# How much do you pay monthly for your SDV Tuning Adapter?



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

I'm building a list to see what the standard charge is for a Tuning Adapter across the U.S.

Please respond with your cable operator name, market, and monthly cost. Also add if they charge for a 2nd Tuning Adapter if there is a difference for a second box. I would also like to know the cost of the CableCARD.

Thanks in advance for helping me populate the matrix. I will share it with the group when its complete!

~Sam

Cable operator: Bright House Networks, Tampa
Tuning Adapter cost: $3.80 / month
CableCARD cost: $2.95 / month

*Cable Operator, CableCARD Cost, Tuning Adapter Cost*
Bright House Networks, CC - $2.95, TA - $3.80
Time Warner Cable, CC - $2.00, TA - Free
Charter, CC - $2.00, TA - Free
Optimum, CC - $2.00, TA - Free
Cox, CC - $2.00, TA - Free
Comcast, CC - $1.75, TA - N/A (limited SDV)
Verizon, CC - $3.99, TA - N/A
Cablevision Systems Corp, CC - TBD, TA - TBD
Suddenlink Communications, CC - TBD, TA - TBD
Mediacom Comm, CC - TBD, TA - TBD
Insight Comm, CC - TBD, TA - TBD
CableOne, CC - TBD, TA - TBD
WideOpenWest Networks, CC - TBD, TA - TBD
Atlantic Broadband Group CC - TBD, TA - TBD
Knology, CC - TBD, TA - TBD
Armstrong Cable, CC - TBD, TA - TBD


----------



## windracer (Jan 3, 2003)

Same prices here in St. Pete. 

Although I had the first year of the TA for free, so it just started showing up on my January bill and was prorated, so I won't pay the full amount until next month.


----------



## Number528 (Oct 6, 2011)

Verizon Virginia
CableCard is $3.99 / Month
No TA


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

Time Warner Cable, Southwest Ohio (North Dayton)
CableCARD: $2/mo.
Tuning Adapter: No Charge
*Reliable* Tuning Adapter: Priceless (but not available) 

Charging for a TA has been very rare. I wonder if it is a reaction to the recent FCC BYOB regulation? Maybe the logic is: "If you get a discount for not using our STB or VCR, you should be charged for any other box we furnish"

We TWC customers probably don't have to worry about this since there is no recorded instance of TWC giving a BYOB discount.


----------



## hifiauto (Apr 14, 2008)

Charter installed a TA last month. They have not yet activated it. They said it would not cost anything. I really can't see them charging for something that they implemented to deal with their signal degradation.

Cable operator: Charter, Cleveland, TN
Tuning Adapter cost: $0 / month
CableCARD cost: $2.00 / month


----------



## xekester (Nov 11, 2005)

Cable operator: Optimum, Piscataway NJ
Tuning Adapter cost: $0 / month
CableCARD cost: $2.00 / month


----------



## rhain (Nov 3, 2004)

I have a Series-3 Tivo

Cable operator: COX San Diego
Tuning Adapter cost: $0 / month
CableCARD cost: $4.00 / month (2 CCs)
CableCARD Credit $3.99 / month


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Tuning adapter is free here. CableCARDs are $2/ea

Dan


----------



## Krellion (May 17, 2002)

Cox in Hampton Roads, VA

CableCARD: $1.99/mo
Tuning Adapter: Free


----------



## Ennui (Sep 2, 2008)

There should be no charge...there is NO benefit to the user. The only benefit is to the cable company (Cox). No charge now here (I have four) and there better not be later. 

Cable card is $2/mo for each.


----------



## CoxInPHX (Jan 14, 2011)

Cox Arizona - Cisco SDV market
Tuning Adapters: $0 Free
CableCARD: $2/mo
Advanced TV Gateway Fee: $1.80/mo per CC, was just reduced this month. (was $3/mo for 1st, $2/mo ea addt'l) This Fee is also charged on every leased DVR or STB, perhaps it is a hidden cost for the Tuning Adapter.


