the sports packages ... but for those that do it could be a big deal-breaker when the cable company DVR can record those if the S3 can't. Or, they buy an S3 and can record those channels ... and then later when the cable company moves them to switched they can't.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Where along the cable network does the switching occur?


----------



## Steve_Martin (Jul 18, 2004)

DT_DC thanks for the informative replies.

I just like having a CableCard so I can minimize the number of external boxes.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

HDTiVo said:


> Where along the cable network does the switching occur?


That's one of those things that can differ vendor to vendor ... plant to plant ... network engineer to network engineer ... even over time subject to industry trends ...

But in general you've got switching at the head-end, and switching at the HFC node (edge servers) ... and switched broadcast could be done at either ... or more typically include elements of switching at both the head-end and the node. "Switching" isn't really a discrete thing and in most deployments elements of SDV will happen all over the place.

Lots of debate about the "best" (cost, performance, flexibility, re-useability, etc) approach.

Some of the articles linked to above have some good technical details ... and diagrams of all the moving parts:
http://www.ct-magazine.com/archives/ct/0306/0306_switchedbroadcast.htm
http://www.ct-magazine.com/archives/ct/0206/0206_switcheddigitalvideo.htm
etc.

Edit: _Lots_ of moving parts.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> ....So anyway, for TTG/MRV for encrypted / protected content ... Tivo is either 1) going to have to use one of the approved technologies from the license agreement or 2) submit a technology of their own and get it aprroved or 3) get someone else to submit a technology they want to use and get it approved.


my know nothing vote is #2- submit tivoguard. And hence the still vague "2nd half of the year" timeframe....


----------



## lajohn27 (Dec 29, 2003)

dt_dc:

If I'm reading this right.. aren't they just making these channel 'glorified' VOD streams? And wouldn't the underlying technology be essentially the same in some way? For example, on my cableco when I start a VOD stream, it is essentially given a channel allocation that only my box is able to tune.

Except in my neighborhood, if you have a QAM enabled TV (no cablecard required) you can actually tune the VOD channels (with very weird channel numbers) because for some strange reason they are not encrypted.

Am I thinking correctly?

J


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

lajohn27 said:


> dt_dc:
> 
> If I'm reading this right.. aren't they just making these channel 'glorified' VOD streams? And wouldn't the underlying technology be essentially the same in some way? For example, on my cableco when I start a VOD stream, it is essentially given a channel allocation that only my box is able to tune.


Essentially yes.


> Except in my neighborhood, if you have a QAM enabled TV (no cablecard required) you can actually tune the VOD channels (with very weird channel numbers) because for some strange reason they are not encrypted.


AFAIK, that is sometimes the case.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

lajohn27 said:


> For example, on my cableco when I start a VOD stream, it is essentially given a channel allocation that only my box is able to tune.


Don't think this is correct - I've been able to see VOD selections that others in my neighborhood are watching by scanning through the frequencies. They bounce around, but they are visible.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

jfh3 said:


> Don't think this is correct - I've been able to see VOD selections that others in my neighborhood are watching by scanning through the frequencies. They bounce around, but they are visible.


 I think the point was another neighbor with a cable company digital set top box can't tune to that channel. However anyone with a QAM tuner can find them as you say.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

interesting tidbit in the cablelabs Press release found here:

http://home.businesswire.http://hom...d=news_view&newsId=20060320005785&newsLang=en



> The approval by CableLabs allows TiVo to build and deploy a CableCARD(TM)-enabled DCR digital video recorder (DVR), and enables consumers to enjoy unidirectional digital and high definition (HD) cable programming without the need for a set-top box.


could mean that since there isn't a two way spec they didn't test it that way and cant say it will ever be two way. But it's sure weird that they would go out of their way to call out its unidirectional. Is that their standard MO?

dug some more- not so good- these people got cleared for unitdirectional and 2-way:
http://home.businesswire.com/portal...ewsLang=en&beanID=2133606841&viewID=news_view

so sounds like tivo is one way for sure as of now.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

MichaelK said:


> dug some more- not so good- these people got cleared for unitdirectional and 2-way:
> http://home.businesswire.com/portal...ewsLang=en&beanID=2133606841&viewID=news_view


This link didn't work for me.

This one (to the EnCentrus CPDO) did:
http://home.businesswire.com/portal...d=news_view&newsId=20060320005785&newsLang=en

BTW, EnCentrus CPDO is an "approved output" for digital cable ready products ... not a product in and of itself.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

lajohn27 said:


> If I'm reading this right.. aren't they just making these channel 'glorified' VOD streams? And wouldn't the underlying technology be essentially the same in some way?


Yes, there is _alot_ of technical similarities between how VOD is delivered and how switched broadcast is delivered (and Time Warner's Start Over and Cablevision's RS-DVR). And ideally (from the cable company's perspective) lots of re-usable components that can be used for both / either / all.

That's why one-way products can't access them ... and why as cable companies roll out / expand VOD ... switched broadcast starts looking very attractive to them.

There are some differences of course. People don't expect "channel surfing" from VOD. Switched broadcasts, OTOH are intended to look / act just like normal channels. VOD is always intended for a single viewer ... but if 5 people on the same node tune to (switched) HBO-W ... you want them to be able to all get the same stream ... you don't want to have to send 5 streams.

Anyway, lots of similarities ... and a few differences.


lajohn27 said:


> For example, on my cableco when I start a VOD stream, it is essentially given a channel allocation that only my box is able to tune.
> 
> Except in my neighborhood, if you have a QAM enabled TV (no cablecard required) you can actually tune the VOD channels (with very weird channel numbers) because for some strange reason they are not encrypted.


Cable doesn't have the ability to send a stream to just one box. Technically, everyone on a "node" gets everything that comes down the coax (this includes VOIP and data too). But cable can send info so that the boxes that are looking for a particular stream can access it ... and other boxes ignore it ... or even encrypt content so that only a particular box has access to it. VOD streams (right now) are mostly unencrypted ... that's why you can see your neighbor's VOD (with a QAM tuner) ... but there's alot of talk in cable about how to efficiently change that.

