# Series3, CableLabs, and Sharing Shows



## TiVoPony (May 12, 2002)

Glad you're all excited about the S3. It's a great product...you're going to love it.

I have read some confusion (and some really outstandingly silly thread titles) this morning about Multi-Room Viewing and TiVoToGo. Let me offer some perspective. Then you can decide whether your glass is 'half empty' or 'half full'. 

MRV and TTG are available on our Series2 products today because they're cool features, we all want them, and they make life just a little bit better. And...because TiVo spent long hours to get the related industries - content providers, content owners, the FCC - to accept our methods and practices. In the end, the FCC approved our implementation, and you know the rest of the Series2 story.

MRV and TTG on the Series3 product is just as cool, and we want them just as much, and they definitely make life a little better. But...in this case it's not the FCC that decides, it's CableLabs. And while we continue to work with CableLabs, and are optimistic they'll allow us to support these features, they haven't for this initial software release. It's not that we failed to meet a spec, or failed to talk to the right people, or missed a date - rather, we are trying to provide functionality that is unique in the industry, and CableLabs has not been able to give us their blessing yet. This sort of functionality is not supported by any CableCard product today.

We're working on it. We know it's popular. But without CableLab's blessing, cable companies wouldn't give you a CableCard for your Series3. So...we could sell you a pretty box, but it wouldn't record your shows. Getting a dual tuner, high def box out now, and continuing to push forward for CableLabs certification of MRV and TTG is the choice we've had to make today.

If you think we shouldn't have shipped until this is resolved...boy, I can just imagine the thread titles for that topic! 

If MRV & TTG today are a must-have for you on Series3, and you want to wait...wait. It's ok. But you'll be missing out on the absolutely best dual tuner HD DVR on the planet.

This thing rocks. 

Pony


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

I think it should be stated clearly somwhere on the website that TTG and MRV are not guaranteed to be available. It's one thing to not have the rights to do this yet, but if people are buying the S3 with the idea that it will be added, they could be very disappointed in a few months.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

Hey, thanks for the info. Always appreciated. Especially when it's from an official source. Doesn't make me feel any better about it though. I'm still in the wait camp for more than one reason.


----------



## Sixto (Sep 16, 2005)

Thanks Pony!

Just ordered on tivo.com so TiVo gets the mark-up profit (instead of Best Buy) to continue the R&D.

Looking forward to lots of "cool" Series3 features in the future. 

And will be turning off DirecTV in the coming months ...


----------



## krypdo (Sep 13, 2001)

Stormspace said:


> Hey, thanks for the info. Always appreciated. Especially when it's from an official source. Doesn't make me feel any better about it though. I'm still in the wait camp for more than one reason.


+1


----------



## echodave (Dec 27, 2005)

TiVoPony said:


> If MRV & TTG today are a must-have for you on Series3, and you want to wait...wait. It's ok.


So, if it's "ok" for us to wait, howzabout not forcing us into running out and buying by some arbitrarily created deadline so that we're not forced to choose between features that many of us use every day or having the lifetime subscription?

That'd make it way more "ok".


----------



## TiVoPony (May 12, 2002)

echodave said:


> So, if it's "ok" for us to wait, howzabout not forcing us into running out and buying by some arbitrarily created deadline so that we're not forced to choose between features that many of us use every day or having the lifetime subscription?
> 
> That'd make it way more "ok".


Just as we did when Series2 came out, we've made a special offer to our lifetime subscribers that allows them to upgrade and keep their lifetime service.

And just as when we did this for the Series2, this offer has a limited timeframe, and it is very unlikely it will be offered again.

With the Series2 deal, people commented that the timeframe to make a decision was too short. We've given you lots more time to decide with Series3...but there will always be people who say it's still too short. 

Lifetime is gone. This is your chance to move the lifetime service that you have to Series3. I'm trying to be clear. Am I? 

Pony


----------



## tunnelengineer (Jul 21, 2006)

remember, no one is forcing you to buy anything.....


----------



## vstone (May 11, 2002)

The SA 8300HD is also designed with the MRV capability. There have even been setup instructions available at the SA site for at least a year, maybe 2 years. Where is it?

D* has had a unit with these capabilities announced for about 2 years also. Where is it?

MRV HD is not there absent the PC solutions and MCE won't let me record some SD content on my PC. 

Cablelabs also has to ensure protection of content. The FCC ruling last year only affected OTA transmissions.

Give these guys a break. They had to get something out the door!

We may see MRV and/or TTG only for SD or only for 64bit Vista or never again.

MRV must wait (probably among other issues) until cablelabs can ensure that HD content can be protected while wandering around the house. If it can't SD MRV may eventually go away.


----------



## AJRitz (Mar 25, 2002)

Yep folks - sounds like the focus of our dismay really needs to be on CableLabs. They're insulated from consumers, because they don't make any direct to consumers products. Time to start contacting CableLabs and let them know that they're impacting their clients (the cable companies) by dragging their feet on MRV approvals. If MRV was ready to go, I'd be jumping into the cable world with both feet - top end HD package and four cable cards. But with MRV slow in coming, I'll stick with my much more limited cable account (which I'd drop entirely if I could get my HD locals OTA, but I'm screwed by a combination of distance and living in a valley).

CableLabs will take their time until someone makes them understand that this issue matters. Because it certainly doesn't matter to them (at least not in terms of the existence of MRV being important, outside of the context of paranoid levels of content protection).


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

Stormspace said:


> Hey, thanks for the info. Always appreciated. Especially when it's from an official source. .


As long as we're on the topic of official info, here's TiVo's S3 FAQ:
http://www.tivo.com/2.0.3hdDvr.plt.faqs_2.asp


----------



## VinceA (May 13, 2002)

My only question is: Has CableLabs already given an initial disapproval or is the process ongoing right now? Before I/we vent our ire at CableLabs, I'd like to know if it's warranted.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

TiVoPony-

can you explain if cablelabs can stop you from MRV from S2's TO the S3? Can Cablelabs stop you from MRV of ATSC signals?

Assuming that cable never lets you move their content, I'm wondering if moving OTA content (which the FCC has approved if I understand) is a possibility. 

For many of us, that alone could handle most instances of tuner conflicts.

If you cant say then please reply that you cant say so we're all aware you read the question. 

Thanks
Mike

Off to go buy one from Tivo.com....


----------



## echodave (Dec 27, 2005)

TiVoPony said:


> Just as we did when Series2 came out, we've made a special offer to our lifetime subscribers that allows them to upgrade and keep their lifetime service.


And I think that's cool of you to do.

See? I'm really not just here to whine. 



TiVoPony said:


> And just as when we did this for the Series2, this offer has a limited timeframe, and it is very unlikely it will be offered again.


Hence the "decision" and "high pressure sales pitch", which seriously bugs me.

Granted, I wasn't "around" for the conversion from S1 to S2...as mentioned elsewhere, I didn't embark on my Tivo journey until early 2003...but can you really compare the S1 -> S2 conversion to the S2 -> S3 conversion?

In other words, did you take anything *away* functionality-wise that was there in the S1 that wasn't there in the S2?



TiVoPony said:


> With the Series2 deal, people commented that the timeframe to make a decision was too short. We've given you lots more time to decide with Series3...but there will always be people who say it's still too short.


If it were a 1:1 comparison, I don't think you'd have as many squawkers. Well, at least I could guarantee you that you'd have *one* less. I've just seen too many promises of "it'll be there in the next release" in my RL to believe it, even coming from a place like Tivo.



TiVoPony said:


> Lifetime is gone. This is your chance to move the lifetime service that you have to Series3. I'm trying to be clear. Am I?
> 
> Pony


Yep. Equally as clear as my, and others, (not to) purchase decision should be.

Seriously, I've loved Tivo from the first time I plugged that first unit in, and all five of the suckers are integral parts of our homelife. It sucks that I have this bad taste in my mouth now. [shrug]


----------



## mgar (Feb 14, 2005)

TiVoPony said:


> But...in this case it's not the FCC that decides, it's CableLabs. And while we continue to work with CableLabs, and are optimistic they'll allow us to support these features, they haven't for this initial software release.


In other words, MRV is beyond TiVo's control, and they have no basis for promising it in the future.


----------



## TiVotion (Dec 6, 2002)

I understand not being able to implement MRV and TTG at this time, for all the reasons Pony explained.

However, it might behoove TiVo to make that aspect a little more clear in the advertising of these boxes. I realize that they are kind of stating this fact...by omission.

How many people will get this $800 beast home (adding on even more for a subscription commitment) and then realize that these features aren't there? For some, it will be a dealbreaker, for others it won't. But for people who are familiar with TiVo's existing features (read: MRV and TTG) and are just assuming it's going to be there (not everyone reads these forums), I'd expect quite a few unhappy campers initially. 

Not everyone realizes that these features "might" be enabled via a future software release. 

How many will return the box once they discover this?


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

TiVotion said:


> How many will return the box once they discover this?


Thus, the 1, 2, and 3-year commitments


----------



## AJRitz (Mar 25, 2002)

As I understand it, in order to be certified to have CableCards plugged into the box, TiVo was forced to agree not to include the MRV/TTG features in the box. The ONLY way to get ANY MRV on the S3 box (short of the kind of hacking that is probably illegal) is to get CableLabs consent. Because CableLabs is a stepchild of the of the cable companies and content providers themselves, they have little interest in approving those networking options. They sell NOTHING directly to consumers. As I mentioned above, I believe that the only way to get any kind of responsiveness from CableLabs is going to be to begin innundating them with consumer complaints and examples of how the refusal to allow reasonable networking of CableCard devices like the S3 TiVo is contrary to the financial interests of their clients - the cable companies and the content providers.

Cable companies will see satellite customers returning to the fold if consumers perceive added value from MRV/TTG. Consumers will likely purchase more extensive programming packages, because they will be able to place-shift their viewing and take advantage of those additional programming options. Content providers will benefit by the broader viewership acheived when consumers can more easily navigate timeslot conflicts. Additionally, content providers benefit with fewer missed shows, which tend to drive consumers away from episodic television if a show or two is missed.


----------



## skaeight (Jan 20, 2004)

AJRitz said:


> As I understand it, in order to be certified to have CableCards plugged into the box, TiVo was forced to agree not to include the MRV/TTG features in the box. The ONLY way to get ANY MRV on the S3 box (short of the kind of hacking that is probably illegal) is to get CableLabs consent. Because CableLabs is a stepchild of the of the cable companies and content providers themselves, they have little interest in approving those networking options. They sell NOTHING directly to consumers. As I mentioned above, I believe that the only way to get any kind of responsiveness from CableLabs is going to be to begin innundating them with consumer complaints and examples of how the refusal to allow reasonable networking of CableCard devices like the S3 TiVo is contrary to the financial interests of their clients - the cable companies and the content providers.
> 
> Cable companies will see satellite customers returning to the fold if consumers perceive added value from MRV/TTG. Consumers will likely purchase more extensive programming packages, because they will be able to place-shift their viewing and take advantage of those additional programming options. Content providers will benefit by the broader viewership acheived when consumers can more easily navigate timeslot conflicts. Additionally, content providers benefit with fewer missed shows, which tend to drive consumers away from episodic television if a show or two is missed.


Unfortunately i doubt that approach will work. Your cable company wants to sell you their dvr, not help tivo's work better. What guarentee do they have that people will flock to cable and sign up with all sorts of premium packages? I can guarentee most cable companies don't even know what the Series 3 Tivo is.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

AJRitz said:


> Yep folks - sounds like the focus of our dismay really needs to be on CableLabs. They're insulated from consumers, because they don't make any direct to consumers products. Time to start contacting CableLabs and let them know that they're impacting their clients (the cable companies) by dragging their feet on MRV approvals.


It would probably be better to contact your congressman to put pressure on the FCC. If they can mandate that the cable providers support cablecards, they can certainly define the scope what a cablecard restricts.

It would seem to me that a CableLabs certification would include the software (firmware) as well as the hardware, so every software patch would have to be signed off by CableLabs as well.


----------



## MediaLivingRoom (Dec 10, 2002)

TiVotion said:


> I understand not being able to implement MRV and TTG at this time, for all the reasons Pony explained.
> 
> However, it might behoove TiVo to make that aspect a little more clear in the advertising of these boxes. I realize that they are kind of stating this fact...by omission.
> 
> ...


And the poor salesperson at Best Buy may have told the customer that is has all the features of Series 2 but HD and more. So the customer brings it home to find out it does not do some features that a series 2 has. The customer may think the sales person lied. Come on, even the best training can go wrong!! They should say TiVoToGo and MRV is not available on all marketing material.


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

One thing to keep in mind. CableLabs has folks from the cable industry involved with it. Two major players in the cable industry (Comcast and Cox) have deals with TiVo. With everyone having DVRs now, they might want some of these features available on their boxes to keep subs or lure subs from DBS.

There would be a big stink if the cable companies had TiVo software with those features on cable company boxes, but TiVo could not have the same functionality on their own boxes.

That's how CableLabs came into being in the first place. People complained about needing to have a box again - that CableReady was dead - and once it got loud enough someone did something about it.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

Selling this box with two of Tivo's biggest features missing (possibly permanently) and not making that crystal clear to everyone involved is not right. Who is responsible for not allowing it is irrelevent.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

So is CableLabs also behind the eSATA port being disbabled?


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

And...because TiVo spent long hours to get the related industries - content providers, content owners, the FCC - to accept our methods and practices. In the end, the FCC approved our implementation, and you know the rest of the Series2 story.[/QUOTE]

2/3rds of the tuners are for OTA and analog cable, yet MRV is disabled for all content if if a cablecard has never been plugged into the box.


----------



## tuler (Nov 10, 2004)

TiVo should just incorporate SlingBox technology into the S3 so you don't actually "transfer" the content, you're just viewing it on a different screen. 

Time to think outside the box! (pun intended)


----------



## SpankyInChicago (May 13, 2005)

Oh brother.

I think upper management at Tivo needs to be engaged in a Come To Jesus Meeting.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

HiDefGator said:


> So is CableLabs also behind the eSATA port being disbabled?


No.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

vman41 said:


> It would probably be better to contact your congressman to put pressure on the FCC. If they can mandate that the cable providers support cablecards, they can certainly define the scope what a cablecard restricts.


No letter to congress needed ... CableLabs has already agreed to arbitration via the FCC on "approved digital outputs" and "content protection technologies".


> http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/downloads/DFAST_Tech_License.pdf
> 
> CableLabs shall approve or disapprove digital outputs and/or content protection technologies on a reasonable and nondiscriminatory basis within 180 days of submission by a Licensee of a request and all information necessary to evaluate such request. In the event of disapproval, CableLabs will indicate in writing the specific reasons for the disapproval.
> (...)
> In the event that CableLabs disapproves or fails to act within the time specified above, a Licensee may petition the Federal Communications Commission concerning such denial or lack of approval. The parties anticipate that the FCC shall determine in an expedited 90-day proceeding whether the proposed digital output and/or content protection technology provides effective protection to Controlled Content against unauthorized interception, retransmission or copying, taking into account, among other things, the factors utilized by CableLabs. CableLabs agrees to be bound by a final order of the FCC.


That being said ... if I was Tivo ... I'd try to work with CableLabs as long as possible before petitioning the FCC ...

Oh, and you can also use the studios to get CableLabs approval ...


> Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event that CableLabs is advised that four (4) member studios of the Motion Picture Association approve a digital output or content protection technology that provides effective protection to Controlled Content against unauthorized interception, retransmission or copying, such output or content protection technology shall be deemed approved by CableLabs.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Ain't monopolistic capitalism grand?

Thanks for the information. I think I'll wait and see what happens with this until I purchase... unless I just can't stand being without one any longer.


----------



## MediaLivingRoom (Dec 10, 2002)

Why could we just have Analog recorded content have the ablity for TiVoToGo and MRV. That has nothing to do with CableCard, right???? 

If you record content from CableCard then TiVoToGo and MRV will be disabled until TiVo gets the OK from CableLabs.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

MediaLivingRoom said:


> Why could we just have Analog recorded content have the ablity for TiVoToGo and MRV. That has nothing to do with CableCard, right????
> 
> If you record content from CableCard then TiVoToGo and MRV will be disabled until TiVo gets the OK from CableLabs.


I'd like to know that too.


----------



## ufo4sale (Apr 21, 2001)

I guess, TiVo thinks, that people are not going to call customer support and ask where the two most popular features have gone. I would love to know what TiVo was thinking on this one. And for them to state that it will be available in a future release knowing it's not in their hands it's really (feel in the blank).


----------



## ITGuy72 (Aug 10, 2005)

rainwater said:


> Thus, the 1, 2, and 3-year commitments


Thus, also, the 30 day money back guarantee.


----------



## TerpBE (Jan 23, 2003)

echodave said:


> So, if it's "ok" for us to wait, howzabout not forcing us into running out and buying by some arbitrarily created deadline so that we're not forced to choose between features that many of us use every day or having the lifetime subscription?
> 
> That'd make it way more "ok".


I agree. Tivo doesn't have the power to decide whether TTG/MRV will be implemented - that's in the hands of CableLabs. However, Tivo DOES have the power to give people the opportunity to transfer their lifetime once they know if they'll have to lose part of their service or not.

It's kinda like going to a car dealership and having the sales guy say you can trade in your old VW Rabbit plus $1000 for a shiny new Mustang. However, he won't let you look under the hood to see if there's an engine in it first.

At this point, I'm trying to see if I can get myself around in my Yugo from Comcast. It's ugly and umcomfortable, but it gets me from point A to point B cheaply. I'd really like that Mustang, but I want to know what I'm getting before shelling out a grand.

Thanks for the info, Pony. We're really not trying to complain. We just hope Tivo hears us that we don't want to be pressured to make a decision before we know if we're going to lose some functionality.


----------



## pkscout (Jan 11, 2003)

MediaLivingRoom said:


> Why could we just have Analog recorded content have the ablity for TiVoToGo and MRV. That has nothing to do with CableCard, right????
> 
> If you record content from CableCard then TiVoToGo and MRV will be disabled until TiVo gets the OK from CableLabs.


It is possible that CableLabs looks at all capabilities of a box and that even disallowing copying of stuff from CableCard decrypted shows wasn't enough from them.

Remember, it's CableLabs job to ensure the cable monopolies keep their stranglehold. They don't give one rats hindquarter for the consumer or the CE industry.


----------



## Dajad (Oct 7, 1999)

MediaLivingRoom said:


> Why could we just have Analog recorded content have the ablity for TiVoToGo and MRV. That has nothing to do with CableCard, right????
> 
> If you record content from CableCard then TiVoToGo and MRV will be disabled until TiVo gets the OK from CableLabs.


Because, like Apple, TiVo follows the KISS rule - Keep it Simple Stupid. Imagine trying to explain to the non-technical user that shows x and y can be viewed in multiple rooms but shows A & Z can't. This would be a nightmare.

...Dale


----------



## DTSDude (May 24, 2006)

Pony, does TiVo have to certify any software releases/updates with CableLabs? It was my impression it was mainly a hardware compatibility certification, however with your comments in the OP I'm lead to believe software is also included. This would raise some concern over TiVo being able to release fixes/updates quickly, which could end up being a problem for a young platform (S3) and it's maturation process?


----------



## kleckner (Nov 12, 2003)

Why does everyone assume that cable companies want you to buy their DVR? 

It would seem to me that Tivo is so expensive because it's not subsidized by the cable companies. That implies that the cable companies are SPENDING MONEY to get a DVR in your hands. They do this because you are then more likely to spend more on their services. The more you watch the happier they are. But it's not the DVR they want to give you. They subsidize the DVR to get you to buy more other crap.

By this logic it would seem that cable companies would love Tivo. Gets you to buy all the services without having to subsidize the cost of the hardware.

What's wrong with my logic?


----------



## TechDreamer (Jan 27, 2002)

So now Tivo gets to blame CableLabs for every missing feature. So CableLabs won't let us send content TO the Tivo? I wish we had a list of what was Tivo's fault and which is CableLabs. I know fault doesn't really matter in the real world, but I'm just so tired of these scumbag cable companies and everyone that has to bow before them.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

kleckner said:


> Why does everyone assume that cable companies want you to buy their DVR?
> 
> It would seem to me that Tivo is so expensive because it's not subsidized by the cable companies. That implies that the cable companies are SPENDING MONEY to get a DVR in your hands. They do this because you are then more likely to spend more on their services. The more you watch the happier they are. But it's not the DVR they want to give you. They subsidize the DVR to get you to buy more other crap.
> 
> ...


TiVo doesn't support PPV. Their product does. There is also lock in with their product. Once you are using their device and you get hooked to it you are more likely to stay with them. Also, they can change the standards with which they broadcast at a moments notice without having to make certain that some third party device will get hosed. Is that enough?


----------



## mittelhauser (Aug 7, 2002)

Stormspace said:


> TiVo doesn't support PPV. Their product does. There is also lock in with their product. Once you are using their device and you get hooked to it you are more likely to stay with them. Also, they can change the standards with which they broadcast at a moments notice without having to make certain that some third party device will get hosed. Is that enough?


Like he said...

PPV Porn is one of DirecTV's biggest revenue sources. I'd assume the same is true with Cable. They don't want customers using a box which prevents that...

Having said that, I think they are shortsighted (big surprise there). I am a perfect customer for DirecTV. I bought 4 HD-Tivos at $1k when they first came out. I have subscribed to basically everything they offer for 10+ years, etc, etc. However, I'd be jumping ship today to S3 and the local comcast if not for a combination of factors...

1) Thanks to CableLabs, no MRV or TTG currently
2) Thanks to the DirecTV exclusive, no NFL Sunday Ticket

I might be able to get over one of those factors but combined I am just screwed. Now it is a race to see if DirecTV puts out a decent DVR or Tivo gets the CableLabs restrictions lifted first.

-Jon


----------



## Shawn95GT (Oct 7, 2005)

Pony,

With regards to MRV, will the S3 be able to MRV from an S2 or a Tivo Desktop install, or is MRV just not even an option? 

I can understand 'from' the S3 due to your information, but it seems that we should be able to MRV from a S2 / Tivo Desktop without stepping on CableLab's toes.


----------



## bubba1972 (Mar 28, 2005)

Pony, can you share with us what the S3 would be able to do in terms of MRV and TTG if you got Cablelabs blessing? Would S2 to S3 transfers be supported? Would HD content going to an S2 be converted to SD? Could HD content be transferred to PC? Thanks.

I am in a similar pickle now like others. I am willing to spend $1K to transfer my lifetime service to an S3, but having these features are what help justify turning my Moxi in to the cable company, which does a pretty nice job with HD. Thanks.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Right now ALL transfers are disabled, period.

I've dealt with things like this before. I wouldn't be surprised if Cable Labs said "no transfers at all until we can really take a look at how this all works". They are probably concerned that opening up the functionality at all might provide a backdoor, etc. They're not going to approve TiVo's code without doing a review, etc. That all takes a lot of time. TiVo is breaking new ground with them, and most agencies like that are going to issue a blanket denial until they have some comfort level.


----------



## Shawn95GT (Oct 7, 2005)

In reading Megazone's FAQ I think I answered my own question... no MRV period .

<edit>Mega speaks!</edit>


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

mittelhauser said:


> ...
> 
> I might be able to get over one of those factors but combined I am just screwed. Now it is a race to see if DirecTV puts out a decent DVR or Tivo gets the CableLabs restrictions lifted first.
> 
> -Jon


dont envy you...


----------



## kleckner (Nov 12, 2003)

mittelhauser said:


> Like he said...
> 
> PPV Porn is one of DirecTV's biggest revenue sources. I'd assume the same is true with Cable. They don't want customers using a box which prevents that...
> 
> ...


I always forget about the porn.

So, in a nutshell, porn is stopping me from getting TivoToGo and MRV?


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Dajad said:


> Because, like Apple, TiVo follows the KISS rule - Keep it Simple Stupid. Imagine trying to explain to the non-technical user that shows x and y can be viewed in multiple rooms but shows A & Z can't. This would be a nightmare.
> 
> ...Dale


Yeah, its not like they do that with ProductWatch or TiVoCast.


----------



## DUDE_NJX (Feb 12, 2003)

How about transferring videos TO tivo? Does that work like it does in S2?


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

megazone said:


> Right now ALL transfers are disabled, period.
> 
> I've dealt with things like this before. I wouldn't be surprised if Cable Labs said "no transfers at all until we can really take a look at how this all works". They are probably concerned that opening up the functionality at all might provide a backdoor, etc. They're not going to approve TiVo's code without doing a review, etc. That all takes a lot of time. TiVo is breaking new ground with them, and most agencies like that are going to issue a blanket denial until they have some comfort level.


apparently the consent decree says there's a time limit as to how long they can study it.

What date did Tivo get approval? May or so? 180 days equals november if May is when Tivo asked....

I'm farily certain that Tivo could quickly B-slap cable. The FCC already approved the tivo system. So what's cable going to do, deny it- and then TiVo goes to the FCC and asks them to review it and points out that the other office down the hall at the FCC already approved TiVo's system? Hows the cable idiot at the fcc going to disput that the OTA idiot already approved the tivo system even against the wishes of the NFL and other content providers....

That said this all smells mightily HMO on the Directivo's to me. I bought an S3 anyhow so it's not a deal breaker to me, but I can say I'm pretty disappointed.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

DUDE_NJX said:


> How about transferring videos TO tivo? Does that work like it does in S2?


No.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

DUDE_NJX said:


> How about transferring videos TO tivo? Does that work like it does in S2?


been posted like 3 times

NO TRANSFERS of anykind.

NONE FROM 
NONE TO


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Quite a messy situation. Disabling entire features for the sake of just a part.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

HDTiVo said:


> Quite a messy situation. Disabling entire features for the sake of just a part.


I dont know but based upion ghte fact it takes forever to get any of their spec done, I think cbale specifically hires the dumbest people they can for the opencable/cablecard division. They probably send an email out once a month to all their members "anyone have any installers who fell of a ladder and hit their head? We have open positions for opencable personell"

So Tivo says " we will disable all transfers for digital cable content"
CC guy says "content?
and the conversation degraded from there resulting in tivo throwing up their hands and offering to disable it all and give the morons the 180 days to decide Tivo isn't secure enough although the FCC already decided they are secure enough for the governments purposes...