----------



## eaayoung (Feb 5, 2008)

Cable operator: Brighthouse, Central Florida
Tuning Adapter cost: $3.80 / month
CableCARD cost: $2.95 / month


----------



## LoREvanescence (Jun 19, 2007)

COX in Rhode Island
Tuning adapter is free


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

$0


----------



## pileosnafu (Jul 23, 2005)

Bright House // Orlando

CableCARD = $2.95 
Tuning Adapter was $3.80 (with one year free) 
Next month as per the internal price memo that I got when I asked for a their annual price sheet today the cost for the TA is $4.00

However I added a second TA today and the REP did add free year to both again. 

I have been forced into their packages and getting a Box of their own, which is a battle I am currently fighting with them.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

WOW!! SO they charge for the cable card AND the tuning adapter?


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

Cable operator: Comcast - Staunton, VA

No SDV so no tuning adapter
CableCARD: $1.75 / month

I too thought that tuning adapters were supposed to be provided free of charge where needed. They just went all digital here (virtually) to add more HD and to get us DOCSIS 3.0 and higher bandwidth Internet.

Scott


----------



## jpcamaro70 (Nov 23, 2011)

Cable Operator: Optimum TV (Cablevision)--Manorville, NY
CableCard: $2.00/month
No Tuning adapter


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

All,

Thanks very much for your responses. I had an email exchange with an official official at the FCC discussing the cost of Tuning Adapters.

Unfortunately the FCC doesn't have the power to mandate that Tuning Adapters be furnished at zero cost.



> Unfortunately we don't have a lot of authority to regulate equipment costs (administrative agencies like the FCC are only allowed to work under the authority that Congress provides).
> 
> Our statement that the tuning adapters are typically free is true (Cox and Time Warner Cable both provide them for free) and also an effort on our part to encourage cable operators to continue the practice, but there's no rule that cable operators have to offer them for free.


It is interesting that Bright House Networks appears to be one of the few cable operators charging for the Tuning Adapters.

Its also interesting from the responses that Comcast is still moving in a direction that skips SDV and goes straight to IP delivery mechanisms thus not requiring a Tuning Adapter.

I will update the first post to highlight the various costs that have been provided by your responses.

Thanks!
~Sam


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

rhain said:


> I have a Series-3 Tivo
> 
> Cable operator: COX San Diego
> Tuning Adapter cost: $0 / month
> ...


Can you clarify your cost per CableCARD? Each one is $4.00 but than they credit you back $3.99 or is each CC $2.00 for a total of $4.00 per month?


----------



## rhain (Nov 3, 2004)

2.00 each, net 4.00


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

rhain said:


> 2.00 each, net 4.00


Thanks for the clarification. It looks like all cable operators are at least consistent across their enterprise! I'm surprised that BHN is charging so much for the TA when all of the other's are providing it for free. I'm actually surprised the others haven't figure out a way to recoup the hardware cost of providing the TA which I'm guessing is approximately $3.80/mo for 60 months = ~$228.00.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

sbiller said:


> Its also interesting from the responses that Comcast is still moving in a direction that skips SDV and goes straight to IP delivery mechanisms thus not requiring a Tuning Adapter. /QUOTE]
> 
> That's what I had heard as well at least regarding not moving forward with any more SDV deployments. Given the difficulties people have had with the TA's, I certainly hope that continues to be true in our area!
> 
> Scott


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

HerronScott said:


> sbiller said:
> 
> 
> > Its also interesting from the responses that Comcast is still moving in a direction that skips SDV and goes straight to IP delivery mechanisms thus not requiring a Tuning Adapter.
> ...


Here is an article from LightReading that discusses the state of SDV with Comcast. Unfortunately it appears they are one of the few cable operators that are "skipping" SDV and investing in modernizing their cable head-ends. They continue to play around with SDV as well so they could flip-flop on the issue again.

http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=203902&site=lr_cable


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

sbiller said:


> Unfortunately it appears they are one of the few cable operators that are "skipping" SDV and investing in modernizing their cable head-ends.