BTW, "homes per node" is very important in the efficiency of VOD / switched broadcast / nDVRs / etc. For example, if you have 1000 homes per node, and you figure 10% are going to be using VOD at any one time ... you have to have dedicated space for 100 streams (about 10 6MHz QAM channels ... 60MHz). But, if you're at 200 homes per node ... you can provide for 10% usage with only 20 streams (2 6MHz QAM channels ... 12MHz).

As cable ramps up VOD, switched broadcast, and other similar initiatives, they've also been working on reducing the homes per HFC node.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

thanks for the better link- i think i fixed mine.

I relaize it's not a product for retail exactly- just thought it interesting it said 2-way- especially since it doesn't really have anythign to do with 2-way being an output format. I couldn't find any recent hardware approvals to see how they worded those.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

MichaelK said:


> I couldn't find any recent hardware approvals to see how they worded those.


There might be a Samsung one somewhere ... and maybe a Panasonic one ...


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

dt_dc said:


> Time Warner is the only company actively rolling it (switched broadcast) out.


Woops ... add Cablevision:


> While Cablevision didn't provide any details on how its RS-DVR was installed and provisioned, the company has deployed switched digital in some of its New York area footprint.
> 
> http://www.ct-magazine.com/news/040406.html


Shouldn't be too surprising that with Time Warner and Cablevision looking at other similar things (MaestroTV / Start Over and RS-DVRs respectively) ... they are also two of the more active companies with switched broadcast.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

MichaelK said:


> I couldn't find any recent hardware approvals to see how they worded those.


Here's the Samsung 2-Way certification press release from September:
http://www.cablelabs.com/news/pr/2005/05_pr_samsung_082405.html

Keywords = OCAP-enabled interactive


----------



## TexasAg (Apr 2, 2006)

dt_dc said:


> BTW, "homes per node" is very important in the efficiency of VOD / switched broadcast / nDVRs / etc. For example, if you have 1000 homes per node, and you figure 10% are going to be using VOD at any one time ... you have to have dedicated space for 100 streams (about 10 6MHz QAM channels ... 60MHz). But, if you're at 200 homes per node ... you can provide for 10% usage with only 20 streams (2 6MHz QAM channels ... 12MHz).
> 
> As cable ramps up VOD, switched broadcast, and other similar initiatives, they've also been working on reducing the homes per HFC node.


Anybody know how Verizon Fios TV works (or if it would possibly go to switched digital video)? Since it's fiber to the home, I couldn't imagine that you'd need switched digital video to save bandwidth.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

dt_dc said:


> Here's the Samsung 2-Way certification press release from September:
> http://www.cablelabs.com/news/pr/2005/05_pr_samsung_082405.html
> 
> Keywords = OCAP-enabled interactive





> Samsung is the first consumer electronics manufacturer to build a 2-way integrated digital television. This is quite a feat considering the complexity of these new devices, said CableLabs President and CEO Dr. Richard R. Green. As this technology is rapidly progressing, Samsung has agreed to continue to work with Cablelabs to ensure interoperability with future OCAP headend providers, he added.


Sounds like Samsung is willing to make changes "on the fly". The way I read it is that updates will be necessary for the Samsung product to continue to work properly. Would this be a correct interpretation?


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

there was only one hit to the word 'guide' in this thread. So can someone explain to me if the guide will be inherently 'the same' as I have now on my hdtivo? I thought i read somewhere that people can't use cablecards in their tv and have access to the free tvguide? I may be wrong as I haven't had cable in years. but there was something that wasn't available. Maybe it's the PPV and on demand people are talking about.


----------



## Rcam10 (Apr 13, 2004)

Well, if the S3 comes out and really isn't 2 way, and also cannot be updated, then I won't be interested in it. It was my plan to get at least one S3 and go to TWC. But with them doing SDV in the area I'd use it, unless the S3 will get those, then I wouldn't be interested. 

Which is too bad since I hate that SA8300HD SATA interface they are using. They won't even update that software because of them testing Start over and SDV. Of course the update don't do a lot but at least its better than what they use now. 

The person speaking for TWC in SC clearly state they might move any channel to SDV at any time. Most of the anlalog channels are simicast that way now. Also west coast HD feed and Universal HD. 

So, without the S3 working with all that, I can't use it. Actually I'd prefer it work with VOD and everything, but I guess I could do without that part.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

newsposter said:


> there was only one hit to the word 'guide' in this thread. So can someone explain to me if the guide will be inherently 'the same' as I have now on my hdtivo? I thought i read somewhere that people can't use cablecards in their tv and have access to the free tvguide? I may be wrong as I haven't had cable in years. but there was something that wasn't available. Maybe it's the PPV and on demand people are talking about.


 Tivo will not use the free tvguide - it will use it's own. That's part of the monthly service fee and also why you need phone/ethernet connectivity to it.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

newsposter said:


> there was only one hit to the word 'guide' in this thread. So can someone explain to me if the guide will be inherently 'the same' as I have now on my hdtivo? I thought i read somewhere that people can't use cablecards in their tv and have access to the free tvguide? I may be wrong as I haven't had cable in years. but there was something that wasn't available. Maybe it's the PPV and on demand people are talking about.


TiVo supplies their own guide data and onscreen guide, so that will be exactly like any other TiVo. You will not however be able to watch VOD or order PPV. (you can still watch PPV but you have to order it via phone or the web)

Dan


----------



## Steve_Martin (Jul 18, 2004)

Additionally, with a one-way CableCard you don't get the guide data and channel displays that normally appear on a set top box (i.e. the ones that come from the cable company and not Tivo).


----------



## Carfan (Aug 9, 2003)

Congrats to everyone involved in this momentous success!

Put me on the list for one as soon as it is ready - this Motorola 6412 I have to centend with day's are numbered!


----------



## Dmon4u (Jul 15, 2000)

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6323111.html?display=Breaking+News

Since all this Cable Card info is still a bit confusing for me, what does this mean ?

"Scientific Atlanta has been awarded qualified status by CableLabs for its multi-stream CableCARD, branded M-Card, that enables consumers of retail set-top boxes and integrated digital television sets to watch and/or record their programming from multiple simultaneous tuners using a single CableCARD. The use of multiple tuners allows functions such as handling picture-in-picture or simultaneous watch-and-record of multiple digital video channels.