----------



## bkdtv (Jan 9, 2003)

> MRV and TTG on the Series3 product is just as cool, and we want them just as much, and they definitely make life a little better. But...in this case it's not the FCC that decides, it's CableLabs.


I find this post from TivoPony a bit misleading.

CableLabs currently has the veto over cable content, sure.

But CableLabs has no veto over broadcast content. Broadcast content and the authorized protection schemes for digital broadcast channels are the domain of the FCC. The FCC already approved Tivo's technology for secure storage and playback of digital broadcast content.

If you don't want to support TivoToGo or MRV for digital broadcast content until you get the issues with CableLabs (for cable channels) worked out, that's fine. But don't blame CableLabs for Tivo's failure to support MRV for broadcast content at launch.

Broadcast content does represent about 80% of typical Tivo usage, after all.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

bkdtv said:


> If you don't want to support TivoToGo or MRV for digital broadcast content until you get the issues with CableLabs (for cable channels) worked out, that's fine. But don't blame CableLabs for Tivo's failure to support MRV for broadcast content at launch.


Cable Labs certifies the devices as a whole. They can deny certification if they have issues with features in the device. Perhaps they didn't feel TiVo's implemention provides enough of a firewall to ensure cable content would never leak out, etc. You're just speculating without knowing the internals of the code.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

megazone said:


> Cable Labs certifies the devices as a whole. They can deny certification if they have issues with features in the device. Perhaps they didn't feel TiVo's implemention provides enough of a firewall to ensure cable content would never leak out, etc. You're just speculating without knowing the internals of the code.


I asked Pony above if cable labs can veto content moving TO the device and MRV of ATSC and he has not answered although he's been here. So I suspect he's not going to give us an answer on the issue.

But I think Megazone is exactly right. Tivo needs cablellabs approval for the box.

Cablelabs knuckls draggers cant understand that the the ATSC content can be moved by the FCC approved methods while still securing Digital cable content from being moved.

Once the 180 days is up then we see what TiVo does....


----------



## hiddentrout (Feb 1, 2002)

TiVoPony said:


> ...MRV and TTG on the Series3 product is just as cool, and we want them just as much, and they definitely make life a little better. But...in this case it's not the FCC that decides, it's CableLabs. And while we continue to work with CableLabs, and are optimistic they'll allow us to support these features, they haven't for this initial software release. It's not that we failed to meet a spec, or failed to talk to the right people, or missed a date - rather, we are trying to provide functionality that is unique in the industry, and CableLabs has not been able to give us their blessing yet. *This sort of functionality is not supported by any CableCard product today*.


It's that bold sentence that concerns me.

...and what happens if MRV and TTG are approved and then subsequently the DRM is "broken" - can CableLabs yank the plug after the fact..?

Curious.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

hiddentrout said:


> It's that bold sentence that concerns me.
> 
> ...and what happens if MRV and TTG are approved and then subsequently the DRM is "broken" - can CableLabs yank the plug after the fact..?
> 
> Curious.


I suspect they can yank approval.

Are the newest generation S2's and Directivo's hacked? I dont think they have been- so hoepfully getting "broken" later wont happen anytime soon....


----------



## classicX (May 10, 2006)

kleckner said:


> Why does everyone assume that cable companies want you to buy their DVR?
> 
> It would seem to me that Tivo is so expensive because it's not subsidized by the cable companies. That implies that the cable companies are SPENDING MONEY to get a DVR in your hands. They do this because you are then more likely to spend more on their services. The more you watch the happier they are. But it's not the DVR they want to give you. They subsidize the DVR to get you to buy more other crap.
> 
> ...


Nothing, except the Tivo doesn't support PPV or On Demand, which is what the cable companies are REALLY pushing. So you don't buy HBO? No problem. You can watch all of these (old) movies for a small fee!


----------



## hiddentrout (Feb 1, 2002)

MichaelK said:


> I suspect they can yank approval.
> 
> Are the newest generation S2's and Directivo's hacked? I dont think they have been- so hoepfully getting "broken" later wont happen anytime soon....


It's not really my "scene," but I do believe TTG extraction is available.

I'd just hate to see "on the fence" buyers purchase if/when TTG and MRV are available, then have some 13 year old kid in Norway break the new TTG DRM, and CableLabs then shut down everyone's TTG...


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

I posted this in another thread, but it seems to be a better fit here:

I have 2 lifetime S2 units right now, and I just "rolled the dice" and picked up a S3. MRV would be a huge win, and would likely convince me to replace the second unit so that I'd have 4 HD tuners at my disposal. I have no vested interest in TTG.

I do most of my watching in one room, though I record on both devices. But since the S3 is a dual tuner box, it will handle most of my recording duty if I can get the drive space increased enough. With at least the eSATA connector, I'm comfortable that will most likely happen.

Do I personally think TiVo will get MRV enabled on the S3 boxes? Yes, I do. Microsoft has been touting that you'll be able to record in HD with a CableCard on a Vista Media Center and watch the recording on your Xbox 360. By using a CableCard, that means that Microsoft (and their partners) would need to go through the same process that TiVo did. So either Microsoft gets their Xbox 360 connectivity and TiVo gets MRV, or neither gets anything.

The optimist in me says both will get their features and we'll all be happy. The pessimist in me won't let me purchase that second S3 yet. <shrug>


----------



## sommerfeld (Feb 26, 2006)

TiVoPony said:


> MRV and TTG on the Series3 product is just as cool, and we want them just as much, and they definitely make life a little better. But...in this case it's not the FCC that decides, it's CableLabs. And while we continue to work with CableLabs, and are optimistic they'll allow us to support these features, they haven't for this initial software release. It's not that we failed to meet a spec, or failed to talk to the right people, or missed a date - rather, we are trying to provide functionality that is unique in the industry, and CableLabs has not been able to give us their blessing yet.


How about limited MRV - which would give you parity on this feature with the multi-head DVR Verizon is hyping? (which, if I'm reading the hype correctly, has MRV just for non-HD content).
For folks with one series 3 and one or more series 2, it would be the best they could use anyway..


----------



## Stu_Bee (Jan 15, 2002)

TiVoPony said:


> Then you can decide whether your glass is 'half empty' or 'half full'.
> If MRV & TTG today are a must-have for you on Series3, and you want to wait...wait. It's ok. But you'll be missing out on the absolutely best dual tuner HD DVR on the planet.
> Pony


So is this kinda why the Lifetime transfer for S2 -> S3 ends in December.....to entice people to switch now, before the complete feature set is known. If we find out after December that the S3 won't ever support Tivo2Go, then you get the extra $7/month if we wish to continue with that feature on our S2's?


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Does anyone think TiVoCast can be enabled without CableLabs approval?


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

HDTiVo said:


> Does anyone think TiVoCast can be enabled without CableLabs approval?


Why not? It has nothing to do with any content that CL has jurisdiction over.


----------



## Aiken (Feb 17, 2003)

Pony--

I think TiVo is running the risk of false advertising via its own FAQ:


> Will the TiVoToGo feature and Multi-Room Viewing be available on the Series3 HD?
> As always, TiVo's goal is to make all of the Emmy® award-winning TiVo service features available on all of our hardware platforms. Because TiVo worked directly with Cable Television Laboratories Inc. (CableLabs®) to enable the recording of digital standard definition and high definition channels with the TiVo Series3 HD box, this product has unique requirements, including what content can be taken off of the DVR and in what form. *TiVo is working with CableLabs and our own engineering team to enable both Multi-Room Viewing and TiVoToGo functionality in a future release.*


There's absolutely no indication there that MRV and TTG may never get approved. All it says is that you're working to enable it in a future release. I hope TiVo is ready to take returns in the event that MRV/TTG are permanently denied by CableLabs, because otherwise this is false advertising.

I'm really on your side, here, but I already placed my order, based on that statement (yes, really), and now I see here that you're saying it may never happen and it's out of your hands. I'm not happy about this.


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

HDTiVo said:


> Does anyone think TiVoCast can be enabled without CableLabs approval?


If the box treats TiVoCast content like it does CableCard content, I don't see why not.

CableLabs seems to care most about what you do with the content once you get it, and quite as much about how it gets to you. So if TiVo just treats TiVoCast stuff like every other recording, its just another piece of "protected" content on the box.


----------



## Stu_Bee (Jan 15, 2002)

Why doesn't the Series 3 allow you to upload videos to it? (ie Tivo2GoBack). Doesn't seem like this is part of the CableLabs concern.

There's a lot of threads going...might have missed it.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

No solid answer - just the blanket all transfers are disabled while TiVo works it out with Cable Labs.

Probably better safe than sorry - no need to antagonize CL while trying to work out the issue.


----------



## montivette (Sep 7, 2006)

What makes it OK for the cable company device to transfer a recording to another cable box, but it is not OK for two Tivo's to do the same thing. 

One of the Motorola HD Moxi boxes has the ability to watch a recording which was recorded on the Moxi box on a second box which is referred to as a Moxi Mate. Both can be leased for a monthly fee from Charter communications. So if it is so evil and impossible for Tivo to get approved for this feature why can Motorola do it? 

If someone has two DVR's in their home, they could have recorded the content on both, so it makes no sense why they should not be allowed to transfer content from one to the other. Even if it is HD content. 

I assume the reason why it is OK to transfer content to a PC on a Tivo Series 2 but not a Series 3 is because of concerns of copying and distribution of HD content. I think the solution to this is to have Tivo to Go downgrade the resolution from HD to SD when transferring to a PC to satisfy the concerns of the movie studios which do not want people making high quality HD copies of their content. I do not foresee them allowing us to permanently store HD movies and shows on our hard drive as then the next step is us burning them to HD DVD's or Blue Ray DVD's. 

Even though they will try hard not to allow it, I bet someone will eventually of course find a way to do it anyways. 

I agree with others if the main issues are with cable card certification the Tivo To Go and other features should at least be activated and allowed for the OTA tuners.


----------



## dkroboth (Jan 25, 2002)

Stu_Bee said:


> Why doesn't the Series 3 allow you to upload videos to it? (ie Tivo2GoBack). Doesn't seem like this is part of the CableLabs concern.
> 
> There's a lot of threads going...might have missed it.


Speculation here. But more likely than not, it a source code simplification issue. If TiVO believes that the whole or even just part TiVoToGo package is going to be approved, it is better to wait for the decision before ripping up the code base trying to seperate and enable functionality for TiVoToComeback which is likely built upon the existing MVR/TiVoToGo code.


----------



## ctcraig (Mar 16, 2002)

Well friends, at 800 bucks and no external SATA, no TTG, and no MRV I think I'll sit it out for a while.

And believe me I've been wanting one for a long time


----------



## johnh123 (Dec 7, 2000)

dkroboth said:


> Speculation here. But more likely than not, it a source code simplification issue. If TiVO believes that the whole or even just part TiVoToGo package is going to be approved, it is better to wait for the decision before ripping up the code base trying to seperate and enable functionality for TiVoToComeback which is likely built upon the existing MVR/TiVoToGo code.


Well, I don't care about TTG or MVR, but I can't justify the purchase without tivotocomeback. Hopefully they will enable it soon.


----------



## ToddD (Jul 9, 2001)

Agent86 said:


> Do I personally think TiVo will get MRV enabled on the S3 boxes? Yes, I do. Microsoft has been touting that you'll be able to record in HD with a CableCard on a Vista Media Center and watch the recording on your Xbox 360. By using a CableCard, that means that Microsoft (and their partners) would need to go through the same process that TiVo did. So either Microsoft gets their Xbox 360 connectivity and TiVo gets MRV, or neither gets anything.


You can learn alot about the struggle that Tivo is going through by looking at the Microsoft situation. Microsoft wanted to have Cable Card support on MCE well over 2 years ago. They worked with cable labs and worked with cable labs. In the end, CL would not approve cable card support as long as it was on Windows XP. This is why we have to wait for Vista to see this support. Vista is LOADED with new DRM and this is the reason that MS was given approval. I am afraid that Microsoft's experience makes me feel kinda bleak regarding Tivo ever getting this approval.

Just to be clear here, Microsoft ALREADY has approval for Vista MC and it's extenders. They are at this point, the only third party approved MRV system from cable labs. I do not find it likely that CL will be approving any system that is not based on a very heavy DRM platform, Standard Linux will not do. Now Tivo may have some DRM that will impress or they may not.


----------



## Stu_Bee (Jan 15, 2002)

dkroboth said:


> Speculation here. But more likely than not, it a source code simplification issue. If TiVO believes that the whole or even just part TiVoToGo package is going to be approved, it is better to wait for the decision before ripping up the code base trying to seperate and enable functionality for TiVoToComeback which is likely built upon the existing MVR/TiVoToGo code.


Understood the theory....but Tivo will have to figure out the number of additional accounts they might lose by not allowing this feature....versus spending some $'s on some programming. The amount of time that they expect to pass before a decision on the matter should, of course, weigh heavily.

Tivo2GoBack functions by putting files in a PC directory that your Tivo Monitors. I think this might be a somewhat simple code separation from the TivoDownload via Tivodesktop function. Unless they haven't even coded the S3 for any of the Tivo2Go/Back features.
=====
For people that give up on the wait and decide on a different solution, those are accounts Tivo may have a very hard time getting back.


----------



## ToddD (Jul 9, 2001)

montivette said:


> What makes it OK for the cable company device to transfer a recording to another cable box, but it is not OK for two Tivo's to do the same thing.
> 
> One of the Motorola HD Moxi boxes has the ability to watch a recording which was recorded on the Moxi box on a second box which is referred to as a Moxi Mate. Both can be leased for a monthly fee from Charter communications. So if it is so evil and impossible for Tivo to get approved for this feature why can Motorola do it?
> 
> ...


Look at how it's done.... It's cable box to cable box. A box that they design and approve. It has nothing to do with a computer and it's not IP based in a standard ethernet way. From their POV, a much safer situation.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

ToddD said:


> Just to be clear here, Microsoft ALREADY has approval for Vista MC and it's extenders. They are at this point, the only third party approved MRV system from cable labs. I do not find it likely that CL will be approving any system that is not based on a very heavy DRM platform, Standard Linux will not do. Now Tivo may have some DRM that will impress or they may not.


Uhhh... TiVo has already been CableLabs approved, Linx OS and all. The only thing that has not been approved is TTG and MRV.

Dan


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Dan203 said:


> Uhhh... TiVo has already been CableLabs approved, Linx OS and all. The only thing that has not been approved is TTG and MRV.
> 
> Dan


Uhhh...


ToddD said:


> They are at this point, the only third party approved *MRV* system from cable labs. I do not find it likely that CL will be approving any system that is not based on a very heavy DRM platform, Standard Linux will not do.


Tivo, in other words, is not approved for MRV, which was his whole point.


----------



## MediaLivingRoom (Dec 10, 2002)

megazone said:


> Right now ALL transfers are disabled, period.
> 
> I've dealt with things like this before. I wouldn't be surprised if Cable Labs said "no transfers at all until we can really take a look at how this all works". They are probably concerned that opening up the functionality at all might provide a backdoor, etc. They're not going to approve TiVo's code without doing a review, etc. That all takes a lot of time. TiVo is breaking new ground with them, and most agencies like that are going to issue a blanket denial until they have some comfort level.


TiVo has been on there radar for a long time so, CableLabs can look at how the Series2 TiVo's use the TiVoToGo and MRV, I think it's the same. TiVo is not new company. Can you tell me what is so different in terms of function? The Final recorded content is recorded in a digital format with the Media Access Code for each file, right? So the same protections are there as they are there for Series2.

Is TiVo not able to place the same Media Access Code to Raw HD content and Digital Cable files?


----------



## 2-Wheeler (Sep 13, 2006)

Okay, its entirely my fault. Theres no need for personal attacks. Were just doing our job. We also have an obligation to respect the confidentiality of those companies who are working with us to get outputs approved. 

dt_dc has done a great job of explaining our process and FCC obligations both on this thread and many others. No need to repeat any of that. Also, there is no need for us to answer questions about how Tivo chose to implement any features. Ask TiVoPony about that. I also cant answer about CableCARD availability, please consult your local cable operator. 

Now if anyone here has questions about the CableLabs process for approval of protected digital outputs and protected digital recording technology or about any of our specifications, Id be glad to answer those questions in person (not on this forum). You will find me at the Tivo booth (#378) CEDIA, at 10:37 AM on Thursday (Sept 14). Ill be the one carrying a helmet. 

Also, we are always looking for brilliant engineers, so if you know any, Id be glad to take resumes. One of the brightest guys who once worked for me now works for Tivo and was largely responsible for the S3, so who knows, we could launch your career at Tivo too!


----------



## bdraw (Aug 1, 2004)

kleckner said:


> Why does everyone assume that cable companies want you to buy their DVR?
> 
> It would seem to me that Tivo is so expensive because it's not subsidized by the cable companies. That implies that the cable companies are SPENDING MONEY to get a DVR in your hands. They do this because you are then more likely to spend more on their services. The more you watch the happier they are. But it's not the DVR they want to give you. They subsidize the DVR to get you to buy more other crap.
> 
> ...


The problem is they already own all those DVR's and since up until now there has been no other option, they want to sell more features. Cable Companies want to get out of the STB business, but only after they get the money out of the boxes they already own, it's a vicious cycle. They can't have their cake and eat it too and why should they change now for an interim technology that has planned obsolescence like the CableCARD 1.0?


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

montivette said:


> What makes it OK for the cable company device to transfer a recording to another cable box, but it is not OK for two Tivo's to do the same thing.


It's like tivopony said. Your cable company doesn't have to activate it unless they want to since it isn't cablelabs certified. If it is cablelabs certified on the other hand, then they are required by law to activate it.



ToddD said:


> Just to be clear here, Microsoft ALREADY has approval for Vista MC and it's extenders. They are at this point, the only third party approved MRV system from cable labs. I do not find it likely that CL will be approving any system that is not based on a very heavy DRM platform, Standard Linux will not do. Now Tivo may have some DRM that will impress or they may not.


Tivo has a pretty strong DRM system in place but it is easy to defeat. The same reason why CL refused to do this with XP. Thus is probably why CL refuses to allow TTG. MRV is slightly harder to break (it requires physical modification of the box.) But if you ask me, it is my oppinion that the current hardware of the S3 will never be able to provide a DRM layer that CL would approve of, so I personally doubt you'll ever see MRV or TTG on an S3, but then I am no psychic.

I have some doubts that the current software for the S3 just has a "hidden MRV" that can be turned on by removing the cert checks (it's probably been removed from the code) but I haven't seen it myself so I can't say for sure.

With the old S1 and current HDTivos (with 3.5) you can achieve these features (we at deal database have been doing this since long before TTG and MRV were ever created by tivo.) It wouldn't surprise me one bit if similar methods can be applied to the S3 in order to obtain those features, completely free of DRM to boot. But mind you, you need to break open your shiny new box and do a bit of soldering if you want to try it.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

ToddD said:


> Just to be clear here, Microsoft ALREADY has approval for Vista MC and it's extenders. They are at this point, the only third party approved MRV system from cable labs.


Real Helix and DTCP have also been approved by CableLabs and could be used to provide MRV-type functionality.


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

dt_dc said:


> Real Helix and DTCP have also been approved by CableLabs and could be used to provide MRV-type functionality.


And ATI:

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2662


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

Stu_Bee said:


> Understood the theory....but Tivo will have to figure out the number of additional accounts they might lose by not allowing this feature....versus spending some $'s on some programming. The amount of time that they expect to pass before a decision on the matter should, of course, weigh heavily.
> 
> Tivo2GoBack functions by putting files in a PC directory that your Tivo Monitors. I think this might be a somewhat simple code separation from the TivoDownload via Tivodesktop function. Unless they haven't even coded the S3 for any of the Tivo2Go/Back features.
> =====
> For people that give up on the wait and decide on a different solution, those are accounts Tivo may have a very hard time getting back.


If Tivo thinks they can get approval before they can redo all the code then there is no sense to redo the code.

Also, for all we know they are reding the code and are in the middle of that now.

It's still early.

personally I'm not very warm and fuzzy that we'll ever get it. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised. But years of waiting for HMO or other upgrades from Directv has me jaded. But I dont think you can LOGICALLY assume what is on the box day one is what is on the box in 3 months.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

Jeanesco said:


> It's like tivopony said. Your cable company doesn't have to activate it unless they want to since it isn't cablelabs certified. If it is cablelabs certified on the other hand, then they are required by law to activate it.
> 
> Tivo has a pretty strong DRM system in place but it is easy to defeat. The same reason why CL refused to do this with XP. Thus is probably why CL refuses to allow TTG. MRV is slightly harder to break (it requires physical modification of the box.) But if you ask me, it is my oppinion that the current hardware of the S3 will never be able to provide a DRM layer that CL would approve of, so I personally doubt you'll ever see MRV or TTG on an S3, but then I am no psychic.
> 
> ...


I assume they pulled the MRV code too- would be very bad to try to explain to CL that they are so secure when 10 peole at the database are running MRV before it's approved.

I agree TTG is a farily long shot, seems people know how to deal with that, but why do you think MRV is hopeless when it requires physically modifying the box. I have to imagine that cablelabs cant really say boo about that. can they? I mean isn't any STB basically hackable if you crack it open and start soldering? (just an assumption, I dont know that's why i ask.)

Acatully, made me thinking- defeating TTG- isn't that being done be exploiting windows actually? Can you defeat TTG on linux, mac, whatever? So it's windows fault! I knew it!


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> Real Helix and DTCP have also been approved by CableLabs and could be used to provide MRV-type functionality.


I'd like to know the opinion of "he who knows all about cablecards".

What's your opinion dt_dc? Do you think it's possible, probably, or not likely that MRV and goback gets enabled? What about TTG?


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

MichaelK said:


> I have to imagine that cablelabs cant really say boo about that. can they? I mean isn't any STB basically hackable if you crack it open and start soldering? (just an assumption, I dont know that's why i ask.)


Yes they can, and they will. For all intents and purposes, you could in theory pop open that cablecard itself and modify it to allow you to get free cabletv. But the way it is designed, it is so secure that it would be rediculously expensive and time consuming for the average consumer to do so.

The tivo is not on the other hand. It would take about 10 minutes for the skilled hacker to do. And remember that with DRM, all that is required (in theory) is for one chain along the link to be broken, and the whole thing is worthless. So if joe consumer wanted to, he could start recording whatever he wants on his tivo, and then start putting it up on p2p networks.

That is what CL fears anyways, but this has been going on with Dtivos and SA tivos for years and I haven't seen it happen once yet (people who distribute content over P2P networks always prefer ripping it from a DVD as it is in better quality and is so much easier and cheaper to do.) But nonetheless the content industry hopes that one day they will seal all of the holes in every single distribution medium out there, and thus they won't want to approve of any device that can be easily tampered with, that way this day they are hoping for will eventually come.

IMO this is a losing battle however, as people will always find some way around everything (as the adage goes, if man can build it, man can unbuild it.) It is also my oppinion that for this reason, DRM is a fad that will eventually go away once the content industries realize that the costs to come up with these DRM counter-countermeasures are too high and in the end don't accomplish much. It'll probably eventually settle to 'stick-of-gum' measures that make sure that one person doesn't just make a copy of his neighbors DVD willy nilly, but nothing on the level that we are seeing today. (e.g. HDCP along with every technology out there that tries to "close" every single interim hole.)



MichaelK said:


> Acatully, made me thinking- defeating TTG- isn't that being done be exploiting windows actually? Can you defeat TTG on linux, mac, whatever?


I would imagine you easily can.

In the broader scheme of things here, I think it is safe to say that we will start seeing cable providers start offering their own MRV like solutions (such as the MCE) competing with one another, and if that happens, it *could* come about that *some* cable providers if they are feeling generous will allow these S3's to be activated with MRV without CL approval.

But I think what is more likely to happen is that CL will eventually come up with a new specification for units with MRV like capabilities that will have restrictions on what measures the hardware must have in order to allow that. Say for example the hardware must use BGA type chips with the boot code integrated into an asic that has a tamper prevention mechanism (so that you have to go through it by use of some secure digital key before you can modify the boot code) then all has to be digitally signed, then the data communication between units must have a strong pairing mechanism, and then the encryption must meet certain standards, etc, etc, etc, blah, blah.

In which case, tivo would have to create a new hardware design anyways.


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

For what its worth, and I'm not an expert, I think we're looking at this from the wrong angle a bit.

CableLabs has already certified the Series 3. So, as it stands today, they think it is hunky-dory and meets all their standards for security and other such things. MRV and TTG are apparantly different animals.

The hacks you folks are talking about have nothing to do with MRV - they have to do with any recording residing on any TiVo box thus far. You're talking extraction - and MRV has nothing to do with it. CableLabs must have looked at this when they certified the Series 3, and so they've already signed off on it. However the Series 3 stores the data, CableLabs has decided its OK by them. Maybe its as it always was, maybe its encrypted, maybe its obfuscated in some other way. Whatever it is, TiVo has the green light on this front.

MRV itself is VERY secure. I've never seen any hack, anywhere, against MRV itself. I've never seen a program that pretends to be another TiVo to download to or from, or a program that sniffs a MRV stream and can rebuild the recording or any other hack against MRV. I have seen hacks to enable MRV in boxes that were not supposed to have it, but I've never seen a hack that modified how MRV functioned or otherwise "broke" MRV. I readily admit I might have missed something, but I've never seen one.

TTG is a totally different animal. TTG does have issues in this space, and it would not surprise me if they hit some bumpy waters here. I've never seen a .tivo file hacked - or even used - in any OS other then Windows. In Windows most people attack it through what is effectively a weakness in DirectShow. TiVo's partner let them down on this one.

If my assumptions are correct, I think MRV might not be too hard to get certified by CableLabs. TTG might have to sit on the shelf until Microsoft gets their house in order - which they need to do anyway for their Vista Media Centers to gain approval.

But - on the other hand - I could be completely and totally wrong about everything.


----------



## Leo_N (Nov 13, 2003)

Agent86 said:


> For what its worth, and I'm not an expert, I think we're looking at this from the wrong angle a bit.
> 
> CableLabs has already certified the Series 3. So, as it stands today, they think it is hunky-dory and meets all their standards for security and other such things. MRV and TTG are apparantly different animals.
> 
> ...