Unfortunately? That seems like a fortunate thing to me. One less cable split, one less device to cause problems and one less wall wart sucking power.

Dan


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> Unfortunately? That seems like a fortunate thing to me. One less cable split, one less device to cause problems and one less wall wart sucking power.
> 
> Dan


I agree. Sorry for the double negative! I wish all the cable operators would take Comcast's approach and abandon QAM for IP delivery direct to home.


----------



## gteague (Apr 1, 2007)

Dan203 said:


> Unfortunately? That seems like a fortunate thing to me. One less cable split, one less device to cause problems and one less wall wart sucking power.
> 
> Dan


+1! major pita and yet another source of failure. every time they move channels around on the sdv i lose my signal for up to 48hrs and no one can explain or fix it.

here's my data point:

time-warner north texas extended digital service
cable card: $2.00ea (i only have two, but they are charging me for three. there is no separate line item for tuning adaptor, but i have another $2.00 charge for 'defeatured equipment'). the worst part is that i am terrified to call and complain because they end up disconnecting one of my moving parts and kill my service. these people are truly awful--there are just no words. any other viable option and i'd be gone.

that is last month's bill. i now have an elite which only uses one cable card, but i can't get any to work so i currently am in possession of five of them. god knows how much they'll charge me next month.

/guy


----------



## brewman (Jun 29, 2003)

Gwinnett County, GA - Charter
$3 - cable card
Free - TA


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

sbiller said:


> I agree. Sorry for the double negative! I wish all the cable operators would take Comcast's approach and abandon QAM for IP delivery direct to home.


Umm, what? No.. Then you wouldn't be able to use a Tivo..

Plus, wouldn't you be much more likely to get glitches (i.e. like when watching video streamed in a browser), compared to _relatively_ much rarer glitches when watching a channel continuously broadcast on cable? (Yes, there are glitches, especially since it went digital)


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

mattack said:


> Umm, what? No.. Then you wouldn't be able to use a Tivo..
> 
> Plus, wouldn't you be much more likely to get glitches (i.e. like when watching video streamed in a browser), compared to _relatively_ much rarer glitches when watching a channel continuously broadcast on cable? (Yes, there are glitches, especially since it went digital)


Hmmm. I don't think so. The program is still delivered to the box (i.e., recorded). Its just utilizing IP technology instead of QAM. Its also possible that they (Comcast) use MPEG-4 instead of MPEG-2 to gain more bandwidth and avoid SDV. I'm a bit confused on the technical details. I'm hoping I can get MegaZone to jump in and clarify.


----------



## turbobozz (Sep 21, 2006)

sbiller said:


> Hmmm. I don't think so. The program is still delivered to the box (i.e., recorded). Its just utilizing IP technology instead of QAM. Its also possible that they (Comcast) use MPEG-4 instead of MPEG-2 to gain more bandwidth and avoid SDV. I'm a bit confused on the technical details. I'm hoping I can get MegaZone to jump in and clarify.


The only way TiVo handles IP tech now is with ~apps.
Thats how the seachange VOD stuff works.

Comcast (and other cable cos) compress lesser desired channels to smaller bitrate envelopes to get more channels in.... even without going to mpeg4.
This is what the satellite companies do... and it's why Comcast, etc. PQ used to be better than mpeg2 satellite.... and why FiOS PQ used to (still is?) be better than Comcast, etc.
There's obviously other ways to fit more channels in... but the final form coming into your house right now is not IP with few exceptions (like FiOS VOD, ATT, SeaChange VOD).


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Charter, Worcester, MA:
CableCARD $2/month each
Tuning adapters - free

As for the question of content being delivered over IP - I believe TiVo's hardware could do that, it just doesn't do it today outside of 'apps'. But the HW is there and software is fungible. They could do it like SDV. When you tune an SDV channel the TiVo is smart enough to know it has to use the Tuning Adapter to make a special request for the channel. For IP delivered channels I'd expect it'd just have a new branch on the decision tree and for those channels it'd make an IP request for the content over broadband. I could see the server info being transparently configured via the one-way data channel that is enabled by CableCARD. That's used today for configuring SDV, and it is used on cable SDVs and tru2way devices to configure the server info.