S-A, a subsidiary of Cisco Systems, says the "M-Card" will operate in a backwards-compatible, single-stream manner when paired with a single-stream device (for example, in a Unidirectional Digital Cable Product); or in a multi-stream manner when paired with a multi-stream device. It is expected that multi-stream CableCARD devices will be widely available for use by mid-2006 and will be supported by cable operators."

Will the new TiVo require multiple Cable Cards where SA's need only one ?


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

Good question. Well, the S3 prototype had 2 CableCARD slots... Pony said they were good for 2 single-stream cards, or one multi-stream. What will end up on the final box, we dunno.

It may also depend on which type of card your cable provider offers.


----------



## ChuckyBox (Oct 3, 2005)

BigJimOutlaw said:


> It may also depend on which type of card your cable provider offers.


That's all it depends on. If your provider offers multi-stream cards, you only need one to tune/record two digital channels. If they offer single-stream cards, you will need two cards to tune/record two digital channels.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

CableLabs Certifies New Gear

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Matt Stump 
4/7/2006 4:30:00 PM

Scientific Atlanta Inc. and TiVo Inc. received qualification for two CableCARD-related products from Cable Television Laboratories Inc.

CableLabs said TiVo achieved verification for a new HD-capable digital-video recorder that will have a CableCARD slot. TiVo said the DVR will be on the market later this year.

We wanted to have an HD CableCARD product, said Mark Roberts, senior vice president, products and operations at TiVo. He added that the company *hasnt decided what size hard drive to put into the dual-tuner box.*

CableLabs awarded qualified status for SAs multistream CableCARD, which would allow consumers to watch and record programming from multiple simultaneous tuners via a single CableCARD.

Advanced Digital Broadcast signed a downloadable-conditional-access-system licensing agreement with CableLabs, which will allow ADB to build retail set-top boxes and other devices that deploy downloadable conditional access.

CableLabs also announced the release of specifications for an advanced Internet-protocol-services platform.


----------



## ChuckyBox (Oct 3, 2005)

HDTiVo said:


> We wanted to have an HD CableCARD product, said Mark Roberts, senior vice president, products and operations at TiVo. He added that the company *hasnt decided what size hard drive to put into the dual-tuner box.*


I vote 300GB. It keeps the price down now, they can bump it up to 400 or 500 in a year or so, and the early-adopters can buy an external 500 or 1000 next year.

The SA news is great, too. I'd love to get multistream right from the get-go.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

TexasAg said:


> Anybody know how Verizon Fios TV works (or if it would possibly go to switched digital video)? Since it's fiber to the home, I couldn't imagine that you'd need switched digital video to save bandwidth.


Well ... in some ways Verizon and cable are very similar. In some ways ... they are very different. Also, in some ways cable's switched broadcast is very similar to Verizon's IP VOD ... and in some ways it's very different.

Anyway, Verizon certainly could do cable-style switched (QAM) broadcasts. However, AFAIK they aren't deploying the neccesary edge servers and QAM modulators like cable is so ... I wouldn't see it happening any time soon (if at all). Verizon seems to be preferring the pure IP approach (like they are using for VOD) for these type of "narrowcast" / "unicast" applications.

So, while I wouldn't see Verizon doing "switched broadcast" any time soon ... I can see them potentially, at some point, start moving some linear channels off RF QAM and deliver them via IPTV. Slightly different (although also somewhat similar) ... but, the end result would still be that those channels wouldn't be available on a one-way CableCard product.

Verizon doesn't quite have the "huge bandwidth advantage" over cable or "unlimited capacity" that some people seem to think. But they definately aren't feeling any "bandwidth crunch" like cable and the IPTV FTTN telcos. And, they have the ability to deliver services either "cable-style" OR "IPTV telco-style". This gives them the ability to sit back ... watch the industries / technologies ... let cable and IPTV FTTN telcos test / trial / demo stuff and work out the bugs with vendors ... and then when / if they do start feeling a bandwidth crunch pick and choose some already-established technologies.

For example ... IPTV might not mature quickly enough. "Narrowcast" digital add insertion and some other key things cable is already tackling might still be a long, long way off for IPTV. In which case Verizon might end up going more "cable-style" with switched (RF QAM) broadcasts.

But yes ... whatever bandwidth-conserving techniques they use ... it's probably quite a while before they will need them.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

DCIFRTHS said:


> Sounds like Samsung is willing to make changes "on the fly". The way I read it is that updates will be necessary for the Samsung product to continue to work properly. Would this be a correct interpretation?


The joy of working from an open / changing spec.

The OCAP / 2 Way specs are still changing. The Samsung 2-Way TV is being used in a (small) trial by Time Warner ... and OCAP EPGs and other software are in their very first iterations. The spec is still being revised by CableLabs (and CE companies with change requests) ... and there's the 2-way negotiations which may neccesitate changes.

Once things are finalized / closed, things shouldn't change as much. But ...

One of the main thing the CE companies and CableLabs are talking about right now is interoperability and future updates. Under OCAP, software gets downloaded from the cable company to run on your TV / DVR / whatever. Sounds great in theory ... but ask any Java developer about write-once run-anywhere in real deployments ...

Anyway, the CEA is asking for a test lab where apps can be tested out ... and a way to deploy any software patches they may need (automatically, to the cable-ready products via the cable plants). So even once things are finalized / closed ... software updates on "cable ready" products may be alot more commen than people are used to (with CE products).


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Dmon4u said:


> http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6323111.html?display=Breaking+News
> 
> Since all this Cable Card info is still a bit confusing for me, what does this mean ?
> (...)
> Will the new TiVo require multiple Cable Cards where SA's need only one ?


The Scientific Atlanta qualification is for a _card_ ... not for a DVR (host).

Cable companies buy CableCards (for deployment) from whatever company provides their CA (Conditional Access) system. Cable companies that use Motorola CA use Motorola CableCards. Cable companies that use Scientific Atlanta CA use Scientific Atlanta CableCards.

The current cards are single-stream only ... you need multiple cards if you want to support multiple tuners.

But once cable companies start deploying the multistream card ... any company (including Tivo) can deliver a product with multiple tuners that only needs one multistream card.

The multi-stream cards are also backward compatible so ... if you have a single-tuner CableCard product now ... and the cable companies later start deploying the multistream cards ... they'll work just fine in current products.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> The multi-stream cards are also backward compatible so ... if you have a single-tuner CableCard product now ... and the cable companies later start deploying the multistream cards ... they'll work just fine in current products.