That sounds pretty reasonable. I could see MS Vista being required for TTG also. And if the only reason they don't want MRV (sounding suspiciously like TTG in theory to someone who doesn't exactly know the guts of it) on now is to not give CableLabs anything to worry about to slow down the launch, I'm good with that. Besides, the S3 with no MRV and no TTG still beats the hell out of the Moxi I'm using now.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Just curious, but did TiVo actually rip out all the show/video transfer code or did they simply force the settings to make it appear as if MRV is disabled via the server (basically like forcing the allow transfer account setting to no). The reason I ask, is if it's the former, it would require a software update to get it working which means that even if CL okayed it today, it wouldn't be enabled until the next update (which could be later this year or sometime next year). If it's the later, it could be turned on the same day CL approves it.


----------



## Martlet (Jan 26, 2003)

I'm ready to purchase an S3 for the main HDTV room, and two S2s for the SDTV bedrooms. I've been ready since CES. MRV is the key to why Tivo is better than all other DVRs in my particular case.

But for me, no S3 MRV means the S3 isn't going to be useful. I'll have to go with S2s only, and no HDTV.

I understand TivoPony's stance of "we're working on it, trust us for a little bit longer".

But us Mac owners are running out of faith in TiVo's promises of "we're working on it". 

So make me a believer, show me Mac OS X TivoToGo, and I'll have more faith in how hard anyone's working on getting the S3 MRV and TTG.


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

Leo_N said:


> And if the only reason they don't want MRV (sounding suspiciously like TTG in theory to someone who doesn't exactly know the guts of it) on now is to not give CableLabs anything to worry about to slow down the launch, I'm good with that.


Per TiVoPony's post to open this thread, TiVo isn't withholding TTG and MRV - CableLabs is. They can't put the functionality in if CableLabs doesn't approve it first. So its not about worrying them, its about specifically getting their approval.



morac said:


> Just curious, but did TiVo actually rip out all the show/video transfer code or did they simply force the settings to make it appear as if MRV is disabled via the server (basically like forcing the allow transfer account setting to no). The reason I ask, is if it's the former, it would require a software update to get it working which means that even if CL okayed it today, it wouldn't be enabled until the next update (which could be later this year or sometime next year). If it's the later, it could be turned on the same day CL approves it.


Since TiVoPony mentioned they haven't allowed to include them for this software release, chances are it will require another software release to enable them. Other then some HME apps, TiVo has always done things through new software releases. I don't think TTG and MRV are features that TiVo would want to sit on for months on end. As they stated, they are some of the most popular ones. Chances are if/when they receive the OK for MRV or TTG, there will be a software release as soon as they can get through the release procedure (create a new build, test it, etc).

I would bet that, if polled, MRV is the largest factor/draw for folks thinking about multi-TiVo homes. TiVo probably wants it just as bad as we do.


----------



## saberman (May 4, 2004)

Jeanesco said:


> Tivo has a pretty strong DRM system in place but it is easy to defeat. The same reason why CL refused to do this with XP. Thus is probably why CL refuses to allow TTG. MRV is slightly harder to break (it requires physical modification of the box.) But if you ask me, it is my oppinion that the current hardware of the S3 will never be able to provide a DRM layer that CL would approve of, so I personally doubt you'll ever see MRV or TTG on an S3, but then I am no psychic.


It is my understanding that the DRM technology TiVo uses is actually licensed from Microsoft. The following was in response to a question about why Linspire did not offer a TiVoToGo type feature:
"This will not be possible because Tivo to go shows are wrapped in Windows Media DRM which Microsoft will not license to Linspire or any other Linux operating system company.."

My guess is you won't see TTG on a Series 3 until Vista ships (if then) and you will have to use Vista.


----------



## btwyx (Jan 16, 2003)

morac said:


> Just curious, but did TiVo actually rip out all the show/video transfer code or did they simply force the settings to make it appear as if MRV is disabled via the server (basically like forcing the allow transfer account setting to no).


It could be either way, and only TiVo could tell you, and I doubt they would. If I were writing this code, it'd all be controlled by #if switches. Basically, one small edit and the code dissapears from the ap entirely. Its not ripped out, its just not put in.


----------



## saberman (May 4, 2004)

TiVoPony said:


> Glad you're all excited about the S3. It's a great product...you're going to love it.


Let's see:

S2
SD Digital
One Tuner
DVD Burner
TiVoToGo 
TiVoToGoBack
Input from VCR so I can digitize VHS tapes.
Cost: Already own with lifetime.

S3:
HD Digital
Two Tuners
Lose ability to backup TiVo records
Lose access to 312 video files on my PC
Lose ability to burn DVDs
Lose input from VCR
Cost: $700 + $199 to transfer lifetime.

What's not to love?


----------



## Dennis Wilkinson (Sep 24, 2001)

saberman said:


> It is my understanding that the DRM technology TiVo uses is actually licensed from Microsoft.


It isn't licensed from Microsoft, it's TiVo's own DRM. They simply provide it on Windows as a DirectShow filter. Remember, the DRM is being applied on Linux, on the TiVo itself.

They could implement the decryption side on any platform if they chose to (although it certainly wouldn't be as a DirectShow filter.)


----------



## Aiken (Feb 17, 2003)

Agent86 said:


> I would bet that, if polled, MRV is the largest factor/draw for folks thinking about multi-TiVo homes.


Yup. TTG is nice, for sure, and TTCB too, but no MRV will eventually be a deal-breaker for me. I've bought a box, but I'm not transferring lifetime until the last minute before the deadline, and if there's no word from TiVo that MRV is definitely coming, I won't do it. I'll still give them a bit longer to see if they can get it in, but if it's not in by, say, the spring 2007 update, I'll probably bail on TiVo entirely in favor of an MCE Vista box or three. Three lifetimed S2s and an S3 on ebay will get me enough cash to do that. Sure, I'll lose some of the stuff I like, but I'll gain a _lot_ that I've been passing up in favor of my vast love for the TiVo interface.

I know TiVo will try its best to get MRV in, at the very least, but given how badly it's turned out to rely on a disinterested third party to get something like Mac TTG working, I don't have a lot of faith that it'll happen. If it's out of their control and in the control of people who don't care whether it happens, what else can I expect?


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

Jeanesco said:


> Tivo has a pretty strong DRM system in place but it is easy to defeat. The same reason why CL refused to do this with XP. Thus is probably why CL refuses to allow TTG. MRV is slightly harder to break (it requires physical modification of the box.) But if you ask me, it is my oppinion that the current hardware of the S3 will never be able to provide a DRM layer that CL would approve of, so I personally doubt you'll ever see MRV or TTG on an S3, but then I am no psychic.


I don't understand your argument. If you break the DRM with a hardware modification, MRV is irrelevant since you can insert your own code to extract drive contents at will.

CL seems to have concluded that the MRV implementation per se left protected content open to unapproved access.


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

Agent86 said:


> MRV itself is VERY secure. I've never seen any hack, anywhere, against MRV itself. I've never seen a program that pretends to be another TiVo to download to or from, or a program that sniffs a MRV stream and can rebuild the recording or any other hack against MRV.


http://tivoserver.sourceforge.net/



Agent86 said:


> I have seen hacks to enable MRV in boxes that were not supposed to have it, but I've never seen a hack that modified how MRV functioned or otherwise "broke" MRV.


You can make MRV send data over the line completely unencrypted. The information for doing so can be found all over deal database.



Agent86 said:


> In Windows most people attack it through what is effectively a weakness in DirectShow.


http://digg.com/apple/How_to_decrypt_.tivo_files_on_OS_X_



Agent86 said:


> TTG might have to sit on the shelf until Microsoft gets their house in order


The simple fact is that there is nothing microsoft can do to fix TTG even if they wanted to. I don't think tivo can either. The encryption it uses is relatively simple - the way it is designed in current boxes pretty well limits its capabilities. Namely tivos outright lack the horsepower required to do any kind of strong encryption at all because it has to do on the fly encryption as you extract the video.

The internal data storage is fairly well encrypted (strong but certainly not any military grade encryption as tivo has claimed before) due to a hardware controller that doesn't have to bother the CPU to do its job, and the same mechanism is used in MRV transfers. However on tivo to PC transfers it has to first decrypt that video, and then it has to re-encrypt each i-frame on the fly as it transfers to the PC. This is the main reason why TTG transfers are painfully so slow compared to the direct extraction methods we use on deal database.


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

Leo_N said:


> That sounds pretty reasonable. I could see MS Vista being required for TTG also. And if the only reason they don't want MRV (sounding suspiciously like TTG in theory to someone who doesn't exactly know the guts of it)


MRV and TTG are far different. MRV is far more secure than TTG can ever be.



morac said:


> Just curious, but did TiVo actually rip out all the show/video transfer code or did they simply force the settings to make it appear as if MRV is disabled via the server (basically like forcing the allow transfer account setting to no). The reason I ask, is if it's the former, it would require a software update to get it working which means that even if CL okayed it today, it wouldn't be enabled until the next update (which could be later this year or sometime next year). If it's the later, it could be turned on the same day CL approves it.


If it were made anything like 6.1 or 6.2, then tivo wouldn't have to send a software update, they would just have to issue the certs to the tivos. Tivo could activate MRV on directivos this night if they wanted to without making any code changes whatsoever.

In 6.3 (the version for HDTivos) some are saying the code is actually removed entirely, meaning there will be no MRV for hdtivos ever. I have speculated before that its likely they did the same thing in the S3 units, as I am sure that CL would get pretty pissed off if hackers could just enable it anyways. Though I don't know for certain as I haven't seen the software myself.

They could still send a software upgrade that could enable MRV later down the road anyways, but that is only if CL approves it of course.



vman41 said:


> I don't understand your argument. If you break the DRM with a hardware modification, MRV is irrelevant since you can insert your own code to extract drive contents at will.
> 
> CL seems to have concluded that the MRV implementation per se left protected content open to unapproved access.


Well, not entirely at will, but going into those specifics is forbidden by adolph bottler, so I digress.

But who says you have to break the DRM in order to break the rules with MRV? Somebody can always share a tivo account with their neighbor, setup a VPN (or better yet share a wireless node) and thus split their cable bill with a neighbor. It's illegal and CL doesn't want it to happen on their watch. And honestly I don't really see any way that tivo can completely seal this hole.


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

saberman said:


> Let's see:
> 
> S2
> SD Digital
> ...


Then why don't you just leave the S2 hooked up to your TV, use that to watch your video files, burn DVDs, etc and use the S3 for watching HD? Keeping the S2 hooked up doesn't cost a thing, other than the electricity required to run it, and you'll have to pay for monthly service on the S3. Skip a trip to McDonald's once a month and you've recovered that cost, it isn't like it's a whole lot of money...


----------



## tase2 (Sep 27, 2004)

Is there some way we can't politely contact/petition CableLabs to let them know how important we find these features and to please give their blessing.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

tase2 said:


> Is there some way we can't politely contact/petition CableLabs to let them know how important we find these features and to please give their blessing.


Wouldn't make a lick of difference. They're job, as an industry consortium, is to protect the members' interests. They'll give their blessing if and when they (and, by extension, their members) feel completely secure with Tivo's implementation of these features, and not one minute before.


----------



## Leo_N (Nov 13, 2003)

Jeanesco said:


> MRV and TTG are far different. MRV is far more secure than TTG can ever be.


While I agree with you, can you not see that to someone who doesn't know exactly how Tivo's coding works that MRV and TTG might look suspicious? They both are setup for moving files off the Tivo. Perhaps that is where CableLabs trepidation lies.


----------



## Dennis Wilkinson (Sep 24, 2001)

Jeanesco said:


> http://tivoserver.sourceforge.net/
> 
> http://digg.com/apple/How_to_decrypt_.tivo_files_on_OS_X_


That's a little misleading. TiVoServer only works with hacked TiVo's which have crypto disabled, and the "decrypt on Mac OS" link actually describes "decrypt on Mac OS by running/emulating Windows on your Mac".

While I agree that MRV is essentially broken by hacking a Series 2 unit (and preventing encryption in the first place), it is also fair to say that the encryption itself hasn't been cracked. No one, to my knowledge, has written a program that, completely independent of TiVo's DirectShow filter, strips the encryption from a .tivo file.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

Jeanesco said:


> But who says you have to break the DRM in order to break the rules with MRV? Somebody can always share a tivo account with their neighbor, setup a VPN (or better yet share a wireless node) and thus split their cable bill with a neighbor. It's illegal and CL doesn't want it to happen on their watch. And honestly I don't really see any way that tivo can completely seal this hole.


The TiVo knows which source a recording came from and could easily disable MRV on only CC-related content, Either CL felt they couldn't vett the code properly or they prevent it for non-technical reasons (i.e. customers confused as to why CSI Miami recorded OTA ATSC can be sent to a second box but the same show record from digital cable can't).


----------



## Solver (Feb 17, 2005)

So the difficulty in getting this done is not limited by technology but by bureaucracy.
No wonder we haven't colonized the planets yet.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

Jeanesco said:


> ...
> 
> But who says you have to break the DRM in order to break the rules with MRV? Somebody can always share a tivo account with their neighbor, setup a VPN (or better yet share a wireless node) and thus split their cable bill with a neighbor. It's illegal and CL doesn't want it to happen on their watch. And honestly I don't really see any way that tivo can completely seal this hole.


You have some interesting info, thatnls for sharing...

But now you are just being silly. I can also put a splitter in my basement and run a cable to my neighbors house and then go down to the cable office and ask for 2 more boxes and split it with my neighbor. Can CL seal that hole with their own boxes?


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

Dennis Wilkinson said:


> That's a little misleading. TiVoServer only works with hacked TiVo's which have crypto disabled, and the "decrypt on Mac OS" link actually describes "decrypt on Mac OS by running/emulating Windows on your Mac".
> 
> While I agree that MRV is essentially broken by hacking a Series 2 unit (and preventing encryption in the first place), it is also fair to say that the encryption itself hasn't been cracked. No one, to my knowledge, has written a program that, completely independent of TiVo's DirectShow filter, strips the encryption from a .tivo file.


can the S2DT's get hacked to turn of their encryption?


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

MichaelK said:


> can the S2DT's get hacked to turn of their encryption?


Don't think it's been done yet. At the very least it'd require a PROM mod.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

cheer said:


> Don't think it's been done yet. At the very least it'd require a PROM mod.


I think that bodes well...


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

Leo_N said:


> While I agree with you, can you not see that to someone who doesn't know exactly how Tivo's coding works that MRV and TTG might look suspicious? They both are setup for moving files off the Tivo. Perhaps that is where CableLabs trepidation lies.


Possibly, but I don't think that is ultimately the problem. Like I said, they could eventually produce a hardware spec that allows for this, you never know. If it is, then cablelabs may believe that MRV is not where the future of home entertainment lies, and they would instead rather opt for VOD.



Dennis Wilkinson said:


> That's a little misleading. TiVoServer only works with hacked TiVo's which have crypto disabled, and the "decrypt on Mac OS" link actually describes "decrypt on Mac OS by running/emulating Windows on your Mac".


Hmm...so it does. I wouldn't know, I really don't like macintoshes.



vman41 said:


> The TiVo knows which source a recording came from and could easily disable MRV on only CC-related content, Either CL felt they couldn't vett the code properly or they prevent it for non-technical reasons (i.e. customers confused as to why CSI Miami recorded OTA ATSC can be sent to a second box but the same show record from digital cable can't).


They could do that, but TBH if I owned one of these I would be pretty annoyed if they did. Honestly, how much content do you watch on OTA vs cable/sat? But actually if they did do this, then breaking the box open could allow a hacker to easily open up MRV to all programming either way, which I think would piss off CL.



MichaelK said:


> But now you are just being silly. I can also put a splitter in my basement and run a cable to my neighbors house and then go down to the cable office and ask for 2 more boxes and split it with my neighbor. Can CL seal that hole with their own boxes?


Hmm, good point. However I think the cable company can get a bit suspicious if you have 6 receivers in a 3 bedroom house. And not only that but several cable companies require you to actually have one of them physically come out and install the cablecard or else they refuse to activate it. I would venture to guess that this is why, and if it is why, then the cable installer is already going to know which rooms in your house should have tv.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

Jeanesco said:


> Honestly, how much content do you watch on OTA vs cable/sat?


Quite a bit, actually, I get 6 digital stations OTA, 4 of which use sub-channels, and I don't have digital cable (and TWC isn't carrying the ABC and FOX channels in HD if I did). If I'm home, I prefer watching live programming in HD to a TiVo recording of the SD broadcast.


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

Jeanesco said:


> http://tivoserver.sourceforge.net/


I did not know about this. Reading into it, it requires the SuperPatch hack, which requries a kernel hack. Last I knew, the only way to hack the kernel in 540 model (and higher) TiVos was by replacing the PROM. I know very, very very few people who are skilled enough AND risk-accepting enough to try this.



> You can make MRV send data over the line completely unencrypted. The information for doing so can be found all over deal database.


I don't have too much time to search there, but even if I spot you this, it still requires a kernel hack.



> http://digg.com/apple/How_to_decrypt_.tivo_files_on_OS_X_


This articles just tells you to virtually install Windows XP, and then use one of the methods for defeating TTG in Windows. This is HARDLY decrypting .tivo files in Mac OS X.



> The simple fact is that there is nothing microsoft can do to fix TTG even if they wanted to. I don't think tivo can either. The encryption it uses is relatively simple - the way it is designed in current boxes pretty well limits its capabilities. Namely tivos outright lack the horsepower required to do any kind of strong encryption at all because it has to do on the fly encryption as you extract the video.
> 
> The internal data storage is fairly well encrypted (strong but certainly not any military grade encryption as tivo has claimed before) due to a hardware controller that doesn't have to bother the CPU to do its job, and the same mechanism is used in MRV transfers. However on tivo to PC transfers it has to first decrypt that video, and then it has to re-encrypt each i-frame on the fly as it transfers to the PC. This is the main reason why TTG transfers are painfully so slow compared to the direct extraction methods we use on deal database.


As I have mentioned, TTG might be very troublesome. TTG is nifty, but I don't really have a lot of vested interest there. TTG might have to sit on the shelf for Vista, or maybe even a complete re-write. Who knows?

But I do believe that MRV is a strong candidate. If Microsoft can figure out how to get CableLabs to approve bussing shows to an Xbox 360 for playback, I'm fairly confident that TiVo can figure out how to bus shows between two S3 units. Remember: The units are already approved - its the transfer mechanism that needs to be examined. And unless you have an old TiVo - which won't be able to play files recorded on an S3 anyway - hacking MRV is extremely difficult.

But - again - I am by far NOT an expert. I could be completely and totally wrong, and that's exactly why I've only bought 1 S3.


----------



## curiousgeorge (Nov 28, 2002)

echodave said:


> In other words, did you take anything *away* functionality-wise that was there in the S1 that wasn't there in the S2?


They "took away" visual quality a tiny bit with the S2. The Series 1 boxes had better looking video at each setting, IMO. But the things S2 offered and would soon offer far outweighed staying with the S1.

I got the Series 1 when it was about $1000 a month or so after it came out (1999?). Do I regret that? No WAY!

As a longtime sat subscriber who hates the way cablecos operate, I do think it sucks that the S3 doesn't have satellite support, but I've been waiting for this pup long enough that I ordered mine within 2 hours of getting the "VIP" email. I already have cable internet, so I'll just add the HD package to that and keep the S2 hooked up for Satellite/SD stuff. I can switch TV inputs to change the TiVo I'm viewing. Awkward? Yes. Worth it? At this point in time I would say yes as well. But the other three TiVos in the house aren't getting changed to S3 until there's at least MRV because we use it ALL the time.


----------



## dugbug (Dec 29, 2003)

TivoPony and the other tivo reps haven't answered a key question that has been posed in various threads (including this one):

Why disable MRV, etc for non-cablecard recordings?

ie: copy over series 2 shows via MRV, and likewise send shows to a series 2 if it was not cablecard protected.

-d


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

dugbug said:


> TivoPony and the other tivo reps haven't answered a key question that has been posed in various threads (including this one):
> 
> Why disable MRV, etc for non-cablecard recordings?


Maybe because it was easier to code and support until they have a permanent solution.


----------



## Krellis (Mar 27, 2003)

dugbug said:


> TivoPony and the other tivo reps haven't answered a key question that has been posed in various threads (including this one):
> 
> Why disable MRV, etc for non-cablecard recordings?


Obviously because they hate their customers, and want to go out of business.

Seriously, what answer could they give that would satisfy you or the others rabidly asking this and other (many less-than-polite) questions? I can't exactly blame them if they don't want to get into just another justification battle with often-irrational people (not intending that directed at you, but clearly there are many irrational people here).

jfh3's guess seems as good as any, and is good enough for me - I trust TiVo enough to know what they're doing, and to take it at face value when they say there are problems with CableLabs and that they're trying to resolve them. But it seems that the people who are asking this question aren't likely to accept any answer that they get, so what's the point of TiVo answering?


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

MediaLivingRoom said:


> Why could we just have Analog recorded content have the ablity for TiVoToGo and MRV. That has nothing to do with CableCard, right????
> 
> If you record content from CableCard then TiVoToGo and MRV will be disabled until TiVo gets the OK from CableLabs.


It was likely just easier and better to concede to disabling transfers altogether for now and get the hardware out the door right away, than to hold it back further developing, testing, and getting CableLabs approval for a selective transfers, for a much later initial release.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

montivette said:


> What makes it OK for the cable company device to transfer a recording to another cable box, but it is not OK for two Tivo's to do the same thing.


Because either MRV is unknown to them, or not secure enough (there must be some reason DirecTV didn't want it).

Perhaps CableLabs only awarded a conditional approval, with no transfers.



> I assume the reason why it is OK to transfer content to a PC on a Tivo Series 2 but not a Series 3 is because of concerns of copying and distribution of HD content. I think the solution to this is to have Tivo to Go downgrade the resolution from HD to SD when transferring to a PC to satisfy the concerns of the movie studios which do not want people making high quality HD copies of their content.


It is not HD, it is having "their" digital content floating around a newtork out of their control they are worrined about.



> I agree with others if the main issues are with cable card certification the Tivo To Go and other features should at least be activated and allowed for the OTA tuners.


I do three, but it is likely not in the cards in the current software release, as it probably has non-selective MRV/TTG, or no MRV functionality.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

MediaLivingRoom said:


> . Can you tell me what is so different in terms of function?


The fact that the S3 directly records the digital stream from the provider, which means the provider has the right to impose deeper copying restrictions, and as I have been speculating, the current software release cannod discern those restrictinos, so a blanket "no copy" rule has been implemented until at least a software release CableLabs is happy about can have MRV enabled.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

Krellis said:


> Obviously because they hate their customers, and want to go out of business.
> 
> Seriously, what answer could they give that would satisfy you or the others rabidly asking this and other (many less-than-polite) questions?


"We didn't put enough resources into addressing that problem and now we know how important it is we will get the issue resolved, if need be sell non-certified S3s (fill the cablecard connectors with epoxy) that have the full suite of TiVo features."


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

Solver said:


> So the difficulty in getting this done is not limited by technology but by bureaucracy.
> No wonder we haven't colonized the planets yet.


Right now, yes it seems the bureaucracy (CabeLabs) has the upper hand, but we (or at least I) don't know if they are being "overly cautious" and have to be talked down, or they have a genuine concern with the TiVo hardware or software,as certified, or in its current state.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

morac said:


> Just curious, but did TiVo actually rip out all the show/video transfer code or did they simply force the settings to make it appear as if MRV is disabled via the server (basically like forcing the allow transfer account setting to no). The reason I ask, is if it's the former, it would require a software update to get it working which means that even if CL okayed it today, it wouldn't be enabled until the next update (which could be later this year or sometime next year). If it's the later, it could be turned on the same day CL approves it.


This is my speculation:

The software version that TiVo sent to CL for certification didn't meet CL's approval (more accurately didn't discern correctly at all between dgital cable and other content), so CL said no transfers until further approval. The features are there in the software, but due to the way they are controlled, a blanket transfer disabling must be employed.
A further update could separate the feature enabling flags, so only features not of CLs concern can be enabled.


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

Agent86 said:


> I did not know about this. Reading into it, it requires the SuperPatch hack, which requries a kernel hack. Last I knew, the only way to hack the kernel in 540 model (and higher) TiVos was by replacing the PROM. I know very, very very few people who are skilled enough AND risk-accepting enough to try this.


There is a much easier solution available. It basically involves a clip on chip, and is easier to do than say an xbox mod chip (which people do all thetime) though heir bottler would forbid me from linking to it so I can't.

But even so, there are people out there that do services like what you described above for $50 all the time. Cablelabs wouldn't go for that.



Agent86 said:


> I don't have too much time to search there, but even if I spot you this, it still requires a kernel hack.


Yes, but see above.



Agent86 said:


> This articles just tells you to virtually install Windows XP, and then use one of the methods for defeating TTG in Windows. This is HARDLY decrypting .tivo files in Mac OS X.


Correct, I addressed this earlier.



Agent86 said:


> As I have mentioned, TTG might be very troublesome. TTG is nifty, but I don't really have a lot of vested interest there. TTG might have to sit on the shelf for Vista, or maybe even a complete re-write.


Unless the S3 is significantly different from all previous tivos in this area, then I don't see any way that tivo could really lock this down to be honest.



Agent86 said:


> But I do believe that MRV is a strong candidate. If Microsoft can figure out how to get CableLabs to approve bussing shows to an Xbox 360 for playback, I'm fairly confident that TiVo can figure out how to bus shows between two S3 units.


I think a significant difference here is that it is pretty well known that the 360 hasn't been exploited well enough yet (thus far it is impossible to run arbitrary software on one, which would leave the MCE transfers pretty secure) even though it has been nearly a year since its release.

Though things can change. Note I haven't said anywhere that CL will never approve of MRV, just I am not counting on it.



vman41 said:


> Quite a bit, actually, I get 6 digital stations OTA, 4 of which use sub-channels, and I don't have digital cable (and TWC isn't carrying the ABC and FOX channels in HD if I did). If I'm home, I prefer watching live programming in HD to a TiVo recording of the SD broadcast.


That is you then, and it would work fine for you if this were the case (but again remember that if they enabled it at all, it wouldn't be much more difficult to enable DC content to MRV.) As for me though, I have 11 digital stations (soon to be 13,) all but 5 having sub channels, and I still don't watch much OTA programming. (I live in Phoenix)



dugbug said:


> TivoPony and the other tivo reps haven't answered a key question that has been posed in various threads (including this one):
> 
> Why disable MRV, etc for non-cablecard recordings?