As for glitches - no more than QAM. I know I've gone on about this before on other forums, like InvestorVillage, but this should NOT be compared to Internet services like Netflix or Amazon. IP != Internet. A private IP network is a very different beast with very different parameters. The content would be coming from MSO servers, probably local edge servers just as OnDemand content is delivered today. Same infrastructure, same content, just IP carrier instead of QAM. The one difference would be the local network within the home, but MSOs might insist on MoCA just as Verizon does today, and not a customer-run LAN.

MSOs are moving to IP delivery. Verizon has made it clear that they intend to take FiOS all-IP and drop QAM over time. Comcast has also indicated they would like to go all-IP over time. It just makes sense for them to do so, they already need to run IP networks for the new types of services they're introducing and they may as well drop QAM and only maintain the IP system.


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

One more question for the group. What credit or discount, if any, is your cable operator providing since you are bringing your own retail box?


----------



## CoxInPHX (Jan 14, 2011)

Cox Arizona - None

Packages do not include the cost of equipment.


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

CoxInPHX said:


> Cox Arizona - None
> 
> Packages do not include the cost of equipment.


Interesting. Thanks. My providers packages include one non-DVR STB so they provide an $8.00 credit for consumers who do not receive the box.


----------



## windracer (Jan 3, 2003)

sbiller said:


> My providers packages include one non-DVR STB so they provide an $8.00 credit for consumers who do not receive the box.


... except I can never find that explicitly listed on my statement.


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

windracer said:


> ... except I can never find that explicitly listed on my statement.


Windracer, good point. I had to compare my statement to a friend's statement to see the $8.00 delta. I also heard it verbally from BHN but I wanted to verify.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

Comcast - Staunton, VA

None as the Digital Preferred package here does not include equipment. This year's price guide was updated with a footnote stating so as well probably due to the credit. 

Scott


----------



## Number528 (Oct 6, 2011)

sbiller said:


> One more question for the group. What credit or discount, if any, is your cable operator providing since you are bringing your own retail box?


Zero. Verizon FiOS here charges $20/month for a Multi-Room DVR, $15/month for a regular DVR.


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

Interesting. So it looks like BHN is the only cable operator that bundles a set top box in their pricing.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

aaronwt said:


> WOW!! SO they charge for the cable card AND the tuning adapter?


Yeah, I've never heard of a provider charging for a Tuning Adapter. And that's not exactly how the cable industry pitched the solution way back when... Pretty twisted. "Rent this CableCARD. BUT if you really want to view all the channels your digital subscription offers, you'll also have to rent this additional box."


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

davezatz said:


> Yeah, I've never heard of a provider charging for a Tuning Adapter. And that's not exactly how the cable industry pitched the solution way back when... Pretty twisted. "Rent this CableCARD. BUT if you really want to view all the channels your digital subscription offers, you'll also have to rent this additional box."


Thanks everyone for your feedback on Tuning Adapters, CableCARD cost, etc. I just filed another letter to the FCC as a comment on the 97-80 proceeding.

Please see this link if your interested in reading.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/80467547/Biller-Filing-Feb-2012


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

This tuning adapter thread is pissing me off. Well tuning adapters, not the actual thread or posters.  I'm percolating a post. In the meantime, I went through some old emails. I had asked TiVo, Inc if they could determine how often my Cox TA was rebooting...



> For the time period between 10/22 00:00 GMT and the latest 11/02 10:00 GMT there are 22 occurrences.


Fortunately, I'm off Cox and supposedly Cisco TAs are more reliable these days. But having to pay for a second set-top box to use a first is maddening (when CableCARD was intended to eliminate such shenanigans).

*EDIT*: The year was 2010, fyi. By 2011 I'd moved on to FiOS for TiVo nirvana.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

I thought Sam might be confused, surely Bright House couldn't be charging for a flakey tuning adapter and thought maybe it was an AO fee of some sort. But he sent me a copy of his bill (thank you!) and sure enough, there it is. It seems like in some cases BH will waive the fee the first year and/or if you complain enough. Here's an image I'll run hopefully tomorrow with my corresponding post. Maybe I'm just tilting at windmills.