But of course won't "create" in the host the ability to "tune" a second program. 

In all this discussion about things that might not be accessible via Cable Card...remember CC is an agreement between various parties in lieu of the FCC making regulations. If things get unreasonably crazy, there is always the possibility the FCC could step in.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

What is this, and does it have anything to do with anything in this thread?



> CableLabs, ABC Enable VOD Triggering
> 
> By Glen Dickson -- Broadcasting & Cable, 4/10/2006 1:23:00 AM
> 
> ...


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> Cable is constantly talking about lots of things that could be problematic for existing UDCPs. 1024QAM, AVCs (MPEG4/H.264 etc.), expanded RF (1+GHz, 3+GHz), IPTV and other NGNA initiatives, etc. Talking, talking ... lots of talking. Want to stay cometitive ... add more channels ... you gotta do something.
> 
> Existing UDCPs wouldn't be able to handle any of these. The thing is, neither would existing cable boxes. Cable can't suddenly roll out MPEG4 overnight ... becuase they currently don't have any MPEG4 boxes themselves. If Comcast was to suddenly switch their digital channels over to MPEG4 they'd have to buy several million new boxes and toss out several million old boxes. No, most of these things can only happen slowly. For example, Comcast might switch some VOD over to MPEG4 ... then maybe Extra Innings-HD or Full Court Press-HD or things people are willing to get a new box for. Want these new services? You need a new MPEg4 box. But the majority of cable will be MPEG2 for a long long long time with any change to any AVC happening very slowly ... over time ... and starting with a few niche / new things ... and lots of advance warning to the CE companies and consumers.


Here's someone using MPEG4 to increase programming that seems to have a solution to their legacy box problem...



> USDTV Moves To Expand Capacity
> 
> By John M. Higgins -- Broadcasting & Cable, 4/10/2006 3:53:00 AM
> 
> ...


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

HDTiVo said:


> What is this, and does it have anything to do with anything in this thread?


Sounds like a VBI tag, similar to the one TiVo uses for the Thumbs Up icon, that can actually trigger VOD content. I seriously doubt it has anything to do with CableCARD since there is no way for a one-way card to request a VOD download, and two-way CableCARDs aren't even in production yet. It sounds more like it's designed for current, non-CableCARD, set top boxes.

Dan


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

HDTiVo said:


> Here's someone using MPEG4 to increase programming that seems to have a solution to their legacy box problem...


According to this article from 9/26/2005 ... USDTV had a grand total of 4,500-5,000 subscribers.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6260559.html?display=Breaking+News&referral=supp

Which would be considerably down from the 10,000 subscriber number reported by the same publication (and same reporter) on 11/24/2004:
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA483252.html?display=Breaking+News

Cable upgrading all their digital boxes would be in a completely different league.

Oh, and USDTV had to sell a controlling interest in their company back in September in order to raise the capital for various improvements (including, I would suppose, the MPEG4 switch).


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

HDTiVo said:


> What is this, and does it have anything to do with anything in this thread?





Dan203 said:


> Sounds like a VBI tag, similar to the one TiVo uses for the Thumbs Up icon, that can actually trigger VOD content.


You can read more about CableLabs' ETV project (which it's based on) here:
http://www.opencable.com/etv/etv_overview.html

You can lump ETV in with other ITV initiatives you hear about. Then there's the "On Ramp To OCAP" which is similar ...
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6285417.html?display=Technology

Basically, cable is trying to figure out how to gear up and deploy ITV applications on legacy STBs before OCAP is more widely deployed (when it's assumed OCAP ITV apps will become more common and easier to deploy). ITV is one of those things that ... well, it'll be interesting to see where it goes (and how). Not just for cable ... but for everyone.

Getting back to Tivo ... a one-way product doesn't have a (standard) way to access / run the same ITV applications that will run on cable company equipment (and two-way OCAP products). A two-way product could run OCAP ITV applications. I've never really seen or heard anything that I would consider an ITV "killer app" though. Some cool / wiz-bang demos ... but no "killer app" yet. And, Tivo has its own ways of delivering ITV applications if they so desired / needed to ...


----------



## old64mb (Apr 11, 2005)

kb7oeb said:


> I also hope the S3 has firewire/1394 but I doubt it will. It could be implemented so well too. Hook up your D-VHS deck (or future hd optical disk burner) and hit save to VCR, the vcr automatically turns on, switches to the digtal input and starts recording and stops right when its done, you could probably even watch something else while the recording is transfered. I think a standard D-VHS tape hold somewhere around 44GB


Heh, I wish. My experience with Firewire transfers (most to DVHS, a few to desktop PC) are that the process is far from automatic and often really fragile - as in you have to do things in a very specific sequence or the entire Firewire chain crashes every device on it, so even if its implemented the poor engineers would be tearing their hair out. Would be marvelous if it was the case.

Incidentally, last I recall, the DVHS standard is 19 GB/hr - comes into play when you deal with transferring from another high def media source to it.

Actually the other interesting part about this is that the cable companies are now required to provide boxes with a Firewire output by FCC mandate; I'm actually a bit surprised that the S3 doesn't fall under that restriction, but I guess since Tivo was supposed to be one of the beneficiaries of the policy maybe their boxes are exempt.

We'll see.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

ChuckyBox said:


> I vote 300GB. It keeps the price down now, they can bump it up to 400 or 500 in a year or so, and the early-adopters can buy an external 500 or 1000 next year.
> 
> The SA news is great, too. I'd love to get multistream right from the get-go.


I agree on the 300GB drives, unless they can dignificantly lower the price by going with older 250GB models.

As for the SA cablecard, I just wish I could buy one, rather than wait and see if my cable company will (a) get them and (b) charge me a fortune for it.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The model number of the approved unit suggests a 250GB drive. However I guess it's possible the model number could change before launch. I personally would like to see a 300GB drive as well. But in either case it'll still hold more then twice as much as the MOXI I'm renting from the cable company. And if I really do need more space there is always that eSATA port. 

Dan


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

Pony said 250GB at CES. Of course that can change.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> According to this article from 9/26/2005 ... USDTV had a grand total of 4,500-5,000 subscribers...