I haven't seen the software myself, but here is my bet: if they leave the MRV code even partially intact, it will be easy for somebody to pop open the box and just enable it for all content, which would piss off cablelabs. Normally somebody wouldn't otherwise care if the code was there and just disabled. However we saw what happened with MRV on the directivo units, where it was supposed to be disabled. And in a larger profile case, remember what happened with GTA:SA and the hot coffee mod? The lesson to be learned here is that if your code contains something that you potentially don't want people to use, then you should remove it entirely prior to distribution, because somebody will figure out a way to use that code anyways.



classicsat said:


> This is my speculation:
> 
> The software version that TiVo sent to CL for certification didn't meet CL's approval (more accurately didn't discern correctly at all between dgital cable and other content), so CL said no transfers until further approval. The features are there in the software, but due to the way they are controlled, a blanket transfer disabling must be employed.
> A further update could separate the feature enabling flags, so only features not of CLs concern can be enabled.


I have my doubts on that, see above.


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

Jeanesco said:


> There is a much easier solution available. It basically involves a clip on chip, and is easier to do than say an xbox mod chip (which people do all thetime) though heir bottler would forbid me from linking to it so I can't....
> ... there are people out there that do services like what you described above for $50 all the time. Cablelabs wouldn't go for that.


I didn't really think of the services angle - that's true. But, at that point, you've basicially compromised the entire machine - not just MRV. That's like the keys to the castle - run your own software, direct stream access, etc. CableLabs has to have already considered that possibility, and they signed off on it when they certified the machine.

My contention is that MRV is in and of itself is secure. You can compromise the entire machine with a PROM hack, which in turn could compromise everything else, but the box has been certified with that risk - whatever it may be - in place. Barring that hack, MRV is a secure transport method.



> Unless the S3 is significantly different from all previous tivos in this area, then I don't see any way that tivo could really lock this down to be honest.


I agree - I see TTG as problematic as well. But since I don't have much vested interest in it, its not a big deal to me. Nice to have - heck yes - important to my personal TiVo usage, not really.



> I think a significant difference here is that it is pretty well known that the 360 hasn't been exploited well enough yet (thus far it is impossible to run arbitrary software on one, which would leave the MCE transfers pretty secure) even though it has been nearly a year since its release.
> 
> Though things can change. Note I haven't said anywhere that CL will never approve of MRV, just I am not counting on it.


The 360 is secure thus far - that is correct. But we have no true idea how secure the S3 is. But - beyond that - how secure is any Windows PC? I'm pretty sure Microsoft plans on letting you do transfers between media centers and not just the 360. That is roughly equilivant to two S3s transferring between each other. Its an interesting situation/problem.

I know you haven't said anywhere that CableLabs won't approve of MRV - and I'm with you on your assessment. I'm not counting on it either - that's why I only purchased one S3. I could use more HD tuners but the output doesn't do me any good except in one room, and I'm not going to try to run like 50 ft of HDMI and optical cables and setup IR repeaters and whatnot. The BS to gratification ratio is just too high on that.


----------



## lorelevitt (Apr 30, 2002)

TiVoPony said:


> MRV and TTG on the Series3 product is just as cool, and we want them just as much, and they definitely make life a little better. But...in this case it's not the FCC that decides, it's CableLabs. And while we continue to work with CableLabs, and are optimistic they'll allow us to support these features, they haven't for this initial software release. It's not that we failed to meet a spec, or failed to talk to the right people, or missed a date - rather, we are trying to provide functionality that is unique in the industry, and CableLabs has not been able to give us their blessing yet. This sort of functionality is not supported by any CableCard product today...
> 
> If you think we shouldn't have shipped until this is resolved...boy, I can just imagine the thread titles for that topic!
> 
> Pony


First-- let me say that I've ordered the S3 for recording purposes only but I'm really disgusted how you and TIVO are trying to put a "happy face" spin on the lack of MRV and TTG. :down: TIVO knew damn well SIX MONTHS AGO that Cablelabs was not going to approve these features. This info could certainly have been released either at CES last January or in a press release during the year...and not sprung on everyone now in the hope they would buy the machine and dismiss the lack of extended functionality.

Second-- Cablelabs WILL NEVER .....REPEAT.....WILL NEVER approve TTG and most likely not MRV either. [Read in the voice of Lex Luther from Superman Returns] Cablelabs was established by the cable companies and it has been well documented in the press that they do not want to give up their lucrative source of income from the STB rentals or the use of PPV/On-Demand. Sure they have to approve the use of cable card in the S3 due to FCC cable card regulations but they have NO INCENTIVE to approve these features.

Third-- The content providers wont approve it. Look at how the the movie studios lined up behind Blu-Ray instead of HD-DVD in part because of the extra layer of copy protection. Microsoft doesn't support Blu-Ray because there isn't digital rights management to move HD material to a computer hard drive with Blu-Ray. With the studios constantly quoted in the press that they will do everything to protect their HD content in 1080i or 1080p, the thought of them supporting TIVO moving HD content, especially movies from HBO-HD, STARZ-HD, etc. to one's hard drive will NEVER HAPPEN.

The reason the spinmeisters are out raving about the S3 is its really hard to sell an $ 800 box with a so much smaller feature set than the S2. Unless one has a set > 50", the difference is not going to be so great at most seating distances for owners to upgrade. When the ad on TIVO's own web site refers to the S3 as a "limited edition" what they really mean is they're not making alot of them since they know they can't sell alot of them at that price and with that feature set.

Fourth-- Its mind boggling that TIVO didn't release the unit with the external ESATA port activated. I've been using a Scientific Atlanta 8300HD (yes with its crappy software) for the past two years with an off-the-shelf ESATA drive with no problems. As I understand from postings, TIVO uses the Linux OS on its boxes. What kind of crappy programmers have been working on the S3 since early in 2005 that they don't understand how to create a hot-pluggable virtual drive using various RAID and Logical Volume Management (LVM) features of Linux. As someone who teaches computer science as part of my job, I know plenty of college students who could have had this feature working a year ago.

So that's my thoughts-- like them or not. Just don't buy an S3 with any expectations that these features will ever be added. One of my friends who is a distributor called TIVO dealer support today, spoke to a SUPERVISOR and they were told: "Tivo to Go - networking and the additional hard drive are NOT features of this unit." There it is.


----------



## TiVotion (Dec 6, 2002)

Wow. Can't say I disagree with any of that.

I do find it funny (with no offense, TiVoPony), that he stated that MRV and TTG "make life a little better". That really seems like a statement meant to downplay MRV and TTG in view of the circumstances.

When TTG and MRV were first announced, was the best thing that could be said about them that they "make life a little better"? No, when TTG and MRV were announced, they were touted as the greatest thing ever.

My how the worm turns in the marketing world.


----------



## rothsss (Sep 11, 2006)

I can think of a MRV implementation that does not need content exchange. If all Tivos record the same shows and controls (delete, bookmark etc.) are communicated between the Tivos, then to me it would provide a MRV feature that I could be happy with.


----------



## talmania (Sep 7, 2006)

lorelevitt said:


> Unless one has a set > 50", the difference is not going to be so great at most seating distances for owners to upgrade.


Couldn't disagree more with that statement. The difference between HD and SD is night and day. Even on my 19" crappy bedroom LCD at 10 feet I can tell the difference.



lorelevitt said:


> I've been using a Scientific Atlanta 8300HD (yes with its crappy software) for the past two years with an off-the-shelf ESATA drive with no problems.


Lucky you---you have the ONLY upgradeable model in the entire market (and a limited sub-set of that market as I understand it) until the release of the S3.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 27, 2001)

lorelevitt said:


> Second-- Cablelabs WILL NEVER .....REPEAT.....WILL NEVER approve TTG and most likely not MRV either.


Agreed on TTG, but I have some hope for MRV



lorelevitt said:


> The reason the spinmeisters are out raving about the S3 is its really hard to sell an $ 800 box with a so much smaller feature set than the S2.


With all the things the Tivo does just the loss of these two features means a much smaller feature set than the S2? I don't think so.



lorelevitt said:


> Unless one has a set > 50", the difference is not going to be so great at most seating distances for owners to upgrade.


Couln't disagree more. HDTV is WAY better even on a small screen. Granted, it's probably unlikely that someone would spend twice as much on the Tivo as they did on TV they use it with.



lorelevitt said:


> Fourth-- Its mind boggling that TIVO didn't release the unit with the external ESATA port activated.


Not really a big deal and I'm sure it will be active long before any other cable co's box.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

lorelevitt said:


> Second-- Cablelabs WILL NEVER .....REPEAT.....WILL NEVER approve TTG and most likely not MRV either. [Read in the voice of Lex Luther from Superman Returns] Cablelabs was established by the cable companies and it has been well documented in the press that they do not want to give up their lucrative source of income from the STB rentals or the use of PPV/On-Demand. Sure they have to approve the use of cable card in the S3 due to FCC cable card regulations but they have NO INCENTIVE to approve these features.


I'm confident MRV will be enabled for all content in the near future. TTG is a little trickier since the DRM protection used for TTG is easily broken and I really can't see content providers like HBO wanting people to have easy access to a pure digital HD stream. That being said if TTG does get denied by CableLabs I think TiVo will still enabled it for all non-CableCARD recordings. And that is fine by me. 90% of what I record comes from network television anyway, so I'd be plenty happy with that even if it meant I had to record all my HD via antenna instead of cable.

Dan


----------



## Stu_Bee (Jan 15, 2002)

I thought the ESATA drive not being enabled was due to the same CableLabs certification process. ie. allowing videos to be placed on a removable/portable drive.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

rothsss said:


> I can think of a MRV implementation that does not need content exchange. If all Tivos record the same shows and controls (delete, bookmark etc.) are communicated between the Tivos, then to me it would provide a MRV feature that I could be happy with.


I'm trying to understand the point of having all Tivos record the same shows.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Stu_Bee said:


> I thought the ESATA drive not being enabled was due to the same CableLabs certification process. ie. allowing videos to be placed on a removable/portable drive.


I dunno. That drive gets "married" to the drive inside. It's just like adding in an internal drive when hacking another TiVo. The files on that external SATA drive aren't in some sort of "convenient" format.


----------



## rothsss (Sep 11, 2006)

cheer said:


> I'm trying to understand the point of having all Tivos record the same shows.


This way the protected content never has to be transferred from one Tivo to another Tivo. Since content does not leave the box, Cablelabs could be fine with it.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> I'm confident MRV will be enabled for all content in the near future. TTG is a little trickier since the DRM protection used for TTG is easily broken and I really can't see content providers like HBO wanting people to have easy access to a pure digital HD stream. That being said if TTG does get denied by CableLabs I think TiVo will still enabled it for all non-CableCARD recordings. And that is fine by me. 90% of what I record comes from network television anyway, so I'd be plenty happy with that even if it meant I had to record all my HD via antenna instead of cable.


I'm not sure why TTG has to be completely disabled. There is already the option to prevent transfers on a show by show basis. HBO could just set the bit and prevent all shows from being transferred.

Also. if MRV is enabled and you can transfer to a S2, then what's to stop from transferring from the S2 to a PC?


----------



## etsolow (Feb 8, 2001)

rothsss said:


> This way the protected content never has to be transferred from one Tivo to another Tivo. Since content does not leave the box, Cablelabs could be fine with it.


Only problem is it completely defeats the purpose of multiple Tivos... if they are all recording the same thing at all times, then in effect you still only have 2 tuners.


----------



## rothsss (Sep 11, 2006)

etsolow said:


> Only problem is it completely defeats the purpose of multiple Tivos... if they are all recording the same thing at all times, then in effect you still only have 2 tuners.


I am not saying that this is a perfect solution. 
My motivation:
I would like to start watching a show in one room and finish watching it in another room. I don't want to enter my recording requests twice.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

Stu_Bee said:


> I thought the ESATA drive not being enabled was due to the same CableLabs certification process. ie. allowing videos to be placed on a removable/portable drive.


The drive issue is not Cable Labs related. All content on the hard disks must be encrypted so there is no real issue with the drives being removable. The Cable Labs regulations are *incredibly* tight on this. All data paths for unencrypted digital video must be inaccessable. This means even at the board level. All traces carry unencrypted video must be burried in middle trace layers and chips that I/O with it must not have accessable pin outs.


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

Agent86 said:


> My contention is that MRV is in and of itself is secure. You can compromise the entire machine with a PROM hack, which in turn could compromise everything else, but the box has been certified with that risk - whatever it may be - in place. Barring that hack, MRV is a secure transport method.


Not entirely, unless of course tivo decides to make MRV on the S3 units incompatible with all other tivo units (e.g. MRV only works between S3 and S3.) It would be pretty easy to MRV a show from the S3 to an S2, and then extract it from there by use of a certain kernel mod. Many S2 units don't even require prom tinkering either in order to have extraction working.



Agent86 said:


> The 360 is secure thus far - that is correct. But we have no true idea how secure the S3 is. But - beyond that - how secure is any Windows PC? I'm pretty sure Microsoft plans on letting you do transfers between media centers and not just the 360.


The difference is the PC is capable of doing some pretty strong encryption of the video on the fly (vis a vis WMV11 encryption) which also has renewable security. The above is not true for tivos.


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

ah30k said:


> The drive issue is not Cable Labs related. All content on the hard disks must be encrypted so there is no real issue with the drives being removable. The Cable Labs regulations are *incredibly* tight on this. All data paths for unencrypted digital video must be inaccessable. This means even at the board level. All traces carry unencrypted video must be burried in middle trace layers and chips that I/O with it must not have accessable pin outs.


I would assume the content on the internal drive is encrypted, and they just need to extend this encryption to the external drive. Its probably not a huge deal, and I'm guessing its harder for TiVo to deal with a drive that may or may not be present in their system then it is to meet the encryption requirements. Remember, as it stood prior, if one drive was missing in a two drive system, the whole thing collapsed on itself. Now they have to detect that case, remove the missing recordings from the database and do all that kind of stuff.

All that said, you seem pretty knowledgeable - I would love to hear your take on the MRV situation.


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

morac said:


> Also. if MRV is enabled and you can transfer to a S2, then what's to stop from transferring from the S2 to a PC?


Nada.


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

lorelevitt said:


> When the ad on TIVO's own web site refers to the S3 as a "limited edition" what they really mean is they're not making alot of them since they know they can't sell alot of them at that price and with that feature set.


Hmm...I never heard anywhere that it is a limited edition. While I am not a conspiracy theorist (I really do not like conspiracy theorists) it would be possible that tivo didn't ask CL if MRV and TTG would be approved until after they were well into the design stages of the S3.

If this were the case, then tivo would still want to go through with it anyways to at least sell enough units to recoup their losses (hiring engineers to design an STB like this isn't cheap,) and not disclose these missing features until the day that the unit comes out, after everybody is all hyped about it. Thus the high price tag, and the downplaying of how useful MRV actually is. Once the hype is over, the sales start dropping, and they discontinue advertising, and eventually discontinue manufacturing.

Sure they can try to petition CL all the want, but will it really get anywhere? *shrug* jury is out on that one AFAICT. But if you really want tivo to stay in business then just buy it regardless. Personally I don't consider myself to be a charity though


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

Jeanesco said:


> Not entirely, unless of course tivo decides to make MRV on the S3 units incompatible with all other tivo units (e.g. MRV only works between S3 and S3.) It would be pretty easy to MRV a show from the S3 to an S2, and then extract it from there by use of a certain kernel mod. Many S2 units don't even require prom tinkering either in order to have extraction working.


True - some S2s do not require PROM modification to be hacked.

I think they could make MRV a one way street from S2 devices, and people wouldn't complain TOO loudly. In most cases the S2 won't be able to playback content recorded on an S3 anyway.

Any digital program and any HD program are simply stored as received, and the S2 doesn't have the guts necessary to play it back. Allowing S2 devices to MRV those programs makes no sense. MRVing analog channels is already being done, so its likely not a huge ordeal to allow an S3 analog recording to be passed to a S2, assuming the two boxes encode the same. They may not - I don't know. Allowing a S3 to pull something from a S2 would be very useful. And, of course, allowing two S3s to talk to each other is the most useful.



> The difference is the PC is capable of doing some pretty strong encryption of the video on the fly (vis a vis WMV11 encryption) which also has renewable security. The above is not true for tivos.


The PC is a little more flexible, and could do some pretty strong encryption - that is true. But the PC's flexibility its biggest weakness. Chances are Vista out of the box won't be perfect - and if its not someone might find a way around. Forcing people to update in the PC world could prove to be difficult. Relying on updates is a bear, that's why everyone (TiVo included) tries to get it right the first time.

In reading some additional posts here, it sounds like the data on the S3 disk has to be encrypted to meet CableLabs standards, and we know the S3 has been approved. If MRV is an encrypted transport and considered secure, and the data it pushes is also encrypted, it sounds like it has a good chance to pass. Not enough of a chance for me to buy another unit yet, but a chance .


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

Agent86 said:


> MRVing analog channels is already being done, so its likely not a huge ordeal to allow an S3 analog recording to be passed to a S2, assuming the two boxes encode the same. They may not - I don't know.


Even the digital channels would be the same. The digital channels use an mpeg-2 transport stream, and the tivo encoded video uses an mpeg-2 program stream. There is very little difference between the two. All tivo video decoder chips can handle even the way off-standard directv mpeg-2 streams.



Agent86 said:


> The PC is a little more flexible, and could do some pretty strong encryption - that is true. But the PC's flexibility its biggest weakness. Chances are Vista out of the box won't be perfect - and if its not someone might find a way around. Forcing people to update in the PC world could prove to be difficult.


It hasn't been perfect, people have found ways around WMV9 and 10 before. However in this particular area microsoft has had a very good track record about renewing their security via windows update so that the holes are quickly closed. Because of this track record, CL gave the go ahead. Tivo's track record in this area is far worse on the other hand.


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

Jeanesco said:


> Even the digital channels would be the same. The digital channels use an mpeg-2 transport stream, and the tivo encoded video uses an mpeg-2 program stream. There is very little difference between the two. All tivo video decoder chips can handle even the way off-standard directv mpeg-2 streams.


This is true, so its really just the HD recordings that the S2 would have no use for. But if CableLabs said "You can only allow reading from S2 machines" I don't think people would complain TOO loudly. I really think its S3 to S3 folks are most concerned with, espicially over the long term.



> It hasn't been perfect, people have found ways around WMV9 and 10 before. However in this particular area microsoft has had a very good track record about renewing their security via windows update so that the holes are quickly closed. Because of this track record, CL gave the go ahead. Tivo's track record in this area is far worse on the other hand.


I'm not so sure about that. I mean, I just saw a Windows Media security update the other day to address the DRM stripping from a few days ago. I let it apply, but I didn't have to. Everything I already had would continue to work if I didn't apply it, including any hacks I might have had. MS has never forced anyone to update anything. So they may patch quickly, but there is little guarantee that the patches get applied.

TiVo, on the other hand, doesn't give you a lot of say in the matter. Unless you completely compromise the box via the kernel (which we've already covered), you don't get any choice - the box upgrades whether you like it or not.


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

Agent86 said:


> MRV has certificates and group policy and security in place. eSATA is likely going to have a drive filled with encrypted data.


Tivos internal hard drive storage is already encrypted, it has been for some time, in fact they haven't changed the encryption mechanism one bit since the S1 dtivos first came around. The eSATA drive wouldn't change at all in this regard.



Agent86 said:


> You would have to break two layers of encryption to bust MRV, where as there is just one on the eSATA. I would be completely flumoxxed if they approved eSATA and not MRV.


I know first hand that this isn't true (in fact I developed and released a particular hack for working around one part of the encryption scheme tivo uses.) First the tivo has three keys stored in its crypto chip, consisting of your unit serial number, a public key, and a private key. When your tivo boots up for the first time, it hashes these numbers against a fourth random number, and stores that number on the hard disk, which tivo dubbed the "DiskConfiguration" key. (thus if you move a hard disk from one tivo to another identical tivo, you see that error #51)

***NOTE TO MODS*** This information CAN'T be used for video extraction (it is only basic info) and is already well documented in scattered places on this particular forum.

Now each time your tivo records *any* video stream (be it livetv, or whathave you) it seeds another random number, and then hashes this number against the "DiskConfiguration" key. It then stores this key (which tivo dubbed the "CommercialSkipOffset" key) in the database entry that references the video stream. This key, combined with the public, private, and serial number keys are used to encrypt the video data as it is being stored to the hard disk (which is done in hardware so the CPU isn't needed, thus it isn't slower than molases like TTG is) and likewise used to decrypt it as it is being read for playback.

So if you merely take the video data from one tivo hard drive and transfer it to another, or just move the drive from one tivo to another, the tivo couldn't decrypt it if it wanted to (again, hence the error #51.) Long story short this process uses *several* different keys. MRV actually transfers this data verbatim from one tivo to another, then when it reaches the other side it generates a new CommercialSkipOffset key that will contain the random seed as well as match the DiskConfiguration key of the new tivo.

The group keys you are referring to are only used to verify that the tivo it is talking to is allowed to MRV. They are not used at all to encrypt the video.


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

Agent86 said:


> I'm not so sure about that. I mean, I just saw a Windows Media security update the other day to address the DRM stripping from a few days ago. I let it apply, but I didn't have to. Everything I already had would continue to work if I didn't apply it, including any hacks I might have had. MS has never forced anyone to update anything. So they may patch quickly, but there is little guarantee that the patches get applied.


That particular one you are referring to worked only for audio. But regardless, your PC can't play or otherwise decrypt anything unless it connects to a microsoft server and obtains a separate public/private key pair in order to be able to decrypt the DRM'ed content. The server will refuse to give you this key pair unless you are using the latest version of the player, so this vulnerability only existed for a few days. Or at least that is what I am aware of for how MS's DRM works.


----------



## Brett (Mar 5, 2002)

I currently have two Series 1 TiVos (w/ lifetime) and a Moto HD PVR from Comcast, so I don't have any experience w/ TTG or MRV, but have eagerly awaited these along with the ability to record HD.

After reading this thread I have become even more upset w/ TiVo's decision to offer the new S3 box at the high price of $799 and then try and put the hard sell on some of its earliest adopters to buy the lifetime service when these two MAJOR features could be held up in limbo indefinitely. *And on top of that, if we want the "VIP" deal, we have to pay MSRP and only get a 90 day warranty, we can't even buy it at a retail store where we could get the box for a slight discount + a 4 year extended warranty (for only about an additional $30).*

I was REALLY looking forward to this box, but this whole launch has left a sour taste in my mouth. I know the TTG and MRV situation is out of your hands now, but some of the documentation on your site and uninformed retail staff will mislead many buyers into thinking these features will be available any day now, and this just doesn't seem right.

I can see that some TiVo reps do read this forum, so I hope they see that there are a lot of TiVo fans that are upset with the pricetag (esp. considering the currently missing features) and do something about it. Had the box been $499 or less I would have jumped on it right away, but at $800 + $200 + monthly cable card fees - 2 major features, like many others have said, I'll stick w/ my current Comcast PVR for now despite its shortcommings.


----------



## wmccain (Dec 16, 2002)

morac said:


> Also. if MRV is enabled and you can transfer to a S2, then what's to stop from transferring from the S2 to a PC?


If MRV is ever implemented on the S3, we should _expect_ that any transfers to an S2 (if supported at all) would be for "SD content only". Allowing HD content to transfer to a machine that cannot play it would clearly be problematic, regardless of any content-protection issues.

Disallowing HD content to transfer to an S2 would have the side-effect of closing the TTG "loophole" that you describe. When all is said and done, protecting HD content is what CableLabs (and the movie studios) are _really_ concerned about!


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

Yeah - I yanked my eSATA chunk after re-reading it, but after you quoted. It didn't come out right, and there were a few things I forgot to consider. That's a lot of detailed information, much of which I had no idea about.

This is basicially beyond my knowledge zone, so a couple things I'm just thinking outloud here.

1) The eSATA drive is basicially just going to have encrypted streams on it. All the keys are going to be stored either on the chips, or on the internal hard disk in the database. So anyone who would pop the drive off and attach it to their PC is just going to encounter lots and lots of seemingly random /useless data.

2) MRV basicially enforces group policy. It says if you are in the club, or if you are not. But it seems secure in the sense that unless you completely compromise the box - which we covered previously - there is no way for you to modify the policy. You're either in, or you're out.



> That particular one you are referring to worked only for audio. But regardless, your PC can't play or otherwise decrypt anything unless it connects to a microsoft server and obtains a separate public/private key pair in order to be able to decrypt the DRM'ed content. The server will refuse to give you this key pair unless you are using the latest version of the player, so this vulnerability only existed for a few days. Or at least that is what I am aware of for how MS's DRM works.


I don't know much about how MS's DRM works either, but I wonder about this because I see one major problem with it. Say you have an MCE and you record a show. However, when you go to watch it later, your internet connection happens to be out. If you have to go out to MS and get that key pair, it would mean that you couldn't watch any programs whenever your internet connection was not working. This doesn't seem to make sense. I would imagine no one would find this to be a workable solution in a typical household.


----------



## saberman (May 4, 2004)

GoHokies! said:


> Then why don't you just leave the S2 hooked up to your TV, use that to watch your video files, burn DVDs, etc and use the S3 for watching HD? Keeping the S2 hooked up doesn't cost a thing, other than the electricity required to run it, and you'll have to pay for monthly service on the S3. Skip a trip to McDonald's once a month and you've recovered that cost, it isn't like it's a whole lot of money...


I watch at least as much video from my PC as I do from the cable company. It is much more important than a second tuner.

Now if TiVo had given me advance notice that lifetime subscriptions were going away I probably would have bought another Series 2 with lifetime.


----------



## saberman (May 4, 2004)

Dennis Wilkinson said:


> It isn't licensed from Microsoft, it's TiVo's own DRM. They simply provide it on Windows as a DirectShow filter. Remember, the DRM is being applied on Linux, on the TiVo itself.
> 
> They could implement the decryption side on any platform if they chose to (although it certainly wouldn't be as a DirectShow filter.)


Can you provide a contact or documentation that the DRM technology is TiVo's and not Microsoft's? I would like to have it to show to someone.