----------



## windracer (Jan 3, 2003)

Yep, I just came off of my free year of a TA from Brighthouse (same area as sbiller) so I can confirm they definitely charge extra for them! :down:


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

Great job, sbiller. We need more of these kind of consumer oriented filings to deliver the message to the FCC that MSOs will continue to resist their efforts to set a level playing field until they leave no more room for them maneuver. 

They need to either proceed with AllVid rulemaking in a way that gives MSOs no room for sabotage or revisit their CableCARD rules.


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

http://www.zatznotfunny.com/2012-02/the-best-worst-cable-companies-for-tivo-owners/


----------



## GymmyH (Jan 12, 2007)

brewman said:


> Gwinnett County, GA - Charter
> $3 - cable card
> Free - TA


This is interesting, I'm in Gwinnett with Charter-
Cablecard $2
TA $2


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

https://twitter.com/#!/davezatz/status/190556989204606976


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

sbiller said:


> https://twitter.com/#!/davezatz/status/190556989204606976


Bright House's customer care Twitter account double confirms:

https://twitter.com/#!/BrightHouseCare/status/190558908442615808



> @davezatz That's right! By mid April Tuning Adapters will no longer require a monthly cost. Thanks for spreading the word. -Carlos


----------



## windracer (Jan 3, 2003)

Great!

I noticed that the fee went up from $3.80 last month to $4.00 this month. Guess they are squeezing me for every last bit before they drop that cost.


----------



## shaown (Jul 1, 2002)

Cablevision:
Cablecards - $2 each
TAs - Free (I have 3)
-Shaown


----------



## SirMontego (Dec 21, 2004)

Question: How much do I pay monthly for my SDV Tuning Adapter? 

Answer: $0 to the cable company and $2.00 to the electric company.

My Cisco STA1520 is a real energy hog considering it doesn't actually do much. It uses 9 watts of electricity (as measured by a kill-a-watt). At 35 cents a kilowatt hour, that comes out to about $25 a year.

For reference, my wireless router uses less electricity and does a lot more.

It seems rather disingenuous for the FCC to mandate cable cards, but the cable companies to require an energy hog device to use that cable card. I think the FCC needs to threaten cable providers to provide more energy efficient tuning adapters or else they'll allow companies like tivo to install tuning adapters in the tivo machines. 

As a related matter, the issue of inefficient tuning adapters has been presented to the FCC (as evident in the October 14, 2010 order, paragraph 12) and they haven't done anything.


----------



## CybrFyre (Mar 25, 2008)

sbiller said:


> One more question for the group. What credit or discount, if any, is your cable operator providing since you are bringing your own retail box?


None. I'm not eligible for any of the bundles as I'm supplying my own equipment. So, my cost to Time Warner is MORE. I'd be better off paying for their box in a bundle and just putting their box in the basement someplace.

-- Time Warner Central New York. --


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

With mine (Charter Cable) the adapters are not charged for and the cable cards are - first one free and $2 for the second one.


----------



## talexander7 (May 13, 2012)

Knology in Huntsville, Alabama doesn't even know what a Tuner Adapter is.


----------



## SixthAve (Sep 8, 2004)

Charter Cable in Knoxville, TN:

$2.00 per month, per cable card (first one free)
*$5.00 per month for HD content*, per cable card
Tuning Adapters are free


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

I just switched from Time Warner to Grande CATV. For years under TWC, my CableCards were $2.95, then they dropped the price to $1.95. Three TAs were free. Unfortunately, Grande charges $2.99 for CabeCards, and with 2 S3 TiVos and 1 THD, that hurts. OTOH, they do provide a TiVo Premier at no additional cost. ('Piece of garbage, really.) They don't support SDV, unfortunately.