I know they are a bit player...the interesting thing was that they somehow have a simple/cheap sounding way of getting their legacy boxes to work with MPEG4.

If Cable boxes could also be "updated" in a similar way, it would make it much easier to start using MPEG4 in the cable system.

It might be interesting to know the exact details.

--------------

Adding...

http://www.neotion.com/products/modules.php

http://www.neotion.com/news/papers/NEOTION - US CableCard Opportunity - June 30_2005.pdf


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

Dan203 said:


> The model number of the approved unit suggests a 250GB drive. However I guess it's possible the model number could change before launch. I personally would like to see a 300GB drive as well. But in either case it'll still hold more then twice as much as the MOXI I'm renting from the cable company. And if I really do need more space there is always that eSATA port.
> 
> Dan


I would like to see a larger drive or at least an option for a larger built in drive. Hi-Def eats a lot of disk space...

The external drive is nice, but I prefer everything in one box.


----------



## ADent (Jan 7, 2000)

Is the Remote Storage DVR (RS-DVR) basically VOD?

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/services/2006-03-27-cablevision-dvr_x.htm


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

ADent said:


> Is the Remote Storage DVR (RS-DVR) basically VOD?
> 
> http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/services/2006-03-27-cablevision-dvr_x.htm


One major difference.

VOD gives you access to pre-recorded choices only. The Remote Storage DVR (RS-DVR) that some cable companies are talking about allow you to record shows of your choice from current broadcasts just like a faithful DVR (aka TiVo) and that appears to be the rub with the broadcasters.

NEWS ARTICLE I just read this morning, after this post: *Cablevision plan chewed over by network lawyers*

Currently I believe it is only an interm device just like the current DVR is an interm device that is heading towards the ultimate day where all video is offered as VOD and the broadcasters are just video suppliers like Parmount, Universal, or Warner Bros, and the only real broadcast TV are live shows, live sports, and news (aka NN and local); of course local community information. (Funny, its like we are going back to the late 1940s and very early 1950s, where TV suppied a lot of local content.)

You can see the future starting to take shape today in the news; the Disney/ABC offering VOD that took place just yesterday, and there is far more to come. How about TURNER offering all of his movies (aka TCM) in a true VOD situation.

Funny thing, the current DVRs will be used to help supply this NEW VOD FUNCTION until the massive bandwidth is available to supply true VOD to everyone, and the internet is the transport vehicle.

THE FUTURE IS HERE!


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

The PVR seems interim in the same way the PC is only interim until all the PCs are replaced by terminals connected to Mainframes running Time Sharing operating systems.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

HDTiVo said:


> The PVR seems interim in the same way the PC is only interim until all the PCs are replaced by terminals connected to Mainframes running Time Sharing operating systems.


And the funny thing is we are currently headed back to that FUTURE/PAST too, aka Windows Live and Google Apps.

I have been in IT for over 33 years and I can see what the access to broadband is going to do for a majority of changes, including the Windows Live and Google Apps.

Agreed the DVR will NOT disappear anytime soon and will likely NEVER disappear and the same goes for the PC/MAC. Both of those categories of devices will be around for decades, but their usage will change over time. The same goes for the massive online games like WoW, lets face it the backend servers do a lot of the work.

Over many years (decades) the PCs/MACs and the DVRs will become mostly display and control devices (aka terminals) connected to distributed computing power that is spread out over the globe, NOT just one Mainframe, with the Internet being the connection to the Massive Storage and access to the Content.

If you can't see it happening then you are blinded by your experiences of the past. I agree the day of the Monolithic Mainframe is dead, but then again even the day of the Monolithic PC is disappearing. Distributed computing using servers, resources, and content from all over the world are headed our way.

Microsoft is building a huge server farm facility for their online Windows Live backup service in Eastern Washington as I type this post and the same is happening to with Google.

Additional Edit:

I believe that all of the rumors about the Google Apps scared Microsoft into offering Windows Live, which should morph into offering most of the Office products and sooner or later offer major applications like CRM and Financial Applications. The only thing hanging up the major applications are the usual security and access issues, and IT and companies not wanting to let go, but sooner or later the TCO will drive those companies towards this online world, but it will take multiple decades.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

HDTiVo said:


> What is this, and does it have anything to do with anything in this thread?


One more point ...

Bigger picture ... the ITV stuff gets at the heart of some of the CEA vs. CableLabs and two-way issues ... and the OCAP thread:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=281722&highlight=OCAP

Say at the end of American Idol ... you get a "press (whatever) to cast your vote now" message. Press (whatever) and a screen pops up where you cast your vote. At the bottom of the screen ... "Brought to you by GM , press (whatever) for more about the new 2010 _____." Allowing you, of course, to press a button and get a telescoping / extended ad via whatever method (cable VOD content, Tivo showcases, whatever).

Cable is trying to get a piece of revenue from GM for the above ... And CE companies (and Tivo) are doing the same. Which side provides that ITV piece ... and gets that ITV revenue (directly from consumers, from advertisers, whatever) ... is a _big_ part of the CEA vs. CableLabs / two-way negotiations / disagreements.

So I dunno about directly related to this thread ... but definately "big picture" / indirectly related to Tivo and CableLabs and cable-ready products.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

HDTiVo said:


> The PVR seems interim in the same way the PC is only interim until all the PCs are replaced by terminals connected to Mainframes running Time Sharing operating systems.


Or webbrowsers used to connect to webservers. We're already there in some ways - many people use webbased applications with little or no installed specialized software on the local PC. Like this forum for example.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 27, 2001)

Just curious if TiVo could even have this out in beta testing before the certification was done?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Sirshagg said:


> Just curious if TiVo could even have this out in beta testing before the certification was done?


Possibly for the ATSC portion, but they wouldn't be able to test CableCARD functionality until it's approved by both Cable Labs and the FCC.

Dan


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

lajohn27 said:


> If I'm reading this right.. aren't they just making these channel 'glorified' VOD streams?


BTW ... interesting, recent pair of articles from Multichannel News:

Part 1 - Similarities between VOD and switched broadcast:
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6319013.html?display=Technology

Part 2 - Differences between VOD and switched broadcast:
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6323217.html?display=Technology


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> Possibly for the ATSC portion, but they wouldn't be able to test CableCARD functionality until it's approved by both Cable Labs and the FCC.