----------



## MediaLivingRoom (Dec 10, 2002)

lorelevitt said:


> First-- let me say that I've ordered the S3 for recording purposes only but I'm really disgusted how you and TIVO are trying to put a "happy face" spin on the lack of MRV and TTG. :down: TIVO knew damn well SIX MONTHS AGO that Cablelabs was not going to approve these features. This info could certainly have been released either at CES last January or in a press release during the year...and not sprung on everyone now in the hope they would buy the machine and dismiss the lack of extended functionality.
> 
> Second-- Cablelabs WILL NEVER .....REPEAT.....WILL NEVER approve TTG and most likely not MRV either. [Read in the voice of Lex Luther from Superman Returns] Cablelabs was established by the cable companies and it has been well documented in the press that they do not want to give up their lucrative source of income from the STB rentals or the use of PPV/On-Demand. Sure they have to approve the use of cable card in the S3 due to FCC cable card regulations but they have NO INCENTIVE to approve these features.
> 
> ...


Well said!!


----------



## saberman (May 4, 2004)

jfh3 said:


> Maybe because it was easier to code and support until they have a permanent solution.


They aren't going to have a permanent solution. They have two parties to negotiate with not one. Microsoft is a player here and they are aiming directly at TiVo.

TiVo is built on a Linux platform yet they don't support TiVoToGo or TiVoToGoBack on a Linux platform or a Unix deriv like MAC OS. Now there are two possibilities:
1. They don't have the technical knowhow and feel the benefit of supporting Linux doesn't cover the cost of buying the knowhow. (But they are a Linux shop so this one is a little weak.)
2. Some part of the technology is covered by a Microsoft license and Microsoft won't license it to any desktop Linux system. (TiVo is not a desktop system.)

Item (1) makes no sense as in a real Linux shop the Linux developers would have put TiVoToGo on their desktops in their spare time if only to have a stable platform to test on.

Item (2) means no TiVoToGo/TiVoToGoBack until Vista -- if then. Microsoft might just not license the technology to TiVo at all if they are serious about displacing them.


----------



## btwyx (Jan 16, 2003)

saberman said:


> TiVo is built on a Linux platform yet they don't support TiVoToGo or TiVoToGoBack on a Linux platform or a Unix deriv like MAC OS.


They're actively working on the Mac OS version, I think its supposed to be in beta at the moment.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

MediaLivingRoom said:


> Well said!!


Actually, no, it is full of factual errors. It is an uninformed rant.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

saberman said:


> TiVo is built on a Linux platform yet they don't support TiVoToGo or TiVoToGoBack on a Linux platform or a Unix deriv like MAC OS. Now there are two possibilities:
> 1. They don't have the technical knowhow and feel the benefit of supporting Linux doesn't cover the cost of buying the knowhow. (But they are a Linux shop so this one is a little weak.)
> 2. Some part of the technology is covered by a Microsoft license and Microsoft won't license it to any desktop Linux system. (TiVo is not a desktop system.)


Incorrect on both counts. The DRM is 100% TiVo developed - well, using algorithms from others obviously. The decoder was simply developed as a Windows Media Filter DLL because it was easy. While it hasn't been released yet, they've had it working on Mac since at least January. I've also talked to multiple TiVo employees who told me they've used the Mac version personally.

As for Linux, I've also talked to them about that. They haven't released it on Linux because of two things:
1. Low demand.
2. Concern over hacking.

If they released it for Linux it would have to be as a binary. They can't release the source code without exposing the keys used - and then the whole thing is blown wide open. So they'd need to support at least the common Linux distros, and it'd be a lot more support work and headaches - for a very, very small userbase.

It is a business decision, not technical. They *can* do it, they have decided not to.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

lorelevitt said:


> IVO knew damn well SIX MONTHS AGO that Cablelabs was not going to approve these features. This info could certainly have been released either at CES last January


At CES TiVo said that they wanted to support these features on the S3 but might not be able to do so at release because of Cable Labs. Did you miss it? I guess you did. It was NOT set it stone then, and TiVo was actively working for approval. So, no, they did NOT know 'damn well' that it was a solid no.

On top of that, you just don't put out press releases for a forthcoming product talking about what it won't do. That doesn't help anyone. I don't see what difference it makes when the news was released, it was released when the product became available. There was no deception. There was no 'springing' it on anyone. When the product was released ALL the information was released.



> Second-- Cablelabs WILL NEVER .....REPEAT.....WILL NEVER approve TTG and most likely not MRV either.


Wow, you can see into the future? Cable Labs has *already* approved features like TTG and MRV for Vista.



> it has been well documented in the press that they do not want to give up their lucrative source of income from the STB rentals


And this 'well documented' so-called fact has also been heavily debunked. Cable STBs/DVRs cost the cable companies hundreds of dollars each, some of them even as much as the S3 at retail ($800). It takes the cable company *years* to recover the costs of a box through the box rental fees, there is no profit until it is recovered. Then there are the costs involved in repair, warehousing, updates, etc. The idea that cable box rentals are a profit center is a popular myth.



> Sure they have to approve the use of cable card in the S3 due to FCC cable card regulations but they have NO INCENTIVE to approve these features.


Except that their major competitors, the satellite companies, have started offering similar features. Dish network has a PMP that can take their shows. DirecTV is talking about moving shows to a PC. DirecTV has also shown a media center that supports multi-room viewing. Hell, for that matter some cable boxes already support multi-room viewing, so it isn't even new to cable.



> Third-- The content providers wont approve it. Look at how the the movie studios lined up behind Blu-Ray instead of HD-DVD in part because of the extra layer of copy protection. Microsoft doesn't support Blu-Ray because there isn't digital rights management to move HD material to a computer hard drive with Blu-Ray.


This is mostly incorrect. Content providers did swing to BD over HD-DVD in part because of the BD+ and ROM Mark that BD has and HD-DVD lacks. Fox in particular said this was a key factor in their choice.

However, the rest is incorrect.
1. BD uses the same content protection system, AACS, as HD-DVD. BD+ and ROM Mark are different and serve different roles, they have nothing to do with controling content transfers. BD has the same Managed Copy functionality as HD-DVD, it is part of AACS. Earlier there was a difference - Managed Copy is an optional feature of AACS. HD-DVD decided to make it mandatory for their content. BD didn't - at first. Before BD launched they changed their mind and made Managed Copy mandatory, just like HD-DVD.

2. Microsoft's favoring of HD-DVD over BD has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with DRM. ZERO. It has to do entirely with the interactivity features. HD-DVD uses an XML based system called iHD. iHD was developed by Microsoft and Toshiba, and it will be built into every copy of Windows Vista. Blu-ray rejected iHD as not being powerful enough, and they standardized on BD-J, a Java profile. Java to Microsoft is like garlic to a vampire. If they put native support for BD into Vista they would be required to put Java support in every copy of Vista. That concept does not make MS happy.



> The reason the spinmeisters are out raving about the S3 is its really hard to sell an $ 800 box with a so much smaller feature set than the S2.


'So much?' It is lacking a handful. The big ones are MRV, TTG, and TTCB. These are likely to be added at some point, in some fashion, despite what you think. All of the others - KidZone, et al - are already scheduled for an update later this year.



> they know they can't sell alot of them at that price and with that feature set.


They've stated quite openly that they do not expect to sell a lot of S3s right away, and the primary market is for existing TiVo owners looking for an HD upgrade.



> As I understand from postings, TIVO uses the Linux OS on its boxes. What kind of crappy programmers have been working on the S3 since early in 2005 that they don't understand how to create a hot-pluggable virtual drive using various RAID and Logical Volume Management (LVM) features of Linux. As someone who teaches computer science as part of my job, I know plenty of college students who could have had this feature working a year ago.


'As someone who teaches computer science' then you should know better than to jump to conclusions about programming.

First of all, TiVo uses a modified, stripped down Linux kernel. Not 'Linux' as most people mean it, the entire OS with all the bells and whistles. Many devices run 'Linux', meaning just the kernel, including the Linksys WRT54GL WiFi router. Have fun implementing RAID, LVM, etc.

Secondly, TiVo does not use any of the Linux file systems for video. There are ext2 partitions for the OS and such, but video is stored in what is called the Media File System (MFS). This is more like a database. It was designed from the ground up, and designed for fixed drives. It *really* does not like it when a drive is added or removed. So it has to be redesigned to tolerate an external drive which can be added and removed at the user's whim, without corrupting the system. The cable boxes that support eSATA are generally fairly harsh about it. When you connect the drive the entire box reformats and you lose anything already there, when you disconnect the same thing happens. I'm guessing TiVo is trying to be a bit more polite to the user.

As a CS instructor, surely you understand development priorities and staggered releases to minimize risk in a new product. Or does the saying "Those who can't, teach" apply here?



> So that's my thoughts-- like them or not.


Your thoughts are erroneous.



> One of my friends who is a distributor called TIVO dealer support today, spoke to a SUPERVISOR and they were told: "Tivo to Go - networking and the additional hard drive are NOT features of this unit." There it is.


No kidding, that's what all the info is. They are NOT features of the unit. They may be in the future. Thanks for the blinding flash of the obvious.


----------



## wmccain (Dec 16, 2002)

megazone said:


> Cable Labs has *already* approved features like TTG and MRV for Vista.


I don't doubt the veracity of this statement, but I am a bit curious. Just _how_ will one insert a CableCard into a Vista PC?

Presumably, Microsoft plans to support some kind of tuner cards (or integrated motherboard chip sets?) that include QAM tuners (as well as, one would assume, NTSC and ATSC tuners). But who will be making them? (It is quite possible that such tuners are already available for PCs and I just haven't "gotten the memo yet". I know that NTSC and ATSC tuner cards exist, but QAM with CableCard slots?)


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

wmccain said:


> Presumably, Microsoft plans to support some kind of tuner cards (or integrated motherboard chip sets?) that include QAM tuners (as well as, one would assume, NTSC and ATSC tuners). But who will be making them?


Correct, you will be required to buy a new PC with integrated CableCARD. As for who will make them, it looks like the major OEMs are likely to as part of their Media Center PC lines. Once Vista ships. I forget the hardware MS used to get the certification.


----------



## wmccain (Dec 16, 2002)

megazone said:


> Correct, you will be required to buy a new PC with integrated CableCARD.


Integrated _only_? No add-on cards from Hauppauge (and their competitors, if they still have any)?

I _thought_ that I recalled that at CES, DirecTV announced they planned to make a satellite tuner available as a PC add-on. But all I can find now (looking back over their press releases) is something about making their STBs work with Intel's Viiv "to enable remote viewing of DIRECTV's entertainment services and programming to PC screens". Also something really indecipherable about joining the Digital Living Network Alliance (DLNA) and supporting "UPnP Interoperability" and "SVP Compatible Silicon" ...


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

Agent86 said:


> I don't know much about how MS's DRM works either, but I wonder about this because I see one major problem with it. Say you have an MCE and you record a show. However, when you go to watch it later, your internet connection happens to be out. If you have to go out to MS and get that key pair, it would mean that you couldn't watch any programs whenever your internet connection was not working. This doesn't seem to make sense. I would imagine no one would find this to be a workable solution in a typical household.


Well each public/private key pair is probably only valid for a certain period of time (otherwise you could just keep reusing it which would defeat the purpose.) In which case I would imagine there is a system in place for holding on to keys for so long, for this reason. Again I really don't know the specifics of MS's DRM though. Nor am I aware of how this is supposed to work for portable media players (then again it may even use a different/weaker DRM system since the video quality has to be reduced on these devices anyways.)


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

lorelevitt said:


> First-- let me say that I've ordered the S3 for recording purposes only but I'm really disgusted how you and TIVO are trying to put a "happy face" spin on the lack of MRV and TTG. :down: TIVO knew damn well SIX MONTHS AGO that Cablelabs was not going to approve these features. This info could certainly have been released either at CES last January or in a press release during the year...and not sprung on everyone now in the hope they would buy the machine and dismiss the lack of extended functionality.
> 
> Second-- Cablelabs WILL NEVER .....REPEAT.....WILL NEVER approve TTG and most likely not MRV either. [Read in the voice of Lex Luther from Superman Returns] Cablelabs was established by the cable companies and it has been well documented in the press that they do not want to give up their lucrative source of income from the STB rentals or the use of PPV/On-Demand. Sure they have to approve the use of cable card in the S3 due to FCC cable card regulations but they have NO INCENTIVE to approve these features.
> 
> ...


You've definately nailed my initial impressions of the issues in your post, but after some thought there are doubts as to how all of this will play out. Somehow I think it will be somewhere between your predictions and those opposing you.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

megazone said:


> At CES TiVo said that they wanted to support these features on the S3 but might not be able to do so at release because of Cable Labs. Did you miss it? I guess you did. It was NOT set it stone then, and TiVo was actively working for approval. So, no, they did NOT know 'damn well' that it was a solid no.


The way you wrote about it back in January was that TiVo was unsure of what restrictions MRV would have wrt *CableCard protected* content, but they intended that all content would be unrestricted, which isn't exactly a warning about MRV being totally disabled.


----------



## lorelevitt (Apr 30, 2002)

megazone said:


> At CES TiVo said that they wanted to support these features on the S3 but might not be able to do so at release because of Cable Labs. Did you miss it? I guess you did. It was NOT set it stone then, and TiVo was actively working for approval. So, no, they did NOT know 'damn well' that it was a solid no.


And the blind shall lead the blind...They knew damn well that it wouldn't be approved BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT EVEN GOING TO SUBMIT IT FOR APPROVAL.


megazone said:


> There was no deception. There was no 'springing' it on anyone. When the product was released ALL the information was released.


This is a load of crap. They clearly calculated the marketing impact of the announcement of the lack of features and wanted to minimize the criticism in the press until the device was released. I give their marketing folks alot more credit than you do. Not much different than studios refusing to provide an advance copy of crummy movies to reviewers before the release date. They were hoping people like yourself would be so fanatical about their technology that you would defend the unit and their actions regarcless.


megazone said:


> Wow, you can see into the future? Cable Labs has *already* approved features like TTG and MRV for Vista.


Do a little research first on this issue. There is no blanket approval for VISTA. If and when they approve hardware using VISTA to use cablecard, it will be only on new, approved OEM computers on a machine type by machine type basis. It will also use Cable Card 2.0 so that will keep the PPV/On Demand cash stream flowing. And just because there will be cable card 2.0, there is no assurance that TTG and MRV will be approved:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/01/30/cablecard-on-vista-to-require-cablelabs-certification/

http://www.cablemodem.com/downloads/Certified_Products.pdf


megazone said:


> The idea that cable box rentals are a profit center is a popular myth.


Its the PPV/On Demand...how do I knock some sense into you about where the cash stream comes from on the STBs--its not the monthly rental fees.


megazone said:


> Except that their major competitors, the satellite companies, have started offering similar features.


Irrelevant.


megazone said:


> This is mostly incorrect. Content providers did swing to BD over HD-DVD in part because of the BD+ and ROM Mark that BD has and HD-DVD lacks. Fox in particular said this was a key factor in their choice.


Contradicting yourself. Fox wasn't the only one concerned about extra content protection. Disney is too.


megazone said:


> Microsoft's favoring of HD-DVD over BD has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with DRM. ZERO.


You'd make a really crappy researcher/reporter. Look at what Bill Gates himself said. And yes, I would believe Bill Gates BEFORE I BELIEVE YOU:

http://www.betanews.com/article/Gates_Bluray_DRM_is_AntiConsumer/1129572265

"Gates: Blu-ray DRM is 'Anti-Consumer'
By Nate Mook, BetaNews
October 17, 2005, 2:04 PM

As part of a speaking tour at universities across the United States, Microsoft chairman Bill Gates sat down with Princeton's newspaper to discuss the road ahead. When asked why Microsoft chose to support HD DVD over Sony's Blu-ray format, Gates replied that Blu-ray's copyright protection scheme is "anti-consumer."

"The inconvenience is that the [movie] studios got too much protection at the expense consumers and it won't work well on PCs," Gates said. "It's not the physical format that we have the issue with, it's that the protection scheme on Blu-ray is very anti-consumer.""



megazone said:


> They've stated quite openly that they do not expect to sell a lot of S3s right away


What a business plan. No wonder they can't see black ink in their bottom line.


megazone said:


> Secondly, TiVo does not use any of the Linux file systems for video... It was designed from the ground up, and designed for fixed drives. It *really* does not like it when a drive is added or removed.


They designed it and have had over two years since they first proposed the S3 to program it. I don't accept that they couldn't get it done...unless they only have two programmers working on their entire staff....I would like to hear why TIVO did not have programming resources to get the ESATA working??? I would like to hear what their programmers have been doing for the past year.

So keep defending their development process and marketing skills. You didn't do any real research on any of these issues-- just started spouting the party line.

My point remains unchanged. Buy the unit if you like their software interface-- I did-- but plan on ONLY EVER USING IT FOR RECORDING AND PLAYBACK. The S3 will never be any more than that.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

lorelevitt said:


> My point remains unchanged. Buy the unit if you like their software interface-- I did-- but plan on ONLY EVER USING IT FOR RECORDING AND PLAYBACK. The S3 will never be any more than that.


I too saw some holes in Mega's reply and I thank you for the carefully thought out rebuttal.  The only thing we can count on with the S3 at this time is the current feature set, everything else is vaporware until it's actually on the box and working.


----------



## TiVotion (Dec 6, 2002)

I understand TiVo's reasoning for not organizing a full press release and massive media blitz to draw attention to the fact that the S3 was going to be released without TTG and MRV. I'm not happy about the situation personally, and it was going to be a dealbreaker for me, but I have to say that I understand it.

Let's face reality. The fact is, TTG and MRV are KEY value-added features that differentiate TiVo from any other DVR on the market. If those features weren't, they'd have never been added in the first place - or pushed as selling points. To draw attention to the fact that these features cannot, at this time, be implemented on the Series 3 would be bad marketing. You don't want to release a product and draw attention to what it's not, or doesn't do.

"The new 2007 Mercedes-Benz C-Class. Now available without an audio system!"

That's a silly example, but still. I've never taken a marketing class in my life, but it seems to me the logical thing to do is play up the benefits while minimizing the weaknesses. Now having said that, those who are buying the S3 at launch (and yes, I joined that club last night as well) are the TiVo hardcore. The TiVo hardcore are the people who know what MRV and TTG is, thus the TiVo hardcore are going to be among the ones up in arms about not having it. I know it's been said before, but I concur - Joe Consumer who gets a S3 a year or 2 from now (assuming CableLabs never approves these features) isn't going to be nearly as distressed, because Joe Consumer doesn't miss what he never had.

Being honest with myself, I guess I would have to admit that it would be far better to NOT list these features in the selling points than to include ad copy and packaging copy that boldly declared there is no MRV and TTG in this product.


----------



## tunnelengineer (Jul 21, 2006)

ok, I change my previous post in another topic.....

THIS IS FLAMEFEST 2006!!!!!


----------



## Stu_Bee (Jan 15, 2002)

TiVotion said:


> these features cannot, at this time, be implemented on the Series 3


But it appears they have also disabled some features that could be allowed. Like uploading videos to Tivo(ie tivo2goback). For me this is one of the core features I utilize, and it would be sorely missed.
I would think the code separation of keeping this feature (PC->Tivo) enabled, while disabling (Tivo->PC) would have been somewhat simple, since they work in very different manners.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

lorelevitt said:


> And the blind shall lead the blind...They knew damn well that it wouldn't be approved BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT EVEN GOING TO SUBMIT IT FOR APPROVAL.


And you know they didn't? Nothing I've heard from TiVo indicates they didn't. They've told me they've been working directly with Cable Labs for a while.



> Do a little research first on this issue. There is no blanket approval for VISTA. If and when they approve hardware using VISTA to use cablecard, it will be only on new, approved OEM computers on a machine type by machine type basis. It will also use Cable Card 2.0 so that will keep the PPV/On Demand cash stream flowing. And just because there will be cable card 2.0, there is no assurance that TTG and MRV will be approved:


Have a Microsoft Press Release: http://thomashawk.com/2005/11/hot-donkey-premium-cablecard-hdtv-in.html

There were other statements from MS as well - specifically that it is CC1.0 and NOT 2.0. 2.0 won't be finalized in time, not even close.



> Its the PPV/On Demand...how do I knock some sense into you about where the cash stream comes from on the STBs--its not the monthly rental fees.


And the MAJORITY of cable users do not use those services, cable MSOs openly admit it. So it doesn't hurt for some to have boxes that don't use them. People willing to buy a box that doesn't do PPV/VOD hardly seem like people who would use them if they didn't have the box. Myself, for example - I don't think I've *ever* used PPV or OnDemand, certainly not since 1998 that I can recall.



> Contradicting yourself. Fox wasn't the only one concerned about extra content protection. Disney is too.


No contradiction at all in what I said. And I didn't say it was only Fox, they were just one particular example.



> You'd make a really crappy researcher/reporter. Look at what Bill Gates himself said. And yes, I would believe Bill Gates BEFORE I BELIEVE YOU:


*YAWN* That was BEFORE BD CHANGED THEIR SPEC. It revolved around HD-DVD *mandating* Managed Copy and BD not having done so at the point. Once BD did so, MS dropped that issue. That is OLD, OLD news, resolved well before either format shipped. And it was always a red herring, because BD supported Managed Copy all along, they just weren't going to mandate it for content - but most of the studios had said they'd be supporting it anyway. MS's objections always centered on iHD vs BD-J, and now they SOLELY rest on that. They used the DRM issue as a smoke screen to make it look less self-centered, but as soon as BD added mandated Manged Copy to their spec, MS lost that issue to obfuscate their real gripe.



> What a business plan. No wonder they can't see black ink in their bottom line.


It is an expensive product to produce, and expensive to buy. It is not aimed at the mass market, that's the S2. Overall response so far has been good - even you bought one. Sure doesn't seem like a bad move to make money on the hardware.



> They designed it and have had over two years since they first proposed the S3 to program it. I don't accept that they couldn't get it done...unless they only have two programmers working on their entire staff....I would like to hear why TIVO did not have programming resources to get the ESATA working??? I would like to hear what their programmers have been doing for the past year.


It simply wasn't a priority. It is not considered a launch feature. Plain and simple. If you don't like that, too bad. They put capabilities into the hardware that they intend to enable in the future. Resources are finite, you can't always do everything at the same time. eSATA, MPEG-4, VC-1, etc, were not felt to be requirements for launch. They have a number of projects to work on - the S2DT, cable box ports, S3, continued software updates in general - like KidZone, which was *key* to landing the RadioShack deal for retail, and is felt to have played a role in the Comcast and Cox deals. Updating the advertising platform, which is another growing revenue source for TiVo, with another major deal announced today.

TiVo isn't all that large of a company, they don't have hundreds of developers to spread around.



> My point remains unchanged. Buy the unit if you like their software interface-- I did-- but plan on ONLY EVER USING IT FOR RECORDING AND PLAYBACK. The S3 will never be any more than that.


Except it already does more than that.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Stormspace said:


> I too saw some holes in Mega's reply and I thank you for the carefully thought out rebuttal.  The only thing we can count on with the S3 at this time is the current feature set, everything else is vaporware until it's actually on the box and working.


Except, again, his facts were erroneous. He accuses me of not doing research, than he flubs his research and looks up outdated info.


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

IMO no point in saying whether MRV will or will not be enabled for sure in the future as it is really uncertain. Personally I doubt it however


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

megazone said:


> Except, again, his facts were erroneous. He accuses me of not doing research, than he flubs his research and looks up outdated info.


One of the problems I see with your arguments (and its not your fault) is that you are relying on information gained from your relationship with TiVo. We can't refute that since the source isn't telling anyone publicly this is the case, so since TiVo hasn't confirmed it officially we have to discount it. You and all the others in communication with TiVo could actually be being played by their marketing team to do damage control on the S3 release. It's possible.

Another possibility is that while the development and marketing teams have good intentions with the direction they want to take, it could still be just a pipe dream.


----------



## wbradney (Mar 4, 2003)

Dajad said:


> Because, like Apple, TiVo follows the KISS rule - Keep it Simple Stupid. Imagine trying to explain to the non-technical user that shows x and y can be viewed in multiple rooms but shows A & Z can't. This would be a nightmare.
> 
> ...Dale


Yes, but by doing that they're missing a golden opportunity to deflect the bad PR that's going to ensue from this. They could easily allow for the most common situation: customer gets a shiny new S3 to replace the upgraded 600hr S2 currently in their living room, moving the S2 to another room and wanting to, at the very least, watch the analog shows already recorded, through the MRV feature, on the S3.

I don't know all the details of the CableLabs/FCC decision, but it seems that this should be OK from a legal standpoint, and for those small percentage of (rich) non-technical users who buy multiple S3 units expecting MRV to work between them TiVo just has to say "Here's the number for CableLabs -- go ***** to them".


----------



## Leo Valiant (Apr 19, 2000)

Here's quote from Andrew Morrison, product manager for Series3 at TiVo regarding CableLabs to get certification for moving HD content outside of the set-top box.

"It may never happen, or it could be years away," Morrison said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/cmp/20060914/tc_cmp/193000353


----------



## pkscout (Jan 11, 2003)

wmccain said:


> Integrated _only_? No add-on cards from Hauppauge (and their competitors, if they still have any)?
> 
> I _thought_ that I recalled that at CES, DirecTV announced they planned to make a satellite tuner available as a PC add-on. But all I can find now (looking back over their press releases) is something about making their STBs work with Intel's Viiv "to enable remote viewing of DIRECTV's entertainment services and programming to PC screens". Also something really indecipherable about joining the Digital Living Network Alliance (DLNA) and supporting "UPnP Interoperability" and "SVP Compatible Silicon" ...


CableLabs will only certify an entire system, not a card. So to get certficiation you have to submit the entire system (power supply, ethernet cable, and all). If you want to ship an updated system (say with a new processor), you have to get it certified again. It's CableLabs' way of ensuring that the monopoly cable providers can keep their monopoly.

So, for instance, you'll probably never see a MythTV based system certified by CableLabs. Way to much fair use going on there.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Stormspace said:


> Another possibility is that while the development and marketing teams have good intentions with the direction they want to take, it could still be just a pipe dream.


True, TiVo has never said "This will happen" - they're being cautious, as they should.