Even with the additional CC cost, however, Grande is cheaper and provides much better internet service.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

dlfl said:


> *Reliable* Tuning Adapter: Priceless (but not available)


Mine weren't perfectly reliable, but they were fairly so. 'Certainly far more reliable than any Windows PC. In over three years they only failed to record about a dozen shows that were not on again shortly.



dlfl said:


> Charging for a TA has been very rare. I wonder if it is a reaction to the recent FCC BYOB regulation? Maybe the logic is: "If you get a discount for not using our STB or VCR, you should be charged for any other box we furnish"


No, it goes back to the genesis of the TA. At the time CableLabs was desperately trying to put together a solution for downloadable security, but it was clear they could not get it working any time soon - soon meaning 2 years or more. At the same time, the 3rd party manufacturers were pushing hard for the FCC to accept DCR+, which could have been ratified immediately and implemented upon FCC demand within 6 months. At the same time, TiVo, TiVo owners, and some 3rd party manufacturers were pressing CableLabs and the FCC to come up with a solution for SDV in UDCP devices.

CableLabs was Terrified that the FCC would demand the CATV companies implement DCR+, since it would destroy not only their plans for downloadable security and their long term deployment strategy, but also completely destroy the control they covet over content deployment and subscriber activity. With that in mind, they collaborated with TiVo and certain other manufacturers to come up with the TA in order to forestall an FCC decision in favor of DCR+. Due to completely obtuse reasoning, they chose the worst available design: a USB based TA.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

SirMontego said:


> My Cisco STA1520 is a real energy hog considering it doesn't actually do much. It uses 9 watts of electricity (as measured by a kill-a-watt). At 35 cents a kilowatt hour, that comes out to about $25 a year.


Yeah, they do put out the heat a bit. The embedded RF amplifier doesn't help.



SirMontego said:


> I think the FCC needs to threaten cable providers to provide more energy efficient tuning adapters or else they'll allow companies like tivo to install tuning adapters in the tivo machines.


TiVo would never do that. It would be stupid. They would have to try, with very little success, to deliver each type of resulting TiVo model to each municipality using the particular TA in question. They would also have to field thousands of complaints from disgruntled owners who changed CATV companies, or moved to another city. They would be unable to do anything for those plaintiffs except give them a new TiVo.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Ennui said:


> There should be no charge...there is NO benefit to the user. The only benefit is to the cable company (Cox).


That is simply untrue. The entire reason for SDV is to provide vastly greater available content to the user. SDV allows this. The TA allows it with a UDCP. Indeed, there is no direct benefit to the CATV company to deliver a TA. Its only benefit to the CATV company is keeping the FCC off their backs (which is admittedly significant).


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

HerronScott said:


> I too thought that tuning adapters were supposed to be provided free of charge where needed.


No, they were announced as being free for the time being when they were introduced. The TAs themselves were not mandated by the FCC, and certainly not with any specified price tag. They were entirely voluntary at the time they were introduced.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

sbiller said:


> Thanks for the clarification. It looks like all cable operators are at least consistent across their enterprise! I'm surprised that BHN is charging so much for the TA when all of the other's are providing it for free. I'm actually surprised the others haven't figure out a way to recoup the hardware cost of providing the TA which I'm guessing is approximately $3.80/mo for 60 months = ~$228.00.


'Not even close. All TAs are merely based on DOCSIS modems whose wholesale cost is probably under $20. The additional hardware is at most $30.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

sbiller said:


> Here is an article from LightReading that discusses the state of SDV with Comcast. Unfortunately it appears they are one of the few cable operators that are "skipping" SDV and investing in modernizing their cable head-ends. They continue to play around with SDV as well so they could flip-flop on the issue again.


That is backwards. Those providers are not "skipping" SDV. They are merely delaying its deployment. No amount of upgrading a linear system can match the deployment capabilities of SDV, by many orders of magnitude. Even dropping all analog service in favor of digital and even doubling the capacity by employing h.264 instead of MPEG-II (which is a stretch), no linear system can provide even .00001% of the number of "channels" an SDV system can for less money in the long run.