I'm not aware of any specific FCC approval needed for CableCard hosts. There's the general stuff needed for everything (RF modulators, remotes, etc. etc. etc). But AFAIK they (the FCC) don't have anything specific to say about the CableCard part of a product. That's all up to CableLabs.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Hmm... I thought they were involved somehow. In any case they definitely couldn't be testing CableCARD support in the wild (i.e. with external testers) without Cable Labs approval. So if there is a beta going on right now it is probably limited to ATSC functionality. (well I guess it could have switched last week when they got the approval)

Dan


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

tbeckner said:


> Over many years (decades) the PCs/MACs and the DVRs will become mostly display and control devices (aka terminals) connected to distributed computing power that is spread out over the globe, NOT just one Mainframe, with the Internet being the connection to the Massive Storage and access to the Content.
> 
> If you can't see it happening then you are blinded by your experiences of the past. I agree the day of the Monolithic Mainframe is dead, but then again even the day of the Monolithic PC is disappearing. Distributed computing using servers, resources, and content from all over the world are headed our way.


Years from now clients will be much thicker and there will be far more distributed resources. There is no predicting which will have advanced more relative to the other at any point in time.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> BTW ... interesting, recent pair of articles from Multichannel News:
> 
> Part 1 - Similarities between VOD and switched broadcast:
> http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6319013.html?display=Technology
> ...


Thanks, I understood everything until the part where Bob was watching Oxygen, but then right after Jane started watching Oxygen and at that point I caught on again.

The Unicast thing is also really interesting in the context of that whole remote DVR thing ... both give the opportunity of adding value by customizing the viewing experience to each subscriber, ie. provided the remote DVR adjusts commercial insertion either simplistically over time or sophisticatedly to the viewers' interests (with time in mind too.)


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Panasonic signs DCAS license
By Jeff Baumgartner, CED
April 11, 2006

Panasonic Corp. is the latest consumer electronics company to sign on the dotted line for the CableLabs DCAS (downloadable conditional access) Host license.

The license gives Panasonic the technology, including access to the secrets for a secure micro, it will need to build DCAS-enabled hosts, such as digital televisions and digital set-tops. Advanced Digital Broadcast, LG Electronics and Samsung have also secured DCAS licenses.

"We look forward to working closely with Panasonic on DCAS, both in retail and leased markets, in order to bring these new devices to market as soon as possible," said Comcast Cable EVP and CTO David Fellows.

In January, *Comcast * said it would purchase an initial stock of 250,000 -HD-DVR set-tops from Panasonic. The MSO has the option to buy up to 1 million "RNG" boxes in the first year of the agreement. Those devices will support OCAP, 250 gigabytes of storage and dual codecs (MPEG-2 and H.264).


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Lots of articles coming out about the amount of talk about switched broadcast at NCTA's big annual "The National Show" ... which just concluded.

Broadcasting & Cable article:


> *Switched Broadcast a Hot Topic at NCTA*
> 
> As cable operators look to offer new services and more HD programming to stave off competition from satellite operators and telcos, they are experimenting with some of the same "switched broadcast" techniques that telco AT&T plans to use to provide video over its advanced DSL network later this year.
> (...)
> http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6324247.html?display=Breaking+News


Light Reading article:


> *NCTA: Cable's IP Appreciation Party*
> 
> ATLANTA -- NCTA National Show -- The influence of IPTV was apparent everywhere at NCTA this week. And this is a cable show, for gosh sakes!
> (...)
> ...


Etc.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

From something earlier about CableLabs "approved" digital outputs ...


dt_dc said:


> Encentrus CPDO - no clue what that's about:
> http://home.businesswire.com/portal...d=news_view&newsId=20060320005785&newsLang=en


Some more on Encentrus CPDO from Multichannel News:


> *Now, Store TV Shows on PC Drive*
> 
> ver wondered about using the Gigabyte storage on a personal computer to store television programming when the space on a home digital video recorder runs out?
> (...)
> ...


Not very interesting for now ... only being able to USB and a PC for storage-only. Storing content on a PC but then having to transfer it back to the DVR to watch or use. But ... anyway ... there's what it's about.

Also, CableLabs approved Real Helix for use in Unidirectional Receivers (which I find more interesting):
http://www.cablelabs.com/news/pr/2006/06_pr_ocur_realnetworks_041006.html


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> Lots of articles coming out about the amount of talk about switched broadcast


How far do you think switched can go before regulatory trouble starts with regard to "legacy" one-way CableCard devices?


----------



## ADent (Jan 7, 2000)

There is an FCC mandate to require the cable cos to use CableCards in ALL of their receivers/STBs, but they keep getting it moved back.

If that were to happen, and TiVo gets a 2way card unit approved, then TiVo should have full functionality.

It may be a long time.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

ADent said:


> There is an FCC mandate to require the cable cos to use CableCards in ALL of their receivers/STBs, but they keep getting it moved back.
> 
> If that were to happen, and TiVo gets a 2way card unit approved, then TiVo should have full functionality.


Well ...

Under current CableLabs specs and licensing agreements, switched broadcast and other two-way video services still prove (very) problematic. Taking switched broadcast as an example ...

Yes, Tivo could sell a _box_ (hardware) to consumers that allowed access and recording of switched channels. However, it could only be done by cable-provided software ... not Tivo-provided software. A two-way box downloads (OCAP based) software from the cable company ... guide software, navigation software, DVR software, switched access software, etc. The cable-provided software could schedule a recording of a switched channel, tune to it, record it and save to disc. However, Tivo-provided software could not.

So, a Tivo box sold to consumers could access switched broadcast channels (via cable-provided software) ... by turning everything over to cable-provided software. But Tivo software provided directly to consumers could not. You wouldn't get Tivo DVR functionality ... you'd get cable company DVR functionality. I don't think Tivo is interested in this hardware-only market ... and I don't think this is what customers expect from Tivo so ... I don't see this as very attractive.

Now, Tivo could sell OCAP based software to the _cable company_ which would then download to OCAP based two-way boxes and provide all the functionality you'd expect / want from Tivo. But ... they can't provide that software directly to the consumer under the current two-way specs and licensing agreements. They'd have to sell their software to the cable company ... not directly to consumers.