At the same time, he's making pretty big leaps to his conclusions about it 'never' happening. Like I said in my review, buy the unit for what it does now, don't buy it if you absolutely have to have the missing features. That's just good sense. But if you're willing to take the risk, or just don't care, then go for it. It is a calculated risk. Personally, based on what I know, I have a good feeling about it. And I didn't just talk to marketing people. I think I was kind of a pest during the review, I emailed in a LOT of questions and points for clarification.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

Leo Valiant said:


> Here's quote from Andrew Morrison, product manager for Series3 at TiVo regarding CableLabs to get certification for moving HD content outside of the set-top box.
> 
> "It may never happen, or it could be years away," Morrison said.
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/cmp/20060914/tc_cmp/193000353





> For now, the portability feature in TiVo is used mostly by technology-savvy subscribers, so not having it in Series3 is not expected to hurt sales, Morrison said.
> 
> "For the mass market, it's probably a top 10, but not a top 3 feature," he said.


This is the telling comment. It really isn't important to them to include MRV. Based on the statement and those of TiVo employees in the forum my conclusion is that they are softpedaling on the subject in the forum to minimize the negative word of mouth publicity.


----------



## VOLFAN (Nov 27, 2005)

Stormspace said:


> One of the problems I see with your arguments (and its not your fault) is that you are relying on information gained from your relationship with TiVo. We can't refute that since the source isn't telling anyone publicly this is the case, so since TiVo hasn't confirmed it officially we have to discount it. You and all the others in communication with TiVo could actually be being played by their marketing team to do damage control on the S3 release. It's possible.
> 
> Another possibility is that while the development and marketing teams have good intentions with the direction they want to take, it could still be just a pipe dream.


That's the most common sense post I've read in two days. :up: Basically, no one knows. Wait and see is all we can do.


----------



## Agent86 (Jan 18, 2002)

Leo Valiant said:


> Here's quote from Andrew Morrison, product manager for Series3 at TiVo regarding CableLabs to get certification for moving HD content outside of the set-top box.
> 
> "It may never happen, or it could be years away," Morrison said.
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/cmp/20060914/tc_cmp/193000353


Great find Leo - good article - but the paragraph after that quote is the most important:



Yahoo Article said:


> "It may never happen, or it could be years away," Morrison said.
> 
> Eventually, as HD content and devices become mainstream, it's likely that consumer demand for taking their movies and TV programming with them will force providers to approve copyright-protection mechanisms.


I think that paragraph is accurate. TiVo and Microsoft are already gearing up for (or actively involved) for this push, and Apple is probably on its way to joining the club. Others will likely join the market as well. As time goes on, more and more people are going to want this functionality. It might just be us right now, but we have "friends" waiting around the corner.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Leo Valiant said:


> Here's quote from Andrew Morrison, product manager for Series3 at TiVo regarding CableLabs to get certification for moving HD content outside of the set-top box.
> 
> "It may never happen, or it could be years away," Morrison said.


While the article says there aren't approved systems, there are. AACS, used by both BD and HD-DVD, has been accepted as a way to move copies of HD content between platforms. Like copying a movie from a BD disc onto a PC, and then from the PC to a portable device, etc. That's a key feature of AACS.

Also, from a MS Press Release:


> These Media Center PCs, capable of supporting a CableCARD(TM) module, will allow consumers to enjoy one-way cable programming, including premium high-definition cable content, on their personal computer and throughout the home on compliant network-connected devices, such as Xbox 360(TM), while protecting cable operators' investments in high-value content in a digital environment. Microsoft is working closely with CableLabs to document final approval of Windows Media(R) Digital Rights Management (DRM) as a content protection technology for OpenCable(TM) products that receive one-way cable content under the terms of this agreement.





> The agreement is the culmination of more than two years of extensive evaluation and technical reviews performed by the two entities under the CableLabs OpenCable process to develop specifications and test suites for the new solution.
> 
> The specified OpenCable architecture allows for multiple DRM systems to be used in the device and ensures content providers of protected delivery of content to the PC. Microsoft(R) Windows Media Digital Rights Management is the first major DRM system to complete the due diligence necessary for approval by CableLabs.


Worst case would seem to be whatever DRM system Microsoft gets approved, TiVo uses.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

saberman said:


> They aren't going to have a permanent solution. They have two parties to negotiate with not one. Microsoft is a player here and they are aiming directly at TiVo.


You are misinformed - Microsoft has NOTHING to do with whether Tivo can implement TTG or MRV.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

jfh3 said:


> You are misinformed - Microsoft has NOTHING to do with whether Tivo can implement TTG or MRV.


Actually, Microsoft could *help* TiVo here. If MS convinces CableLabs to allow the kind of features they want for moving content around, that opens the door to similar solutions like TiVo. TiVo and Microsoft have a shared interest here, in getting CableLabs to loosen their control a bit. And MS isn't going to give up.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

Stormspace said:


> This is the telling comment. It really isn't important to them to include MRV. Based on the statement and those of TiVo employees in the forum my conclusion is that they are softpedaling on the subject in the forum to minimize the negative word of mouth publicity.


You mis-read the article - it was about Tivo To Go and transfer to portable devices.

MRV is different. Technically, it's "outside the (original) box", but still under Tivo control.

I don't see any reason MRV won't be put on the Series 3. Tivo always has control.

TTG - as the article implies, I don't expect that on the Series 3 anytime soon, at least for HD content.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

megazone said:


> Actually, Microsoft could *help* TiVo here. If MS convinces CableLabs to allow the kind of features they want for moving content around, that opens the door to similar solutions like TiVo. TiVo and Microsoft have a shared interest here, in getting CableLabs to loosen their control a bit. And MS isn't going to give up.


True. I guess what I should've said is that Tivo doesn't require anything from MS to enable MRV or TTG.

I'm sure all help will be greatly appreciated though ...


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

lorelevitt said:


> It will also use Cable Card 2.0 so that will keep the PPV/On Demand cash stream flowing. And just because there will be cable card 2.0, there is no assurance that TTG and MRV will be approved:


That's impossible, as the CableCARD 2.0 spec hasn't even been finalized yet. The hardware portion has been set, so it's possible for them to build CableCARD 2.0 compatible systems, but until the MSOs actually finish the software side and deploy the technology all that extra hardware will just be sitting there going to waste. In fact the MSOs are pushing to skip CableCARD 2.0 altogether. They've started development of a new downloadable encryption scheme that will make it so they don't have to deploy physical cards at all, and they're pushing hard for another extension so that they can get it ready before the integrated encryption ban goes into effect. If that happens then a CableCARD 2.0 compatible Vista machine will never do anything more then a S3 TiVo with regards to PPV, VOD and SDV.

Dan


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

Stu_Bee said:


> I would think the code separation of keeping this feature (PC->Tivo) enabled, while disabling (Tivo->PC) would have been somewhat simple, since they work in very different manners.


It might be. It just could be they never separated those features in the CableLabs approved release.


----------



## Stu_Bee (Jan 15, 2002)

Which brings up the question...
Is CableLabs going to have to approve every single additional feature proposed to be added to an S3.....every single software version upgrade..........or just aspects that involve the CableLabs area of certification requirements?

Hopefully it's just the latter....which would then not require the Tivo2GoBack feature to sit in the cablelabs approval process mire.


----------



## etsolow (Feb 8, 2001)

Stu_Bee said:


> Which brings up the question...
> Is CableLabs going to have to approve every single additional feature proposed to be added to an S3.....every single software version upgrade..........or just aspects that involve the CableLabs area of certification requirements?
> 
> Hopefully it's just the latter....which would then not require the Tivo2GoBack feature to sit in the cablelabs approval process mire.


Wow, that's a great question! Half the appeal to me in switching from DIRECTV is that I was under the impression that these would be "real" full-featured Tivos, without some uptight organization second-guessing every decision and feature with veto power. It's starting to look like I might have been mistaken! If I'm *still* seeing cool new features on S2s that my S3 can't get, I'm going to have some serious buyer's remorse.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

etsolow said:


> Wow, that's a great question! Half the appeal to me in switching from DIRECTV is that I was under the impression that these would be "real" full-featured Tivos, without some uptight organization second-guessing every decision and feature with veto power. It's starting to look like I might have been mistaken! If I'm *still* seeing cool new features on S2s that my S3 can't get, I'm going to have some serious buyer's remorse.


It would be nice if they could get a box that allowed component in and cable box control like the Series 2 to at least give us component quality shows on our HD sets. Kinda like a poor mans HD, but with TiVo.


----------



## btwyx (Jan 16, 2003)

Stormspace said:


> Kinda like a poor mans HD, but with TiVo.


That's half of the problem, its a poor solution. When there's actual digital data available, decoding and reencoding it is a bad thing. Also the poor man couldn't afford it, because it'd be very expensive. If you think you've seen *****ing about price now, try selling a box which had HD encoders.


----------



## etsolow (Feb 8, 2001)

Stormspace said:


> It would be nice if they could get a box that allowed component in and cable box control like the Series 2 to at least give us component quality shows on our HD sets. Kinda like a poor mans HD, but with TiVo.


My understanding is that there are no consumer-level encoders that can accept HD over component without making the device cost-prohibitive. (As in multi-thousands of dollars.)

E


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

pkscout said:


> CableLabs will only certify an entire system, not a card.


BZZZZT. You lose one turn.



Stormspace said:


> This is the telling comment. It really isn't important to them to include MRV.


Well they included it anyways, they just turned it off. Will they ever turn it on? Who knows. They never did for the directv tivos. But that didn't stop a few motivated individuals...


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

btwyx said:


> That's half of the problem, its a poor solution. When there's actual digital data available, decoding and reencoding it is a bad thing. Also the poor man couldn't afford it, because it'd be very expensive. If you think you've seen *****ing about price now, try selling a box which had HD encoders.


Maybe I'm just being dense, it's happened before , but if a 500.00 LCD can have component inputs and the cost is in the screen, whats so expensive about capturing that output and redisplaying it? <hick>Learn Me</hick>


----------



## Shawn95GT (Oct 7, 2005)

Stormspace said:


> It would be nice if they could get a box that allowed component in and cable box control like the Series 2 to at least give us component quality shows on our HD sets. Kinda like a poor mans HD, but with TiVo.


It isn't component out, but I bet it looks better than your digital cable for the local channels:

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=291435

I've had this setup running close to a year now while I waited for the S3.


----------



## petew (Jul 31, 2003)

Jeanesco said:


> BZZZZT. You lose one turn.


No product from ATI has yet been certified by Cablelabs and without certification the product is dead in the water.


----------



## btwyx (Jan 16, 2003)

Stormspace said:


> Maybe I'm just being dense, it's happened before , but if a 500.00 LCD can have component inputs and the cost is in the screen, whats so expensive about capturing that output and redisplaying it? <hick>Learn Me</hick>


Compression, aka reencoding.

That component input is uncompressed, the panel turns it into a digital stream about about 625GB/hour. If you wanted to store 20 min of video, you could just store that. A 20 minute TiVo would be a be useless, so you have to encode/compress that data.

An encoder which can do real time compression on an uncompressed HD stream is an exotic thing. Its got to turn that 625GB/hour into about 8GB/hour to be reasonable. That's MPEG-2 or more likely MPEG-4 encoding. The cable an satellite people have these encoders, they only need one for each channel they broadcast so can spend 10's of thousands of dollars on each one. People tend to say if you want to do this on the desktop, it'll cost you a few $k for each encoder, and these don't do as good a job as the cable/satellite provider's version. Its just not a consumer item.

This is all pointless anyway, as all HD is delivered as a compressed digital stream. Its sent to you at about 4-8GB/hour, so you can just record that on your S3 TiVo hard drive and have a reasonable amount of space. To do what you want, that 8GB/hour is expanded to 625GB/hour sent to the TiVo, compressed to 8GB/hour. That apart from being pointless leads to a loss of quality.

Expensive, pointless and a bad idea. Now try to make that a product. There are companies which try that, I'm glad to say TiVo isn't one of them.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Stormspace said:


> Maybe I'm just being dense, it's happened before , but if a 500.00 LCD can have component inputs and the cost is in the screen, whats so expensive about capturing that output and redisplaying it? <hick>Learn Me</hick>


Compression. That component feed is a firehose of raw data. If you stored it on a drive as is - like D-VHS does - less than an hour on a 250GB drive. So you'd need to compress it. But to compress that volume of data on the fly you need very powerful hardware and a lot of RAM. The components exist, but cost thousands of dollars - they're used in professional gear.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

Stormspace said:


> Maybe I'm just being dense, it's happened before , but if a 500.00 LCD can have component inputs and the cost is in the screen, whats so expensive about capturing that output and redisplaying it? <hick>Learn Me</hick>


Do the math,: 720x1280x(24/8)x60 = 165,888,000 bytes/seconds to record raw video. That's 600 GB/hour. You need specialized, expensive hardware to do the 80/1 compression of MPEG-2 in realtime so that you can get something that can be saved on your disk.


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

petew said:


> No product from ATI has yet been certified by Cablelabs and without certification the product is dead in the water.





> *ATI is currently* the only manufacturer to have a *ready and certified* reference design, and they do say that it is possible that they will be the only one at launch.


http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2662

Another source:



> Well, well. Looks like this won't be as much of an issue as some thought. Apparently, ATI's OCUR (Open Cable Uni-directional Receiver) device will be certified and available for purchase the same time Windows Vista ships.


http://www.webpronews.com/blogtalk/blogtalk/wpn-58-20060131CableCARDOnlyForCertifiedMCEPCs.html


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

megazone said:


> If you stored it on a drive as is - like D-VHS does - less than an hour on a 250GB drive.


Actually D-VHS stores the compressed MPEG-2 data from the FireWire port. (encrypted using 5C encryption)

Dan


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Doh! I meant W-VHS.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

About the ATI card:


> The tuner is completely controlled by Windows Vista's media center interface, you don't have to treat it any differently once you've got it setup. Although protected by Vista's DRM, once on your machine you should be able to share the content throughout your network, however it has yet to be seen exactly how that's going to work. We would assume that you should at least be able to stream the content to any Xbox 360s on your network.


Strikingly familiar handwaving for a product not shipping yet.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

megazone said:


> Worst case would seem to be whatever DRM system Microsoft gets approved, TiVo uses.


I made the point several months ago related more broadly to TiVo's overall strategy that they need to play/integrate into the Vista/ViiV environment and not stay proprietary. This situation is turning out to be a big reason not to take a separate journey.



Leo Valiant said:


> Here's quote from Andrew Morrison, product manager for Series3 at TiVo regarding CableLabs to get certification for moving HD content outside of the set-top box.
> 
> "It may never happen, or it could be years away," Morrison said.


Big ouch.

If TiVo had simply said "Pending CableLabs Approval" regarding these features, would that have been wrong? If CL never approved wouldn't they be covered? If the process of approval had already begun, wouldn't this be a legitimate and sufficient comment?


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

This thing about consumer component in compression:

Has any company seriously contemplated developing consumer level devices? Has the feasibility of getting Broadcom or LSI or whoever to develop a chip within a high-end consumer price point been explored?

Bottom line: Do the chips not exist because it really is unfeasible even today to provide the processing power at reasonable cost, or do they not exist because not enough CE customers (ie. volume) have approached with a desire to have one to warrant their development?


----------



## btwyx (Jan 16, 2003)

HDTiVo said:


> Bottom line: Do the chips not exist because


Because its "pointless and a bad idea." Anywhere where HD component exists, it exists as compressed HD at the other end of the wire. Its a much more sensible idea to grab that.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

btwyx said:


> Because its "pointless and a bad idea." Anywhere where HD component exists, it exists as compressed HD at the other end of the wire. Its a much more sensible idea to grab that.


Except maybe when your screwed because of 100% dependence on Cablelabs and shut out of satellite...


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Even if such a device was made I'm sure Macrovision would step in and provide some hair brain scheme for "protecting" content recorded via component. It's a no win situation. If you want to record digital content then encryption and restrictions are a fact of life. 

Our only hope going forward is that some sort of DRM standard is established that will allow any company develope a device capable of recording the content and/or put that content onto a portable player for playback in a remote location. If that happens then the majority of both consumer and right holders concerns would be addressed. Although I don't ever expect that to happen as there are too many greedy corporations looking to make their DRM scheme the standard so that they can collect royalties. 

Dan


----------



## wmccain (Dec 16, 2002)

btwyx said:


> Because its "pointless and a bad idea." Anywhere where HD component exists, it exists as compressed HD at the other end of the wire. Its a much more sensible idea to grab that.


True, in principle. However, I have a big dish (C/Ku-band) satellite receiver and its HD decoder has only analog (component/RGBHV) outputs. No FireWire or any other source for the compressed digital data stream (although there _is_ a company that will open up the HD decoder and add a FireWire port, for a cost of about $2500).

Since big dish receivers are a "dead end" (DBS having taken away the consumer market), there will never be a future model of the big dish HD decoder that can (without expensive modification) deliver its MPEG2 data stream to a DVR. Yet, today, there are HD channels I get on the big dish that are as yet unavailable on DBS (Starz HD East & West, Wealth TV HD, Nebraska PBS, and the West feeds of HBO HD and Showtime HD). So, for _me_ (and the rest of the declining big dish market) a DVR with HD component inputs would _not_ be "pointless and a bad idea."

Actually, if the market were there (which it clearly is not, I know and admit that my needs are highly atypical), it probably would be possible to develop a consumer-affordable chip that does HD MPEG2/4 compression. When TiVo and ReplayTV were first introduced, in the late 1990s, doing _SD_ MPEG2 compression in a consumer product was definitely "pushing the envelope". (And they "had to do it", all their sources were analog NTSC, they had no SD MPEG2 data they could simply capture, as they did in the later DirecTiVo models.)

It is now about 8 years later, and given the usual technology price curve, an aggressive vendor could probably get the cost of HD compression down to an affordable price point. _If_ the market existed, which it does not ...


----------



## Gene S (Feb 11, 2003)

Just give me MRV so I can transfer shows from a S2 to a S3.
I have a hard enough time using TTG and converting Tivo files from a S2. Lord knows it going to be more painful with an HD S3 Tivo file!


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

wmccain said:


> _If_ the market existed, which it does not ...


There's no market for using a TiVo to record HD from a DISH or DirecTV box?

Wouldn't it have been nice if two years ago TiVo could have released a $999 S3 that recorded HD from Cable, DISH and DirecTV boxes? How about one year ago?



Dan203 said:


> Even if such a device was made I'm sure Macrovision would step in and provide some hair brain scheme for "protecting" content recorded via component.


I doubt it. OTA would not be affected. Individual cable channels would decide on a per show basis to use anything. So far, I don't see any significant use in the SD realm.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

Gene S said:


> Just give me MRV so I can transfer shows from a S2 to a S3.
> I have a hard enough time using TTG and converting Tivo files from a S2. Lord knows it going to be more painful with an HD S3 Tivo file!


 The S3 digital recordings are just encrypted copies of the mpeg2 transport streams (from OTA ATSC or QAM) so the only capability I would like TTG for is to dump that stream unencrypted onto a PC. I have plenty of tools to go from there to re-encode to something else if desired or simply just play back to my HDTV using DVI connection. There is NOTHING at all complicated about it for digital streams - it's easier than dealing with the traditional Tivo encoded mpeg2 streams from analog sources. And there's no reason it couldn't honor any 5C protection scheme already there - i.e. don't allow premium channels to be extracted but anything with no 5C protection is fair game. I sincerely doubt that complexity is holding it back - it's CableLabs approval that is the sticking point.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

HDTiVo said:


> I doubt it. OTA would not be affected. Individual cable channels would decide on a per show basis to use anything. So far, I don't see any significant use in the SD realm.


That same logic applies to the CableCARD device. TiVo could enable TTG right now for OTA and analog channels, provided their blocking logic support this type of filtering. The only thing that's of question is stuff recorded from digital cable.

Dan


----------



## dugbug (Dec 29, 2003)

Well TIVO (if you are listening):

I would move my lifetime over even though I loose a dvd burner... but only if I know MRV is in there (and works with series 2, even if not for cablecard recordings). But unless that gets announced prior to the expiration of the lifetime deal, I just can't justify it.

So tell us already!

-d


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> That same logic applies to the CableCARD device.


Yes it does, except for the need for CL approval anyway; but that's not the subject. If TiVo were free of CC dependence, ie. if TiVo were only in the process of introducing a follow on S3 product that added CC support, that would be a very different timing situation relative to getting CL approvals.



Dan203 said:


> Our only hope going forward is that some sort of DRM standard is established


That would be WMDRM.


----------



## wmccain (Dec 16, 2002)

HDTiVo said:



> There's no market for using a TiVo to record HD from a DISH or DirecTV box?


Sure there is, but solutions exist for _that_ market. You may not like the fact that the latest DirecTV DVRs are not designed by TiVo (I know _I_ regret it, as TiVo sets a high standard and no other box has ever even come close), and DISH's DVRs never _were_ TiVos, but at least you can buy an integrated multi-tuner receiver/DVR and it will "do the job". And since an integrated tuner/DVR records the original broadcast MPEG2/4 data stream, it is clearly technically superior to _any_ attempt to re-compress from the analog component video.

The market to which I was referring is the big dish market, which is small and getting smaller. This is the _only_ television delivery method available to consumers (nearly all the content providers still offer consumer subscriptions to their big dish feeds, believe it or not) for which no HD DVR of any kind is available (and probably never will be). (There is a guy who sells an SD DVR for big dish. It's actually a PC with an SD video capture board, and it can capture only the analog audio downmix on the Dolby Digital 5.1 channels.)



HDTiVo said:


> Wouldn't it have been nice if two years ago TiVo could have released a $999 S3 that recorded HD from Cable, DISH and DirecTV boxes? How about one year ago?


Yes, it would have been _more_ than nice, it would have been _wonderful_. I personally would have paid even twice that price for a TiVo that could capture HD from "any box" using analog component video (and an SPDIF input for the corresponding digital audio).

But, I am realistic. Unless somebody wanted it badly enough to drive down the price of an HD compression chip, it wasn't "in the stars". And, in fact, nobody wanted it badly enough. ATSC's MPEG2 is "in the clear", the DBS companies and the MSOs worked with manufacturers (including TiVo) to develop DVRs that can capture their digital data streams (some encrypted, some not), and the CableCard spec (and FCC mandate) enabled TiVo to do a cable DVR of their own. Only the declining big dish market was left "out in the cold", and that's really nothing to be surprised about.


----------



## JDguy (Jan 16, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> That's impossible, as the CableCARD 2.0 spec hasn't even been finalized yet. The hardware portion has been set, so it's possible for them to build CableCARD 2.0 compatible systems, but until the MSOs actually finish the software side and deploy the technology all that extra hardware will just be sitting there going to waste. In fact the MSOs are pushing to skip CableCARD 2.0 altogether. They've started development of a new downloadable encryption scheme that will make it so they don't have to deploy physical cards at all, and they're pushing hard for another extension so that they can get it ready before the integrated encryption ban goes into effect. If that happens then a CableCARD 2.0 compatible Vista machine will never do anything more then a S3 TiVo with regards to PPV, VOD and SDV.
> 
> Dan


Hmmm. I was wondering, what about these:
CableCARD Interface 2.0 Specification

CableLabs® Awards Qualification to Motorola Multi-Stream CableCARD

CableLabs® Awards Qualification to Scientific Atlanta for Multi-Stream CableCARD


----------



## JDguy (Jan 16, 2006)

Stu_Bee said:


> Which brings up the question...
> Is CableLabs going to have to approve every single additional feature proposed to be added to an S3.....every single software version upgrade..........


Hmmm. I guess those folks would have to be VERY busy to do evaluate every feature of every update to every product on the list:

Certified/Verified UDCP Product Liist

Seems unlikely.



Stu_Bee said:


> .....or just aspects that involve the CableLabs area of certification requirements?
> 
> Hopefully it's just the latter....which would then not require the Tivo2GoBack feature to sit in the cablelabs approval process mire.


Perhaps neither? I seem to recall that according to the FCC rules, only the first product had to be verified by CableLabs, after that products are "self-verified". Of course the product would still have to comply with the specs and the license, but what features it has, who would know or care?


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

lorelevitt said:


> ....
> 
> Second-- Cablelabs WILL NEVER .....REPEAT.....WILL NEVER approve TTG and most likely not MRV either. [Read in the voice of Lex Luther from Superman Returns] Cablelabs was established by the cable companies and it has been well documented in the press that they do not want to give up their lucrative source of income from the STB rentals or the use of PPV/On-Demand. Sure they have to approve the use of cable card in the S3 due to FCC cable card regulations but they have NO INCENTIVE to approve these features.
> 
> ...


it's not necessarily up to those 2. And that's the hope. THe fcc SHOULD have the final say and has already approved the tivo system for OTA broadcasts. UNless cablecabls can show that theirs some flaw that the FCC didn't think of (even though the NFL and the movie studios already tried to point flaws out to the fcc when tivo asked for approval...) then i dont know that they can stop MRV.

TTG in it's current form seems not so good.

Tivo has already proved to a point that the box itself is secure. If they win with MRV, then I'd guess they could allow TTG for analog, OTA, and unflagged diggital cable content.

If they rework it (basically redo it) to work with vista and intels Viiv (see http://www.tivo.com/cms_static/press_70.html) then it might even get approved for flagged cable content.

But that's what SHOULD happen- the FCC is cables sock puppet so who knows...


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

WHOOAA

read the press release I just linked.

TTG solved:



> application will also allow any content downloaded from a TiVo DVR to an Intel Viiv technology enabled device to be securely played back on certain compliant media adapters, which will be supported in a future planned release of the application.


_EDIT: could be a false alarm- check the dates says the release was supposed to drop first half of this year... sorry..._


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

Jeanesco said:


> Not entirely, unless of course tivo decides to make MRV on the S3 units incompatible with all other tivo units (e.g. MRV only works between S3 and S3.) It would be pretty easy to MRV a show from the S3 to an S2, and then extract it from there by use of a certain kernel mod. Many S2 units don't even require prom tinkering either in order to have extraction working.


I think the issue is only really in effect for FLAGGED digital cable content- which is all probably HD so it wouldn't be a big deal to keep flagged cable content within S3's.

Even assuming some of it is SD- then so be it- lock it to other S3's....


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

lorelevitt said:


> ...They knew damn well that it wouldn't be approved BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT EVEN GOING TO SUBMIT IT FOR APPROVAL.....


where do you get that from ?

there's a guy who posted a few times that he is on the cbale labs team currently investigating MRV and TTG.