A 1 GHz, 100% digital CATV system deploying linear QAMs with h.264 coding could never deliver more than about 600 HD streams. A single VOD channel in such a system can east up easily 40 or 50 streams. That means such a system might possibly eventually deliver 300 HD channels. By comparison, a 750 MHz SDV CATV system could easily continue to deliver 20 or 30 analog channels along with over 100,000 HD channels - far more than would ever be practical for any CATV system to actually deliver.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

gteague said:


> +1! major pita and yet another source of failure. every time they move channels around on the sdv i lose my signal for up to 48hrs and no one can explain or fix it.


That is completely specious. On an SDV system, the channels are moved around every few seconds.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

Ennui said:


> There should be no charge...there is NO benefit to the user. The only benefit is to the cable company (Cox). ..........





lrhorer said:


> That is simply untrue. The entire reason for SDV is to provide vastly greater available content to the user. SDV allows this. The TA allows it with a UDCP. Indeed, there is no direct benefit to the CATV company to deliver a TA. Its only benefit to the CATV company is keeping the FCC off their backs (which is admittedly significant).


Factually correct but, since TiVo's need an extra box and two additional cables (compared to cable co equipment) just to receive all the channels you're paying for, it sure doesn't feel like a benefit. I agree it certainly isn't a benefit to the cable operators.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

sbiller said:


> Hmmm. I don't think so. The program is still delivered to the box (i.e., recorded). Its just utilizing IP technology instead of QAM.


Those are independent items, and not at all mutually exclusive. QAM is a modulation scheme. It does not care in the least what payload it carries. In networking terms it is a layer I protocol. IP (or more properly TCP/IP) is a layer III networking protocol. It can be carried over any layer II and layer I protocols one likes, including QAM.



sbiller said:


> Its also possible that they (Comcast) use MPEG-4 instead of MPEG-2


Not much. I think at least some channels are being broadcast in h.264 on comcast systems, but not many.



sbiller said:


> to gain more bandwidth and avoid SDV.


More efficient coding does not gain any bandwidth whatsoever. It merely increases, by a small amount, the number of streams that can be carried with only a small degradation of PQ in the same amount of bandwidth. How much degradation depends on how much the bit rate is reduced and how much computing power and time is allocated to coding the video. A factor of two is stretching it.

By contrast, SDV actually does increase the bandwidth (or more properly the throughput) of a CATV system, possibly by a factor of as much as 1000 or even more. This is only the tip of the iceberg, however. Because the content is strictly on-demand, the CATV can offer up many thousands of times as many "channels" in the long term than any linear system, no matter what the coding.

Indeed, it is likely that eventually SDV based CATV companies will start delivering their video coded as h.264.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

dlfl said:


> Factually correct but, since TiVo's need an extra box and two additional cables (compared to cable co equipment) just to receive all the channels you're paying for, it sure doesn't feel like a benefit.


It does to anyone who stops to think about it and takes the time to understand the benefits, rather than proclaiming they do not exist. It also most decidely does to anyone, like me, who has transferred from an SDV based system to a linear one. I dreadfully miss more than a dozen channels that are not available in HD on Grande. Of course it does not affect me, since I never made any use of it, but there are a number of other popular SDV services on TWC that are not available to Grande customers. Quixotically enough, the Grande branded Premier *DOES* support IPPV and VOD, which were not available on TWC with a TiVo. I have no interest in them, however.

Still, given Grande's lower price, much better internet service, and vastly better customer support, I'm not about to switch back any time soon, but I fervently wish they would implement SDV and broadcast all those SD channels in HD.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

megazone said:


> As for the question of content being delivered over IP - I believe TiVo's hardware could do that, it just doesn't do it today outside of 'apps'. But the HW is there and software is fungible. They could do it like SDV. When you tune an SDV channel the TiVo is smart enough to know it has to use the Tuning Adapter to make a special request for the channel. For IP delivered channels I'd expect it'd just have a new branch on the decision tree and for those channels it'd make an IP request for the content over broadband.