----------



## ADent (Jan 7, 2000)

So if I buy a Sony, SA, Samsung, or Chinese 2 way CableCard 2.0 STB they will all use the same software, interface, guide, etc.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> From something earlier about CableLabs "approved" digital outputs ...Some more on Encentrus CPDO from Multichannel News:Not very interesting for now ... only being able to USB and a PC for storage-only. Storing content on a PC but then having to transfer it back to the DVR to watch or use. But ... anyway ... there's what it's about.


I use the TiVo + PC for this purpose already... How is this different from what TiVo already does with TiVoToGo? Is it that it's automated?


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

ADent said:


> So if I buy a Sony, SA, Samsung, or Chinese 2 way CableCard 2.0 STB they will all use the same software, interface, guide, etc.


The way the current specs and licensing agreements are written ... basically, yes.

One box may have one set of components outputs ... and another one two (or three). One box may have a 160GB hard drive while another may have a 300GB drive. Little differences like this ... etc. Those you'll see.

But each box will have the capability of using the same software, interface, guide, etc. from the cable company as the others. Yes. And to gain access to certain functionality ... they will have to do so.

And it's going to be very difficult for CE companies to offer certain innovative differentiators themselves. I'd never use the term "technically impossible" (those tech companies are a creative lot) ... but ... very, very difficult ... and probably even "fiscally impossible / unrealistic".


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

MickeS said:


> I use the TiVo + PC for this purpose already... How is this different from what TiVo already does with TiVoToGo? Is it that it's automated?


Cablelabs approval / DRM / pure digital (including HD) capture and transfer ...

See this post:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=3916785&&#post3916785

Mainly:


dt_dc said:


> So anyway, for TTG/MRV for encrypted / protected content ... Tivo is either 1) going to have to use one of the approved technologies from the license agreement or 2) submit a technology of their own and get it aprroved or 3) get someone else to submit a technology they want to use and get it approved.


The (current) tech for TivoToGo isn't (currently, publicly) approved by CableLabs.

Also, when you use TivoToGo ... for digital content ... you're working with a copy that has been 1) decompressed 2) through digital to analog conversion 3) through analog to digital conversion and 4) compressed.

CableLabs "approval" as a digital output allows you to capture, record, transfer, externally store, etc. the digital content just as you got it. Subject to their "approved" usage of course.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

old64mb said:


> Actually the other interesting part about this is that the cable companies are now required to provide boxes with a Firewire output by FCC mandate; I'm actually a bit surprised that the S3 doesn't fall under that restriction, but I guess since Tivo was supposed to be one of the beneficiaries of the policy maybe their boxes are exempt.


The FCC Firewire regulation came about as part of the one-way cable Plug and Play agreement between cable and CE manufacturers. CE manufacturers wanted cable to start including Firewire on their leased boxes ... cable agreed to it as part of the negotiations ... and that regulation went to the FCC (with a bunch of others) as part of a package cable and the CEA said was neccessary for one-way Plug and Play (CableCard) implementation.

However, there's no requirement (by the FCC or CableLabs) for Firewire on CE-manufactured one-way CableCard products.

But, under the current specs, CableLabs _does_ require Firewire on two-way products.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

dt_dc said:


> The FCC Firewire regulation came about as part of the one-way cable Plug and Play agreement between cable and CE manufacturers. CE manufacturers wanted cable to start including Firewire on their leased boxes ... cable agreed to it as part of the negotiations ... and that regulation went to the FCC (with a bunch of others) as part of a package cable and the CEA said was neccessary for one-way Plug and Play (CableCard) implementation.
> 
> However, there's no requirement (by the FCC or CableLabs) for Firewire on CE-manufactured one-way CableCard products.
> 
> But, under the current specs, CableLabs _does_ require Firewire on two-way products.


Well, a firewire port can't cost all that much - sure hope Tivo is going to include on on the Series 3, even if it isn't used right away.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The license fee costs $0.25 per unit and the hardware involved costs $8-$10. However that's not really the issue. The issue is the R&D involved in integrating FireWire into a system that's already been developed. If the system was not designed to support FireWire, and does not have some generic bus they can tack on onto, then that could get really costly.

Dan


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

Dan203 said:


> The license fee costs $0.25 per unit and the hardware involved costs $8-$10. However that's not really the issue. The issue is the R&D involved in integrating FireWire into a system that's already been developed. If the system was not designed to support FireWire, and does not have some generic bus they can tack on onto, then that could get really costly.
> 
> Dan


  Aren't both of those fees rather high? Do you know how much USB costs to implement?


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> The license fee costs $0.25 per unit and the hardware involved costs $8-$10. However that's not really the issue. The issue is the R&D involved in integrating FireWire into a system that's already been developed. If the system was not designed to support FireWire, and does not have some generic bus they can tack on onto, then that could get really costly.


I agree, but it's not like Tivo hasn't known about Firewire for quite some time. I'm not suggesting that they go back to include it now if it's not already in the design, especially if the box is going to be available in the next few months, just hoping that they already designed it in and just didn't have the port showing on the prototype shown at CES. 

Given how infrequently that Tivo updates its' hardware platform, the Series 3 needs to be over-powered and over-engineered from the outset and not a box that has the high-end users clamoring for more power/function right from the start.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

jfh3 said:


> I agree, but it's not like Tivo hasn't known about Firewire for quite some time. I'm not suggesting that they go back to include it now if it's not already in the design, especially if the box is going to be available in the next few months, just hoping that they already designed it in and just didn't have the port showing on the prototype shown at CES.


I guess it's possible, but I doubt they would hide it at CES as it would be yet another selling point. I guess we'll see though.

Dan


----------



## pobox3721 (Jan 1, 2005)

Hey, now that you got that done and over with, how about paying some attention in supporting TTG for Mac? You know, it costs 10x more to aquire new customers than it is to keep the ones you already have


----------



## pobox3721 (Jan 1, 2005)

Something else Tivo could do is making their software open-source. It's amazing what talented people can do when given the proper tools. The best thing is, Tivo get's people working on TTG for Mac at no cost to Tivo. Then, Tivo subscribers can actually get their software in a decent amount of time. Wait, isn't that called a win-win situation? 