Take an internet forum poster for what you will- but there's no way you can say they didn't submit it. CL has 180 days to review. assuming Tivo gave it to them when they gave them the S3 to approve, 180 days may not even be up yet.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

Leo Valiant said:


> Here's quote from Andrew Morrison, product manager for Series3 at TiVo regarding CableLabs to get certification for moving HD content outside of the set-top box.
> 
> "It may never happen, or it could be years away," Morrison said.
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/cmp/20060914/tc_cmp/193000353


good find-

OUTSIDE THE BOX.

Seems to be talking about TTG


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

HDTiVo said:


> This thing about consumer component in compression:
> 
> Has any company seriously contemplated developing consumer level devices? Has the feasibility of getting Broadcom or LSI or whoever to develop a chip within a high-end consumer price point been explored?
> 
> Bottom line: Do the chips not exist because it really is unfeasible even today to provide the processing power at reasonable cost, or do they not exist because not enough CE customers (ie. volume) have approached with a desire to have one to warrant their development?


i think they could do it now if they wanted.

there are camcorders that record HD to hard drives and SD cards. If a chip in a sub $1,000 camcorder can take the output from an imaging chip and encode it and write it to a drive, I dont see how they couldn't do it with component. Hell- You could buy a $500 HD LCD and stick the little camcorder at the perfect distance so it matches pixel for pixel (I know a stretch but humor the logic for a minute) andyou could record HD NOW. So why dont they take the LCD display and the image capture chip out of the loop and just feed the output of whatever feeds teh LCD to the sam pins that normally come out of the imaging chip and your done.

Am I missing something?


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

JDguy said:


> Hmmm. I was wondering, what about these:
> CableCARD Interface 2.0 Specification
> 
> CableLabs® Awards Qualification to Motorola Multi-Stream CableCARD
> ...


good sources- great place to read and see what is happeneing.

cablecard 2.0 is bi0directional.

Cablecard 1.0 is one way. The multistream cards are all one way (eg. 1.0) devices.

the 2.0 sopec is basically for the hardware. Notice it's not closed- so it's still a work in progress (although it's supposed to be safe for people to built hardware to the spec when it's at this point= "issued"). If I recall It basically says 2.0 STB's will have everything 1.0 stb's have plus firewire plus a doscis modem and more memory and more cpu. Tivo has all that but firewire and modem- but the spec isn't final so in theory they could remove the firewire and modem requirment to make it easier to build hardware since it wouldnt screw up any hardware already built to the spec. The big ugly fightr is over the software. that's in the OCAP spec. Cable made an OCAP 1.0 spec and the consumer electronics people basically refuse to build retail devices with that spec in place - some (panasonic off the top of my head) are building STB's for cable but gernally none of them want to spend the invenstment to build stuff to sell at best buy with the crappy software requirements of OCAP 1.0. The manufactureres and cable labs are negotiating OCAP 1.1 now in the hope of having a more reasonable spec so the manufactureres will build products.

I'm no expert, dt_dc is the residnet expert, so anyone who knows better feel free to correct or update my understanding...


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

JDguy said:


> Hmmm. I guess those folks would have to be VERY busy to do evaluate every feature of every update to every product on the list:
> 
> Certified/Verified UDCP Product Liist
> 
> ...


ding ding ding- I think your on to something. The first product Cable labs checks then after that the device maker can say they checked it themselves.

FOr instance the first model tivo send was a TCDxxx250A and cable labs approved it, then tivo submitted a TCDxxx250B that they verified themselves and is being sold now.

not sure how that works with software though.

I also know that cablecard tv's get firmware updates on a regular basis to fix differnt issues with cablecards. My friends panasonic needed a new firmware version to work with the brand cablecards we have around here. I wonder if cablelabs is checking each firmware update?


----------



## wmccain (Dec 16, 2002)

I find it hard to get as worked up as most of you over MRV and TTG. While I have four TiVos, I have never been able to use either feature anyway. No MRV because I have only one Series2 standalone box (the others are a Series1 standalone and two DirecTivos, SD and HD). No TTG because the server that I would want to use is a Mac (yes, I know they are working on TTG for the Mac but I haven't seen it yet). All the other PCs around my house run Win98SE, which does not support TTG either. (I have an XP machine, which I keep in a closet, as I despise that version. The XP machine is used only occasionally, to test my software products for XP compatibility.)

TTG doesn't have any appeal to me, anyway. (In fact, I avoided the whole HMO business until they reduced the price to exactly what I was willing to pay for it, which was zero.) MRV would be "nice", but I've had to live without it, so far, anyway ...

And I'm generally an "early adopter", I bought my first TiVo a few weeks after they first came out. In fact, I spent $1000 to special-order the 30-hour version, because none of the stores had anything but the 15-hour version!


----------



## JDguy (Jan 16, 2006)

MichaelK said:


> good sources- great place to read and see what is happeneing.
> 
> cablecard 2.0 is bi0directional.
> 
> ...


I think there is a misconception. I think that all cards are 2-way and the difference between 1.0 and 2.0 is single-stream vs multi-stream. But if the Host is not 2-way (OCAP) then it doesn't matter what card you put in, it will act as a one-way product. I wonder if dt_dc could opine on this?


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

JDguy said:


> I think there is a misconception. I think that all cards are 2-way and the difference between 1.0 and 2.0 is single-stream vs multi-stream. But if the Host is not 2-way (OCAP) then it doesn't matter what card you put in, it will act as a one-way product. I wonder if dt_dc could opine on this?


Oh, crap! Here it comes again.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

wmccain said:


> Sure there is, but solutions exist for _that_ market. You may not like the fact that the latest DirecTV DVRs are not designed by TiVo (I know _I_ regret it, as TiVo sets a high standard and no other box has ever even come close), and DISH's DVRs never _were_ TiVos, but at least you can buy an integrated multi-tuner receiver/DVR and it will "do the job". And since an integrated tuner/DVR records the original broadcast MPEG2/4 data stream, it is clearly technically superior to _any_ attempt to re-compress from the analog component video.


Solutions exist for cable; why build this S3? What makes fully digital recording the only criteria for superiority? All those solutions were in their infancy two years ago; fully digital could have been a blip compared to Brand Name and features.



> The market to which I was referring is the big dish market, which is small and getting smaller. This is the _only_ television delivery method available to consumers (nearly all the content providers still offer consumer subscriptions to their big dish feeds, believe it or not) for which no HD DVR of any kind is available (and probably never will be). (There is a guy who sells an SD DVR for big dish. It's actually a PC with an SD video capture board, and it can capture only the analog audio downmix on the Dolby Digital 5.1 channels.)


Not much point in even discussing that market.


> Yes, it would have been _more_ than nice, it would have been _wonderful_. I personally would have paid even twice that price for a TiVo that could capture HD from "any box" using analog component video (and an SPDIF input for the corresponding digital audio).
> 
> But, I am realistic. Unless somebody wanted it badly enough to drive down the price of an HD compression chip, it wasn't "in the stars". And, in fact, nobody wanted it badly enough.


Apparently you did. What do you know about the potential market size?



> ATSC's MPEG2 is "in the clear", the DBS companies and the MSOs worked with manufacturers (including TiVo) to develop DVRs that can capture their digital data streams (some encrypted, some not), and the CableCard spec (and FCC mandate) enabled TiVo to do a cable DVR of their own.


Precisely the reason for the predicament.


> I find it hard to get as worked up as most of you over MRV and TTG. While I have four TiVos, I have never been able to use either feature anyway. No MRV because I have only one Series2 standalone box (the others are a Series1 standalone and two DirecTivos, SD and HD). No TTG because the server that I would want to use is a Mac (yes, I know they are working on TTG for the Mac but I haven't seen it yet). All the other PCs around my house run Win98SE, which does not support TTG either. (I have an XP machine, which I keep in a closet, as I despise that version. The XP machine is used only occasionally, to test my software products for XP compatibility.)
> 
> TTG doesn't have any appeal to me, anyway. (In fact, I avoided the whole HMO business until they reduced the price to exactly what I was willing to pay for it, which was zero.) MRV would be "nice", but I've had to live without it, so far, anyway ...
> 
> And I'm generally an "early adopter", I bought my first TiVo a few weeks after they first came out. In fact, I spent $1000 to special-order the 30-hour version, because none of the stores had anything but the 15-hour version!


I think you are responding from a narrow and rare personal perspective. Its much more interesting to think about most of the market.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

JDguy said:


> Hmmm. I was wondering, what about these:
> CableCARD Interface 2.0 Specification
> 
> CableLabs® Awards Qualification to Motorola Multi-Stream CableCARD
> ...


If you look at the CC2.0 spec you will see that it is "Issued" and NOT "Closed". This means that the hardware side of things is complete and manufacturers can start building CC2.0 compatible hardware. However until it's "Closed" the software side is not finished and no MSO is going to deploy it.

As for the cards... Multi-Stream does NOT equal CC2.0! CC2.0 is a platform which consists of multiple peices of hardware which allow not only multi-stream processing, but also bidirectional communication. The cards themselves do NOT do the communication part. In fact the TiVo Series 3 is compatible with mutli-stream CableCARDs but it's not CC2.0 compatible as it doesn't have the other hardware required to do bidirectional communication.

Also, FYI, there is absolutely no mandate in place that says the MSOs have to deploy CC2.0 when it's finished. The ONLY hope we have is that they will deploy it for simplicties sake when the integration ban kicks in next year. However if the FCC grants them another extension like they're requesting then CC2.0 may never even see the light of day. (the MSOs are pushing for an extension so they can skip CC2.0 for a new downloadable encryption system that does not require a physical card to be deployed)

Dan


----------



## wmccain (Dec 16, 2002)

HDTiVo said:


> Not much point in even discussing that market.


Not for the "masses", but there is for _me_. I was able to "cut out the cable company" (and get markedly superior reception) _years_ before the first DBS systems came to market. (And I nowadays have a small dish, too, in addition to two big ones.) More significantly, besides the extra HDTV feeds that I mentioned before, I get 26 different HBO/Cinemax feeds, 24 different Showtime/TMC feeds, and 27 different Starz/Encore feeds. Try finding a DBS or cable system that carries anywhere _near_ that many!



HDTiVo said:


> Apparently you did. What do you know about the potential market size?


Hard to say exactly. If you consider just the "unaddressed market" (big dish) then it is small and getting smaller. On the other hand, the _potential_ market for a "universal" HD DVR (that works off an analog video feed or perhaps HDMI rather than having internal, integrated tuners) could have been vast, if such a device had come to market soon enough (and cheap enough). _Now_, however, the market is "carved up" by all the integrated (and proprietary) DVR boxes.

Another factor, which probably had a lot to do with nobody seriously considering a "universal" HD DVR, is that the movie studios are dead-set against anybody re-digitizing their HD content via the "analog loophole". They have even introduced bills in Congress in a (so far vain) attempt to make this illegal.


----------



## lgerbarg (Jun 26, 2000)

MichaelK said:


> good sources- great place to read and see what is happeneing.
> 
> cablecard 2.0 is bi0directional.
> 
> ...


You can't remove DOCSIS from the spec and magically make current 1.0 devices capable of 2.0 style stuff. The 2.0 standard includes DOCSIS so that the card can use the modem to send back data.

<insane theory>

If you look at Megazone's pictures there is a Xilinx Spartan 3 XC3S200. Xilinx also also offers a DOCSIS softcore compatible with the Spartan 3 line. The FPGA is large enough to hold it, depending on what else the FPGA is being used for. So it *might* be possible to software update the S3 to hardware platform compatible with CC 2.0. Is firewire actually required on commercial STBs, or just cable company provided STBs?

</insane theory>


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

wmccain said:


> Not for the "masses", but there is for _me_. I was able to "cut out the cable company" (and get markedly superior reception) _years_ before the first DBS systems came to market. (And I nowadays have a small dish, too, in addition to two big ones.) More significantly, besides the extra HDTV feeds that I mentioned before, I get 26 different HBO/Cinemax feeds, 24 different Showtime/TMC feeds, and 27 different Starz/Encore feeds. Try finding a DBS or cable system that carries anywhere _near_ that many!
> 
> Hard to say exactly. If you consider just the "unaddressed market" (big dish) then it is small and getting smaller. On the other hand, the _potential_ market for a "universal" HD DVR (that works off an analog video feed or perhaps HDMI rather than having internal, integrated tuners) could have been vast, if such a device had come to market soon enough (and cheap enough). _Now_, however, the market is "carved up" by all the integrated (and proprietary) DVR boxes.
> 
> Another factor, which probably had a lot to do with nobody seriously considering a "universal" HD DVR, is that the movie studios are dead-set against anybody re-digitizing their HD content via the "analog loophole". They have even introduced bills in Congress in a (so far vain) attempt to make this illegal.


Yes, you have quite a choice there. It is a shame there is no HD recorder for that. Have you tried the trick of recording anamorphic output from your big dish box?

Now is getting late to introduce an analog HD-DVR. One year ago, OK. Two years ago, great.


----------



## Jeanesco (Dec 29, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> a new downloadable encryption system that does not require a physical card to be deployed


IMO that is going to be a joke. The satellite providers learned years ago why this is a bad idea.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

lgerbarg said:


> You can't remove DOCSIS from the spec and magically make current 1.0 devices capable of 2.0 style stuff. The 2.0 standard includes DOCSIS so that the card can use the modem to send back data.
> 
> <insane theory>
> 
> ...


Or put the DOCSIS modem in a USB peripheral that's a later add on, the CC 1.0 is a passive device, so it can't interfere with anything going back. Getting the specification to require head ends to honor 'upgrades' of a CC 1.0 card ID to a CC 2.0 protocol (or hybrid) is probably more of a challenge than that technical issue.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

MichaelK said:


> WHOOAA
> 
> read the press release I just linked.
> 
> ...


It also specifically mentioned the S2. No mention of S3's.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

JDguy said:


> I think there is a misconception. I think that all cards are 2-way and the difference between 1.0 and 2.0 is single-stream vs multi-stream. But if the Host is not 2-way (OCAP) then it doesn't matter what card you put in, it will act as a one-way product. I wonder if dt_dc could opine on this?


I actually beleive you are correct-

dt-dc?


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

lgerbarg said:


> You can't remove DOCSIS from the spec and magically make current 1.0 devices capable of 2.0 style stuff. The 2.0 standard includes DOCSIS so that the card can use the modem to send back data.
> ....>


I generally agree, but i guess there's a TINY hope that the backhaul could go via ethernet to the house's cablemodem.

Tiny chance- yes, but i can dream cant i? LOL


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

lgerbarg said:


> ....
> 
> <insane theory>
> 
> ...


keep hope alive!


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

FireWire is required by the CC2.0 spec, so they'd have to add that some how. That being said CableCARD slots are technically just PCMCIA slots, so it's possible they could offer FireWire via an add-in PCMCIA card or breakout box which connects to the extra CableCARD slot. (CC2.0 cards are all multi-stream, so you'll only need one slot)

Dan


----------



## JDguy (Jan 16, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> If you look at the CC2.0 spec you will see that it is "Issued" and NOT "Closed". This means that the hardware side of things is complete and manufacturers can start building CC2.0 compatible hardware. However until it's "Closed" the software side is not finished and no MSO is going to deploy it.


Sorry Dan you're mistaken. Closed is for obsolete specifications that are not being used any longer. The software is defined by OCAP specifications, which are also "Issued."



Dan203 said:


> As for the cards... Multi-Stream does NOT equal CC2.0! CC2.0 is a platform which consists of multiple peices of hardware which allow not only multi-stream processing, but also bidirectional communication. The cards themselves do NOT do the communication part. In fact the TiVo Series 3 is compatible with mutli-stream CableCARDs but it's not CC2.0 compatible as it doesn't have the other hardware required to do bidirectional communication.


Not exactly. There are only two types of CableCARDs, type 1: equals Single-stream. This has been around since "J2K" or July 2000. Also called an "S-Card". These cards indeed support two-way services and use either legacy (DAVIC or Aloha) return signalling or DSG (DOCSIS Settop Gateway) return.

The second type of card is a multi-stream card or "M-CARD" These use an entrirely different pinout and logical interface. The data rate on the bus is much higher to support up to 6 full 38 Mbps transport streams. Another major difference is that a new copy protection encryption is used on the M-CARDs that uses 3xDES, while the older S-CARDs used single-DES. The M-Card also must be able to operate in a backward compatible mode, meaning it can switch back to the S-Mode. This card is also two-way but the main advantage is, it allows watch & record with one card.

And yes, the cards completely control the communications, while the 2-way host (OpenCable Host-2.0) has the reverse transmitter, which is totally under control of the Card. Either card can work in a one-way Host.

You can't go by Wikipedia when you want to know about CableCARDs, you should really go to the source.



Dan203 said:


> Also, FYI, there is absolutely no mandate in place that says the MSOs have to deploy CC2.0 when it's finished. The ONLY hope we have is that they will deploy it for simplicties sake when the integration ban kicks in next year. However if the FCC grants them another extension like they're requesting then CC2.0 may never even see the light of day. (the MSOs are pushing for an extension so they can skip CC2.0 for a new downloadable encryption system that does not require a physical card to be deployed)
> 
> Dan


(It is finished!) But true, there is no mandate as to which type of card they deploy, it is simply a business issue. But the higher level of security will be a strong motivation.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

JDguy said:


> ...
> 
> (It is finished!) But true, there is no mandate as to which type of card they deploy, it is simply a business issue. But the higher level of security will be a strong motivation.


here's hoping the pirates crack the first one ASAP!


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

JDguy said:


> Sorry Dan you're mistaken. Closed is for obsolete specifications that are not being used any longer. The software is defined by OCAP specifications, which are also "Issued."


Wrong! Here are the definitions from the very spec that you linked to...



> *Work in Progress* - An incomplete document, designed to guide discussion and generate feedback, which may include several alternative requirements for
> consideration.
> *Draft* - A document in specification format considered largely complete, but
> lacking review by Members and vendors. Drafts are susceptible to substantial change during the review process.
> ...


As you can see the spec isn't finished until it's "Closed". CableCARD 2.0 will NOT be deployed by any cable company until that spec is listed as "Closed", and even then, as I said above, there is nothing forcing them to do that.

Dan


----------



## JDguy (Jan 16, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> Wrong! Here are the definitions from the very spec that you linked to...
> 
> As you can see the spec isn't finished until it's "Closed". CableCARD 2.0 will NOT be deployed by any cable company until that spec is listed as "Closed", and even then, as I said above, there is nothing forcing them to do that.
> 
> Dan


Dan,
I can see how one could make that assumption. I guess by "finished" you probably mean the same thing I mean by "no longer being used"? I think that when a spec is Closed, it means new products are not being designed to this any longer. I'm not suggesting it means the products are no longer in the field. All the specs that define products that are currently being designed and deployed are classified as "Issued" specs. Those are the specs on the main pages.

Since there is far more history in the CableModem space, take a look at this link  to see examples of DOCSIS specs that are closed.

Can you think of an example of any new products being designed to Closed specifications?


----------



## lgerbarg (Jun 26, 2000)

vman41 said:


> Or put the DOCSIS modem in a USB peripheral that's a later add on, the CC 1.0 is a passive device, so it can't interfere with anything going back. Getting the specification to require head ends to honor 'upgrades' of a CC 1.0 card ID to a CC 2.0 protocol (or hybrid) is probably more of a challenge than that technical issue.


I would assume any sort of 1.0->2.0 device upgrade would invalidate the card being married to the machine, and you would need to swap out the cards for new ones. It would almost necessarily be like setting up a whole new device.


----------



## lgerbarg (Jun 26, 2000)

Dan203 said:


> FireWire is required by the CC2.0 spec, so they'd have to add that some how. That being said CableCARD slots are technically just PCMCIA slots, so it's possible they could offer FireWire via an add-in PCMCIA card or breakout box which connects to the extra CableCARD slot. (CC2.0 cards are all multi-stream, so you'll only need one slot)
> 
> Dan


They are physically PCMCIA slots. I seriously doubt they are full fledged wired Cardbus compliant slots (all Firewire cards are actually Cardbus, not PCMCIA).

Firewire is not a tehcnical hurdle to the CC 2.0 two way requirement, and its usage is strictly optional from an end user stand point. If TiVo really does have a unique relationship with CableLabs (as implied by their discussion of MRV) it is conceivable there might be an exception process for something like Firewire.

Anyway, this is all pie in the sky. You should buy the device based on what it does today, I am just saying there is a lot of possibilities under the hood, don't count TiVo out so quickly.


----------



## petew (Jul 31, 2003)

Gene S said:


> Just give me MRV so I can transfer shows from a S2 to a S3.
> I have a hard enough time using TTG and converting Tivo files from a S2. Lord knows it going to be more painful with an HD S3 Tivo file!


I agree. I'm quessing that when Tivo couldn't get CableLabs cert for MRV they just disabled the entire module as a quick fix solution. Hopefully Tivo will be able to add transfers in to the Series 3 in the next release even if Transfers out are still prohibited.

If I get a Series 3 it will be for a HDTV and will primarily record HD content which I would only watch from the series 3, so transfering out is not a big deal. What I'd really like to do though is be able to transfer in SD content from the other Tivo's


----------



## petew (Jul 31, 2003)

JDguy said:


> Can you think of an example of any new products being designed to Closed specifications?


How about the Tivo Series 3! It's built to the CC 1.0 and CC MUlti Steam specs both of which are closed.

Also no CableCo ahs yet released Multi Stream Cable Cards yet the spec has been closed for over a year.


----------



## Shawn95GT (Oct 7, 2005)

petew said:


> If I get a Series 3 it will be for a HDTV and will primarily record HD content which I would only watch from the series 3, so transfering out is not a big deal. What I'd really like to do though is be able to transfer in SD content from the other Tivo's


+1 here.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

JDguy said:


> Dan,
> I can see how one could make that assumption. I guess by "finished" you probably mean the same thing I mean by "no longer being used"? I think that when a spec is Closed, it means new products are not being designed to this any longer. I'm not suggesting it means the products are no longer in the field. All the specs that define products that are currently being designed and deployed are classified as "Issued" specs. Those are the specs on the main pages.
> 
> Since there is far more history in the CableModem space, take a look at this link  to see examples of DOCSIS specs that are closed.
> ...


Here is a better definition of the Closed status from the OCUR specification...



> *Closed* - A static document, reviewed, tested, validated, and closed to further engineering change requests to the specification through CableLabs.


Closed does NOT mean the spec is no longer used. It means that they can no longer make changes to the specification and as such it is set in stone and safe to deploy for general use. When CableCARD 2.0 is Closed it will be deployed by MSOs. As it is right now they're still fighting with CE companies over the OCAP implimentation. The current OCAP implimentation gives cable companies complete control over software on the host device. The CE companies want a simple protocol that allows them to use their own software to access the advanced features offered by the CC2.0 spec. From what I hear CableLabs is working on a new version of OCAP which wil provide the flexibility the CE companies want and that will ultimately allow them to agree on CC2.0. Once that happens then the spec will be Closed and MSOs can start to deploy CC2.0 in the field. (if they want to)

Dan


----------



## wmccain (Dec 16, 2002)

HDTiVo said:


> Yes, you have quite a choice there. It is a shame there is no HD recorder for that. Have you tried the trick of recording anamorphic output from your big dish box?


No, but I could if I wanted to. Since I get most of the same HD movie channels (except Starz) on my small dish, I use an HR10-250 to record them.

I do have a standalone Series2 TiVo set up to record the 77-or-so SD movie channels from the big dish. This is complex, since dish movement is involved, and I have programmed an AMX controller to emulate a cable box for the TiVo.


----------



## jjarmoc (Sep 15, 2006)

petew said:


> If I get a Series 3 it will be for a HDTV and will primarily record HD content which I would only watch from the series 3, so transfering out is not a big deal. What I'd really like to do though is be able to transfer in SD content from the other Tivo's


I don't care much about MRV personally, but I reall want TivoToGo so I can sync shows to an ipod w/ video. I know it won't support HD res, but I'm hoping either the tivo, or a PC/Mac can do the downconversion.


----------



## JDguy (Jan 16, 2006)

petew said:


> How about the Tivo Series 3! It's built to the CC 1.0 and CC MUlti Steam specs both of which are closed.
> 
> Also no CableCo ahs yet released Multi Stream Cable Cards yet the spec has been closed for over a year.


Actually, Tivo S3 is built to the FCC requirements defined by something called the "Joint Test Suite".

Multistream Cable Card spec = CCIF-2.0, which is Issued, not Closed.



Dan203 said:


> When CableCARD 2.0 is Closed it will be deployed by MSOs. As it is right now they're still fighting with CE companies over the OCAP implimentation. The current OCAP implimentation gives cable companies complete control over software on the host device. The CE companies want a simple protocol that allows them to use their own software to access the advanced features offered by the CC2.0 spec.


I guess time will tell. It seems like they have to deploy something soon with the July 2007 deadlines looming. I guess we'll wait to see what it is. They surely don't need to get any CE approval to deploy cablecards or ocap in their own boxes....


----------



## ADent (Jan 7, 2000)

Dan203 said:


> Also, FYI, there is absolutely no mandate in place that says the MSOs have to deploy CC2.0 when it's finished.


Correct. But IF they are forced to use standard CC cards then they have to implement CC2.0 or turn off PPV and VOD. Those are money makers.

Of course the first if is a big one.


----------



## petew (Jul 31, 2003)

JDguy said:


> Actually, Tivo S3 is built to the FCC requirements defined by something called the "Joint Test Suite".
> 
> Multistream Cable Card spec = CCIF-2.0, which is Issued, not Closed.


The first doc is a testing checklist not a specification, the second Doc is the CableCard 2.0 spec. MultiStream is here which is closed and is not the same is CC 2.0


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

AJRitz said:


> Yep folks - sounds like the focus of our dismay really needs to be on CableLabs. They're insulated from consumers, because they don't make any direct to consumers products. Time to start contacting CableLabs and let them know that they're impacting their clients (the cable companies) by dragging their feet on MRV approvals. If MRV was ready to go, I'd be jumping into the cable world with both feet - top end HD package and four cable cards. But with MRV slow in coming, I'll stick with my much more limited cable account (which I'd drop entirely if I could get my HD locals OTA, but I'm screwed by a combination of distance and living in a valley).
> 
> CableLabs will take their time until someone makes them understand that this issue matters. Because it certainly doesn't matter to them (at least not in terms of the existence of MRV being important, outside of the context of paranoid levels of content protection).