That very thing would have been perfectly trivial for SDV at the time the TA was designed. The excuse given for not designing it that way was, "Not everyone has broadband service." The real reason is the CATV companies would not under any circumstances allow a 3rd party box to make such requests. I doubt that has changed one iota, so any foray into IPTV or similar protocols I surely expect will also require a TA. Of course the same excuse will be given: "Not everyone has broadband service".

An external box (other than an attached internet router or modem) was never required for SDV. Once again the reason given was many UDCPs had no Ethernet port. It was a completely specious argument, because the number of non-TiVo UDCPs at the time whose owners had bothered to get CableCards was almost zero, and the number of UDCPs whose USB ports could be re-configured for SDV use was nearly dead zero. Again, the putative reasons were hogwash: it was done because it was required by CableLabs.



megazone said:


> I could see the server info being transparently configured via the one-way data channel that is enabled by CableCARD. That's used today for configuring SDV, and it is used on cable SDVs and tru2way devices to configure the server info.


Given the CATV industry's continued actions, I seriously doubt their paranoia would ever, ever allow it.



megazone said:


> A private IP network is a very different beast with very different parameters. The content would be coming from MSO servers, probably local edge servers just as OnDemand content is delivered today. Same infrastructure, same content, just IP carrier instead of QAM.


They are still QAM carriers, just with an IPTV (or similar) payload instead of MPEG-II.



megazone said:


> MSOs are moving to IP delivery. Verizon has made it clear that they intend to take FiOS all-IP and drop QAM over time.


Verizon is a completely different animal. They deliver fiber to the home, and the switch realm can be pushed out as close to the home as they like. The broadcast realm can be diminshed all the way down to 1 host. CATV is different. The broadcast realm at a minimum is more than 1000 hosts. That, plus the national broadcast networks and a small handful of cable channels still have a lock on the vast majority of the channels in use. Under those conditions, an SDV / linear mix makes much more sense.



megazone said:


> Comcast has also indicated they would like to go all-IP over time. It just makes sense for them to do so


Well, they could go with UDP broadcast IP addresses for the major networks, I suppose, but even so the SDV paradigm is more efficient in a CATV topology. The main point, however, is that excepting UDP broadcasts, IPTV still requires an upstream channel, which no UDCP provides, and which CableLabs will never support from any device not completely controlled by them, unless the FCC forces them to.


----------



## grit (Jan 1, 2008)

Cox cable in San Diego county is charging me $8/month for a SDV tuner. That's to receive basic channels other than Fox, NBC, CBS, and ABC (and about 6 others). Plus $2/month for the tuner card. That's an extra $10/month just to use Tivo. I love Tivo. Any chance they will make a Tivo for DirecTV again, cause cable is awful.


----------



## CoxInPHX (Jan 14, 2011)

grit said:


> Cox cable in San Diego county is charging me $8/month for a SDV tuner. That's to receive basic channels other than Fox, NBC, CBS, and ABC (and about 6 others). Plus $2/month for the tuner card. That's an extra $10/month just to use Tivo. I love Tivo. Any chance they will make a Tivo for DirecTV again, cause cable is awful.


Can you post an image of the line item from your bill for the Tuning Adapter? How long has Cox been charging you for the TA? Cox has never charged for the TA before in any other market, AFAIK.

Cox does charge a digital gateway (Advanced TV) fee for each CableCARD, for me that charge is currently $1.80, the first one is currently free.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

grit said:


> Any chance they will make a Tivo for DirecTV again, cause cable is awful.


There is a new Tivo for Direct TV.


----------



## rhain (Nov 3, 2004)

grit said:


> Cox cable in San Diego county is charging me $8/month for a SDV tuner. That's to receive basic channels other than Fox, NBC, CBS, and ABC (and about 6 others). Plus $2/month for the tuner card. That's an extra $10/month just to use Tivo. I love Tivo. Any chance they will make a Tivo for DirecTV again, cause cable is awful.


I am in Escondido and I have a Original Series 3 and have two cable cards (CC) along with a Tuning Adapter (TA). I get credited for the full cost of CC along with the full cost of the TA.


----------