Cheers Tivo. Here's to hoping you can release some Macintosh TTG software before the next millennium.


----------



## d_anders (Oct 12, 2000)

HDTiVo said:


> The PVR seems interim in the same way the PC is only interim until all the PCs are replaced by terminals connected to Mainframes running Time Sharing operating systems.


That's already beginning to happen to some degree. What do you think our PCs become once their online with a browser?


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

jfh3 said:


> Well, a firewire port can't cost all that much - sure hope Tivo is going to include on on the Series 3, even if it isn't used right away.


I don't really see the attraction of firewire. Historically it's been more expensive than other alternatives even though it is technically better. As a result of the added expense firewire adoption has been so slow that USB 2.0 has nearly replaced it, even on current Macs AFAIK. I can't imagine a limited technology like this would be a direction any current CE company would take. And when I say limited, I mean market penetration.

PS: However a limited proprietary technology is perfect for cable companies as they can charge what they wish for it as few alternatives are available.


----------



## Brainiac 5 (Aug 25, 2003)

Stormspace said:


> I don't really see the attraction of firewire.


I think the attraction of firewire is that it will allow you to hook up a D-VHS recorder.



Stormspace said:


> However a limited proprietary technology is perfect for cable companies as they can charge what they wish for it as few alternatives are available.


Well, firewire is the standard technology used by current HD recording devices. Many (most?) cable companies seem to provide boxes with firewire output grudgingly if at all (even though they are required to do so), so I don't get the impression they're thrilled with it. I'm sure they'd prefer that there was no way to record HD at all.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

pobox3721 said:


> Something else Tivo could do is making their software open-source. It's amazing what talented people can do when given the proper tools. The best thing is, Tivo get's people working on TTG for Mac at no cost to Tivo. Then, Tivo subscribers can actually get their software in a decent amount of time. Wait, isn't that called a win-win situation?


Unfortunately TTG depends heavily on a propriatary encryption scheme. And there is no way TiVo would ever release source code that could be used to hack their encryption.

Dan


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

Brainiac 5 said:


> I think the attraction of firewire is that it will allow you to hook up a D-VHS recorder.
> 
> Well, firewire is the standard technology used by current HD recording devices. Many (most?) cable companies seem to provide boxes with firewire output grudgingly if at all (even though they are required to do so), so I don't get the impression they're thrilled with it. I'm sure they'd prefer that there was no way to record HD at all.


This is interesting, though it must be for handheld recorders, is that right? I know of some sony products that have firewire for transferring video. Has it been implemented in standard VHS recorders? Or are we talking about only HD recorders? Either way it still seems limited to me, because either none of the people I know are using it, or they have it and don't know what it is. It can be a standard and not be widely adopted, which is what I'm gathering from your response. Also, how would you connect a firewire device to an HD set? Is the firewire connection just to the STB? The reason I ask is my plasma set doesn't have a firewire connection.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

Only HD recorders, though there's nothing preventing SD recorders from doing it. JVC's D-VHS VCRs have Firewire, but they also support "5C" encryption over it.

Many HDTV sets have Firewire inputs. There is an established standard for this.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

pobox3721 said:


> Something else Tivo could do is making their software open-source. It's amazing what talented people can do when given the proper tools. The best thing is, Tivo get's people working on TTG for Mac at no cost to Tivo. Then, Tivo subscribers can actually get their software in a decent amount of time. Wait, isn't that called a win-win situation?
> 
> Cheers Tivo. Here's to hoping you can release some Macintosh TTG software before the next millennium.


Cant galleon (child of javahmo) the open source replacement for Tivos desktop software written in Java work on a Mac?

Im mostly stuck with Directv non hmo dvrs (so not much exposure to TTG) but from what I gather the open source version is better than the tivo version.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

MichaelK said:


> Cant galleon (child of javahmo) the open source replacement for Tivos desktop software written in Java work on a Mac?


It works on a Mac for transfering programs to and from a TiVo. However, due to TiVo's encryption, there is currently no way to actually play a .tivo file on a Mac.

Dan


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

RE:Firewire

actually i just bought an xacti HD1 HD MPEG4 camcorder and it has USB2.0 not firewire. But it has no ability to stream to another device- the USB is merely for file transfers. I'm not sure but i think there are only 2 other HD consumer cmacorders in the world from sony and JVC. . The sony does have ilink (there name for 1394 aka firewire) for streaming and no usb. And the JVC has firewire for streaming and usb but usb is only for transferring still pictures.

I think DV/miniDV/Digital8 480p camcorders all have firewire though. They use it to stream to other devices. 

And of course D-VHS it's a standard too.


----------



## Brainiac 5 (Aug 25, 2003)

Stormspace said:


> This is interesting, though it must be for handheld recorders, is that right?


It's used on D-VHS recorders, some set top boxes, and some TVs. The Sony and JVC HDV camcorders that MichaelK mentioned also have firewire, but D-VHS was first (as far as I know, anyway). The Xacti HD1 he mentioned is a different matter; since it uses MPEG-4, it wouldn't be compatible with any of the other devices mentioned whether it used firewire or not. Since that wasn't a factor, and what they had in mind was connecting to a computer, I imagine they went with USB because almost any computer would have that.



> ... it still seems limited to me, because either none of the people I know are using it, or they have it and don't know what it is. It can be a standard and not be widely adopted, which is what I'm gathering from your response. Also, how would you connect a firewire device to an HD set? Is the firewire connection just to the STB? The reason I ask is my plasma set doesn't have a firewire connection.


In one sense it's not widely adopted, in that not many people have devices for recording HD (other than cable company DVRs, which obviously don't record to removable media and don't need to connect to anything else in order to record). However, all the D-VHS recorders that currently exist use firewire, so in that sense it's as widely adopted as it can be.

As for connecting it to the TV, I think the main thing you'd use this for is to connect your tuner (STB, TV, or whatever) to the D-VHS recorder. I don't actually have D-VHS, so maybe someone else can fill in exactly how this works. My impression is that you record the output from the tuner's firewire port, and then either play it back over the firewire connection to the tuner (which sends it to the TV), or if the recorder has a built-in MPEG-2 decoder, there will be component and/or HDMI outputs you can use. There are TVs with firewire - my Sharp Aquos has a firewire port.


----------