Thats exactly why I wrote all of my congressmen, Senators, The FCC, The govenor of Texas... ETc... To get them to pass legislation making MRV fully legal & a requirment of all future DVR's. HD or not.

I am getting sick & tired of CopyRight BS. I am tired of a company tell me when, where & how I can watch their show's. I am going to watch them my way or not at all. If Im not watching their show. then I am not watching their Commercials either..

All I can say folks... Write your Senators, Congressmen, & the FCC to pass legislation to Push MRV and TTG along.

There is also the use of the SLINGBOX... I have my Tivo hooked up to a Slingbox... Works great over the internet!

TexasGrillChef..... Grilling the World away...


----------



## TexasGrillChef (Sep 15, 2006)

In regards to TTG... here is a work around for those with PDA phones, PSP's, Ipods etc....

I pass the show to my DVD-Recorder (480p) take the DVD to my computer and "Rip" the video to the computer. Then using Intervideo Copy (Version 5) I convert for use to my PSP, Ipod, or PDA phone.

I also just bought me a MCE computer that will take the show from Tivo, Digitize it & convert it for use on a PDA phone, PSP, or Ipod. All in "real-time" that the show takes to view.

Slow yes.. but it works! (For ALL channels)

HD channels will be in Widescreen with black bars though. I use the S-Video out of the Tivo into the DVD recorder or my MCE computer.

TexasGrillChef.... Grilling the world away....


----------



## wmccain (Dec 16, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> FireWire is required by the CC2.0 spec, so they'd have to add that some how.


What exactly is the intended _usage_ of a FireWire port in CC2.0? It's certainly not for communication back to the cable company ... and now that HDMI is in place, few if any displays could use it (they would have to have their own MPEG2 decoders).

D-VHS?


----------



## JDguy (Jan 16, 2006)

petew said:


> The first doc is a testing checklist not a specification, the second Doc is the CableCard 2.0 spec. MultiStream is here which is closed and is not the same is CC 2.0


There is no CableLabs "spec" for the Plug & Play products. The only requirements are defined by the JTS. After the fact, an SCTE standard was written to document the UDCP spec, it was submitted by CableLabs, but is now an ANSI Standard , not a CableLabs spec.

I see the confusion. The spec you point to is closed indeed. I think nothing was ever built to that version of the spec. It is obsolete and was merged with the former singlestream card spec (CCIF-1.0) into what is now the CCIF-2.0 spec. That spec includes BOTH single-stream and multi-stream modes. All prior editions are obsolete. But from the info on their site, how are you supposed to know that?



wmccain said:


> What exactly is the intended usage of a FireWire port in CC2.0?


So I must be confused  Since there is no Firwire/1394 requirements in CCIF-2.0 , or in CCCP-2.0 you must mean something else when you abrieviate it "CC2.0" What do you mean and what is the abrieviation?


----------



## wmccain (Dec 16, 2002)

JDguy said:


> So I must be confused  Since there is no Firwire/1394 requirements in ... you must mean something else when you abrieviate it "CC2.0" What do you mean and what is the abrieviation?


Numerous previous posts from Dan203 and others have claimed that a FireWire port is a requirement of the "CableCard 2.0" spec (and "CC2.0" is their abbreviation, not mine). I have not looked at the actual specs to which you have posted links, and perhaps the previous posters are mistaken. But if they are correct, what is the intended purpose of having a FireWire port?

I note that I have a Sharp Aquos LCD TV that supports a CableCard (although obviously not at the 2.0 level) and this TV does indeed have a FireWire port. Its documented purpose is for the connection of "D-VHS decks, AV-HDD recorders and Blu-ray Disc Recorders" (I am quoting from the manual).

Requiring support for external recorders would seem to me to be "rather strange" for a spec from an organization whose main purpose seems to be "content protection" ...


----------



## TechDreamer (Jan 27, 2002)

The Firewire port was mandated by the FCC. This was the reason I was able to get firewire on my STB from Time Warner. I have been recording in the clear HDTV to my MCE machine ever since. The thing I don't understand though is why Firewire isn't on CableCard 1 devices.


----------



## MediaLivingRoom (Dec 10, 2002)

TiVoPony said:


> Glad you're all excited about the S3. It's a great product...you're going to love it.
> 
> I have read some confusion (and some really outstandingly silly thread titles) this morning about Multi-Room Viewing and TiVoToGo. Let me offer some perspective. Then you can decide whether your glass is 'half empty' or 'half full'.
> 
> ...


What about ESATA, in an interview you said ESATA was coming....http://www.gearlive.com/videocast/gearlivetivoseries3.mp4


----------



## Tippy (Oct 12, 2004)

TiVoPony said:


> MRV and TTG on the Series3 product is just as cool, and we want them just as much, and they definitely make life a little better. But...in this case it's not the FCC that decides, it's CableLabs. And while we continue to work with CableLabs, and are optimistic they'll allow us to support these features, they haven't for this initial software release. It's not that we failed to meet a spec, or failed to talk to the right people, or missed a date - rather, we are trying to provide functionality that is unique in the industry, and CableLabs has not been able to give us their blessing yet. This sort of functionality is not supported by any CableCard product today.
> 
> We're working on it. We know it's popular. But without CableLab's blessing, cable companies wouldn't give you a CableCard for your Series3. So...we could sell you a pretty box, but it wouldn't record your shows. Getting a dual tuner, high def box out now, and continuing to push forward for CableLabs certification of MRV and TTG is the choice we've had to make today.
> 
> ...


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Its not our software, its an issue with Windows.

Its not an issue with Windows, its an issue with your video card.

Its not an issue with our video card, its an issue with your PC.

Its not an issue with our PC its an issue with their software.

Its not our software, its an issue with Windows.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

TexasGrillChef said:


> I am getting sick & tired of CopyRight BS.


I think the best reply to this is "tough luck." Yes, you can choose to deprive yourself of all the entertainment choices available for the very fine entertainment equipment you've purchased, but are you really serving yourself well doing that?


----------



## Tippy (Oct 12, 2004)

Just wanted to get this back on the radar screen. Anything new with the MRV and TTG battle with CableLabs? This is a pretty important feature for me (and others, I assume) and I was wondering why CableLabs referred me directly back to TiVo (see my post above).

Tippy


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Tippy said:


> Just wanted to get this back on the radar screen. Anything new with the MRV and TTG battle with CableLabs? This is a pretty important feature for me (and others, I assume) and I was wondering why CableLabs referred me directly back to TiVo (see my post above).


Because it is a TiVo product, not a Cable Labs product. CL is NEVER going to comment on some vendor's product, it is not their place to do so, period. Most vendors would stomp on them for saying anything about one of their products.


----------



## MediaLivingRoom (Dec 10, 2002)

It seems that this will only be resolved after Dec 31


----------



## Gene S (Feb 11, 2003)

MediaLivingRoom said:


> It seems that this will only be resolved after Dec 31


What makes you say that?


----------



## TiVoPony (May 12, 2002)

Leo Valiant said:


> Here's quote from Andrew Morrison, product manager for Series3 at TiVo regarding CableLabs to get certification for moving HD content outside of the set-top box.
> 
> "It may never happen, or it could be years away," Morrison said.
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/cmp/20060914/tc_cmp/193000353


I spoke with Andrew about this last week at the CEDIA show. There's missing context around that quote.

The reporter from TechWeb was advocating rather strongly that he wants to be able to shuttle High Def movies around on his network without any encryption/DRM, and have the freedom to burn those movies to his blu-ray burner. He asked Andrew when that would be possible.

Andrew replied, "That may never happen, or it could be years away".

Context is important, isn't it...

He was *not* referring to either MRV or TTG.

Cheers,
Pony

[edit - somehow I typed the same thing twice in one sentence. fixed.]


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

Interesting. So what's the real scoop on those two items then?


----------



## MediaLivingRoom (Dec 10, 2002)

Gene S said:


> What makes you say that?


If it was ready it would have been release with the product in Sept. If there is a need to add the function later... since all the package/marketing materials are prepared for the holiday season... why confuse the customers with new packaging and major selling points for the sales staff (TIVO, BestBuy, CC, etc...).

Even if offically, CableLabs approves it now or in Oct. TiVo will hold on it, because all the training for the S3 will need to be added again to the local retailers sales staff.

It makes sence from a cost and dollars to either release the product with those features now or wait until after Dec 31. Then new sales material can be created. also most holidays during Nov and Dec will prevent an introduction during the same time frame.


----------



## ncarty97 (Sep 13, 2004)

I fully understand that Tivo is hamstrung by CableLabs concerning Tivo2Go, et al.

They had to know this was going to happen however.

So why not put a firewire port on the box? The FCC has madated that these things be allowed on Cable Company DVR's, right? 

I've had one on both my DVR's from RCN and they are fairly easy to use and completely legal. It would have been a nice stop=gap until the CableLabs issue is resolved.


----------



## TiVoPony (May 12, 2002)

Stormspace said:


> Interesting. So what's the real scoop on those two items then?


That is covered in the very first post in this thread.

Cheers,
Pony


----------



## tunnelengineer (Jul 21, 2006)

good reply pony.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

MediaLivingRoom said:


> If it was ready it would have been release with the product in Sept. If there is a need to add the function later... since all the package/marketing materials are prepared for the holiday season... why confuse the customers with new packaging and major selling points for the sales staff (TIVO, BestBuy, CC, etc...).
> 
> Even if offically, CableLabs approves it now or in Oct. TiVo will hold on it, because all the training for the S3 will need to be added again to the local retailers sales staff.
> 
> It makes sence from a cost and dollars to either release the product with those features now or wait until after Dec 31. Then new sales material can be created. also most holidays during Nov and Dec will prevent an introduction during the same time frame.


I dont disagree that it might take a while (if at all)-

but your reasons are interesting for sure. First off- what sales staff training are you talking about- the Drones at BB and CC know basically nothing?

WHy do you need to reprint materials or train anyone on new feautres? Just ignore it. People will see the message announcing it when the software is downloaded to the box. I would suspect that at this point being 800 bucks the vast majority of buyers are previous owners of tivo or have researched the stuffing out of them so they alreayd likely know about MRV and wont need much explaining.

The support staff already understands MRV for S2 so they dont need mountains of training either.

All that stuff could be added into anuy decision but I doubt they are overwelming issues.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

TiVoPony said:


> That is covered in the very first post in this thread.
> 
> Cheers,
> Pony


made me laugh!

you ever work for the government?

"i can neither confirm nor deny that nuclear weapons, er ah I mean mrv enabled tivo's, exist at this lab or any other government facility"


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

MediaLivingRoom said:


> If it was ready it would have been release with the product in Sept. If there is a need to add the function later... since all the package/marketing materials are prepared for the holiday season... why confuse the customers with new packaging and major selling points for the sales staff (TIVO, BestBuy, CC, etc...).
> 
> Even if offically, CableLabs approves it now or in Oct. TiVo will hold on it, because all the training for the S3 will need to be added again to the local retailers sales staff.
> 
> It makes sence from a cost and dollars to either release the product with those features now or wait until after Dec 31. Then new sales material can be created. also most holidays during Nov and Dec will prevent an introduction during the same time frame.


they will release it in an update if they release it and the boxes and product info will be updated as it goes through the supply chain. They did not wiat to relase TTG on S2 until they had all the boxes changed.

Change the website tell the retail guys what they can include in the flyers and off you go.


----------



## etsolow (Feb 8, 2001)

> If MRV & TTG today are a must-have for you on Series3, and you want to wait...wait. It's ok. But you'll be missing out on the absolutely best dual tuner HD DVR on the planet.


Well let me just be a data point here: I'll buy my second S3 as soon as MRV/TTG/TTCB are available... get on it!


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

MediaLivingRoom said:


> If it was ready it would have been release with the product in Sept. If there is a need to add the function later... since all the package/marketing materials are prepared for the holiday season... why confuse the customers with new packaging and major selling points for the sales staff (TIVO, BestBuy, CC, etc...).
> 
> Even if offically, CableLabs approves it now or in Oct. TiVo will hold on it, because all the training for the S3 will need to be added again to the local retailers sales staff.
> 
> It makes sence from a cost and dollars to either release the product with those features now or wait until after Dec 31. Then new sales material can be created. also most holidays during Nov and Dec will prevent an introduction during the same time frame.


Going by their track record, if TiVo got the "ok", they would release MRV before its even ready 

They certainly aren't prone to holding back features that can sell a product. If anything they will release a halfway working version just so they can put out a press release about the new feature.


----------



## Brainiac 5 (Aug 25, 2003)

rainwater said:


> They certainly aren't prone to holding back features that can sell a product. If anything they will release a halfway working version just so they can put out a press release about the new feature.


I'm not sure if this is the same TiVo I'm familiar with...? The TiVo I know puts out the press release _before_ the new feature or product is available. Sometimes _way_ before (Series 3). Sometimes the feature never comes out (Teach TiVo?). Therefore, there's no reason for them to rush anything to market so that they can put out a press release.

I don't mean that as a criticism of TiVo - I'm happy to know what's coming in the future. I'm just mentioning it because I think it's odd that there are some who think TiVo rushes things out, while others of us are agonizing over how long it takes to get any new feature.

(Of course, all the anticipation made it much more exciting when I received my Series 3 just about a half hour ago!!)


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Brainiac 5 said:


> I'm not sure if this is the same TiVo I'm familiar with...?


Well, are you familiar with the TiVo that takes agonizingly long to do anything, and then rushes it out anyway?


----------



## Brainiac 5 (Aug 25, 2003)

HDTiVo said:


> Well, are you familiar with the TiVo that takes agonizingly long to do anything, and then rushes it out anyway?


Oh, _that_ TiVo...


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

Brainiac 5 said:


> I'm not sure if this is the same TiVo I'm familiar with...? The TiVo I know puts out the press release _before_ the new feature or product is available. Sometimes _way_ before (Series 3). Sometimes the feature never comes out (Teach TiVo?). Therefore, there's no reason for them to rush anything to market so that they can put out a press release.
> 
> I don't mean that as a criticism of TiVo - I'm happy to know what's coming in the future. I'm just mentioning it because I think it's odd that there are some who think TiVo rushes things out, while others of us are agonizing over how long it takes to get any new feature.
> 
> (Of course, all the anticipation made it much more exciting when I received my Series 3 just about a half hour ago!!)


The KidZone and TTG releases were put out way before they were ready. I expect MRV will be the same thing if they get approval.


----------



## Stu_Bee (Jan 15, 2002)

Stu_Bee said:


> I thought the ESATA drive not being enabled was due to the same CableLabs certification process. ie. allowing videos to be placed on a removable/portable drive.





ah30k said:


> The drive issue is not Cable Labs related. All content on the hard disks must be encrypted so there is no real issue with the drives being removable. The Cable Labs regulations are *incredibly* tight on this. All data paths for unencrypted digital video must be inaccessable. This means even at the board level. All traces carry unencrypted video must be burried in middle trace layers and chips that I/O with it must not have accessable pin outs.


======
Turns out I was right (rarely happens..so I thought I'd reference it)
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=4402752&&#post4402752

It's not so much as whether it SHOULD be given CableLabs ok'd....but it still has to be.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

Pony already corrected me on this. I thought since the data was encrypted it could be on a removable drive. I was wrong. CableLabs still cares.


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

MichaelK said:


> I would suspect that at this point being 800 bucks the vast majority of buyers are previous owners of tivo or have researched the stuffing out of them so they alreayd likely know about MRV and wont need much explaining.


I would assert that given the number of "NEW S3 WON'T WORK WITH MY DIRECTv" and "HOW COME I CAN'T TRANSFER SHOWS" threads floating around here that you may have too high an opinion of others.

(I agree with the rest of your post though)

rainwater, I'm not sure what you're trying to say - since MRV was in the 7.2 codebase for the S3, I would say that it's already ready (and has been for a while) and once Tivo gets the word it'll be enabled and work just fine...


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

GoHokies! said:


> I would assert that given the number of "NEW S3 WON'T WORK WITH MY DIRECTv" and "HOW COME I CAN'T TRANSFER SHOWS" threads floating around here that you may have too high an opinion of others.
> 
> (I agree with the rest of your post though)
> 
> rainwater, I'm not sure what you're trying to say - since MRV was in the 7.2 codebase for the S3, I would say that it's already ready (and has been for a while) and once Tivo gets the word it'll be enabled and work just fine...


chuckling-

touche!


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

GoHokies! said:


> I would assert that given the number of "NEW S3 WON'T WORK WITH MY DIRECTv" and "HOW COME I CAN'T TRANSFER SHOWS" threads floating around here that you may have too high an opinion of others.


Or that some people had too high an opinion of TiVo.


----------



## Marduk (Feb 15, 2007)

I wrote this to 
Mike Schwartz, 
Senior Vice President of Communications
Cable Television Laboratories, Inc.
858 Coal Creek Circle
Louisville, CO 80027-9750
USA

I know people in this blog will rip this apart, but if everyone wrote to Cable labs and vented (professionally not Angrily) maybe, JUST MAYBE, we can get some movement....

I will post a reply If I get one.  


Mr Schwartz,

My Name is Bob Daley, and while you do not know me, I am what you might call an Indirect consumer of your products. 

I have Comcast in my Home, and I have DVRs that record my Favorite shows off the systems you support. Already this month I have been told that I can not subscribe to the "Extra Innings" Package from my Cable provider, due to the fact that Direct TV has now made it painfully aware that they would like to own America's pastime, and charge people a premium for it. While I am saddened by this fact, I am even more saddened about another issue, that apparently, boils down to your company holding off on releasing a critical patch to help me in my DVRs.

I am a proud owner of 3 Tivo boxes - and I have recently purchased a Series 3 Hd DVR. I was also able to transfer my lifetime subscription service from one of my Tivo 2 boxes to my Tivo 3 box...

....And was saddened to see that I can not transfer recordings form one box to the other.I can transfer my License of ownership from one box to the other, but not the content of the box itself. This is one of the main reasons that I spent the $800 for the new box, and an additional $200 for the License transfer - only to not be able to get the same service, due to what Tivo has called for over 6 months" waiting from approval from Cable labs".

What needs to be done to get this approval moved along? Many people on bulletin boards have stated that this is a stall tactic by your organization - which I understand is partly owned by some of the more powerful cable companies in the country - to get cable companies to put their DVRs in our homes. If that is true, I believe that there are better avenues to approach this issue than restricting competition in the open market. 

If this is a content issues- and I would not be surprised if it is based on the piracy issues of today - let me say this in defense of us who work 60 hrs a week, and maybe now and again want to transfer a show to another Tivo so we can watch from bed - why let the majority of us suffer over a few bad apples? I understand the industry is working on some restrictions in content - and I understand that for some reason this short changes revenue on free tv channels - wouldn't it be better for all involved to not restrict access for a service that was transferable from S1 Tivos to S2? What changed to make this now a sticking point? The fact that the picture is better on one of the boxes? Not many homes have multiple HDTVs, and while the supply chain has made pricing for such TVs within some small realm of sanity, I find it hard to believe that transferring content from one box to another would provide the crippling effect that some naysayers have so imagined.

At the end of the day Mr Schwartz, people will still buy their favorite shows on media, and not download it because of the quality of the technology and the resolution of the DVD/Blu ray.People like to have the actual product in there hand. When Napster was a free service, before they were shut down, I downloaded some music. But I still bought selected CDs because of 2 reasons:

1.) The Music was good, and there were more than 3-4 songs I liked;
2.) And I wanted the actual, physical CD in my collection.

I would like to think that napster helped me make the purchasing decision. And it was based on Quality product, and having the LICENSED CONTENT in my hand.

If you were to think of content in that vain, you would see that stalling this only makes people look for other reasons to keep/ replace technology. Tivo is doing other things to maintain its hold in the market with programs like the Unbox service. And with their Tivo casts. These are programs that you do not need to give approval for, and are downloadable content from business partners. So, it seems to me that your organization is the problem. So, let me ask again:

What can be done to expedite a solution to this problem?


----------



## CheezWiz (Dec 30, 2006)

Wow dude, I am sure you will get a canned BS response, but an A++ for effort!


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

CheezWiz said:


> Wow dude, I am sure you will get a canned BS response, but an A++ for effort!


Agreed, by the way, where in the heck is MRV now? It has been "many moons" without news...


----------



## TexasAg (Apr 2, 2006)

Nice vent, but most likely a useless one - unless someone knows of any instance where a certifying body did something related to a product simply because customers complained and wanted it.

Not bashing you Marduk, just seems like it won't help, no matter how many customers complain. Especially since CableLabs is set up, funded, etc. by the cable companies.


----------



## saberman (May 4, 2004)

You do know that Cable labs has nothing to do with your not being able to transfer content TO your S3 don't you? Their restrictions only apply to transferring content FROM the S3.

The reason you can't transfer content to the S3 is that TiVo does not have the software ready.


----------



## kucharsk (Feb 2, 2007)

marduk said:


> What needs to be done to get this approval moved along? Many people on bulletin boards have stated that this is a stall tactic by your organization - which I understand is partly owned by some of the more powerful cable companies in the country - to get cable companies to put their DVRs in our homes.


Why the questions about Cable Labs? Anything you'd want to know about who they are is readily available from their website:



> Founded in 1988 by members of the cable television industry, Cable Television Laboratories, Inc. (CableLabs®) is a non-profit research and development consortium that is dedicated to pursuing new cable telecommunications technologies and to helping its cable operator members integrate those technical advancements into their business objectives.


[ ... ]



> Founded in 1988 by members of the cable television industry, Cable Television Laboratories, Inc. (CableLabs®) is a nonprofit research and development consortium that is dedicated to pursuing new cable telecommunications technologies and to helping its cable operator members integrate those technical advancements into their business objectives.
> 
> CableLabs serves the cable television industry by:
> 
> ...


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

kucharsk said:


> Why the questions about Cable Labs? Anything you'd want to know about who they are is readily available from their website:
> 
> [ ... ]


you left out the most important bit:



> Membership
> 
> To be a member of CableLabs, a company must be a cable television system operator (as defined by the Cable Act) located worldwide. A cable operator, as defined by the Cable Act, is a person or persons who provide(s) video programming using closed transmission paths and uses public rights-of-way. This definition does not include open video systems, MMDS (multichannel multipoint distribution systems), or DBS (direct broadcast satellite).


there's more somplace about how telco's are also banned unless they were selling video ions ago and already had a membership before cable felt threatened by them..

It's a private club ONLY for cable company's- other interested parties need not apply.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

> CableLabs' members are exclusively cable system operators. They do not include competitive network platforms such as direct broadcast satellite (DBS), telephone companies delivering video services, electrical utilities delivering broadband services, multi-channel multipoint distribution systems (MMDS) or the like. Nor do they include manufacturers or content providers (such as cable programmers, broadcasters or movie studios).


from the memebers page


----------



## ncbagwell (Feb 15, 2005)

saberman said:


> The reason you can't transfer content to the S3 is that TiVo does not have the software ready.


Is this a fact? Not calling you out, but can you provide a link where this was stated?

Transferring content TO the S3 from other S2s on the network is all I really want.


----------



## CheezWiz (Dec 30, 2006)

ncbagwell said:


> Transferring content TO the S3 from other S2s on the network is all I really want.


++++ :up:


----------



## etsolow (Feb 8, 2001)

ncbagwell said:


> Transferring content TO the S3 from other S2s on the network is all I really want.


I only want to transfer DIVX video from my PC to the S3.


----------



## CheezWiz (Dec 30, 2006)

etsolow said:


> I only want to transfer DIVX video from my PC to the S3.


Same thing with Tivo.Net or pyTivo since they emulate another Tivo on the network..


----------



## etsolow (Feb 8, 2001)

CheezWiz said:


> Same thing with Tivo.Net or pyTivo since they emulate another Tivo on the network..


I don't think they do. As I understand it, TTCB is distinct from MRV. When viewed in the NPL, my other TiVos have a different icon than my PC running pyTivo. *shrug*


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Correct -- that's why they won't work with any ol' MRV-enabled Tivo like Tivoserver will.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

CheezWiz said:


> Same thing with Tivo.Net or pyTivo since they emulate another Tivo on the network..


actually that's slightly untrue.

tivo.net (and I beleive pytivo) emulate tivo desktop or "tivo to come back" which is a differnt protocol then MRV which is tivo to tivo.

(edit- sorry the other guys beat me to it- but the frustrating bit below is still true)

This is what makes it so frustrating. Cablelabs has a beef with MRV but NOT with the 'come back' so there is no reason tivo shouldn't turn on that feature and leave mrv off.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

ncbagwell said:


> Is this a fact? Not calling you out, but can you provide a link where this was stated?
> 
> Transferring content TO the S3 from other S2s on the network is all I really want.


I believe the software is totally ready but that tivo has it disabled. Likely becasue they have no way to enable that while keeping the MRV part off.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

and even more frustrating to me- if you could get TTCB enabled while still diabling MRV- you couild have poor mans MRV. You could use galleon to send shows from an S2 to your TTCB server and then use TTCB to put them on the S3. It would add 1 step and double the transfer time- but it would still work.


----------



## CheezWiz (Dec 30, 2006)

etsolow said:


> I don't think they do. As I understand it, TTCB is distinct from MRV. When viewed in the NPL, my other TiVos have a different icon than my PC running pyTivo. *shrug*


Since both programs fake a TSN to operate, I figured that it also faked being a Tivo... Unless that long number is not a TSN...

If that is the case, then that pisses me off even more about the delay of getting it enabled..!!


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

CheezWiz said:


> Since both programs fake a TSN to operate, I figured that it also faked being a Tivo... Unless that long number is not a TSN...
> 
> If that is the case, then that pisses me off even more about the delay of getting it enabled..!!


get bent more- if you read the whole tivo.net thread there's some discussion of how the ttcb and mrv protocols are different.

I'm certain in my mind that TTCB can work today on an S3 while somehow disabling MRV that and TTG that cablelabs has a beef with.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

I beleive the main difference is the MAK and encryption. 

Not 100% positive but I dont ever recall entering a MAK for tivo.net or in the server side of galleon. Galleon's module to get content OFF a tivo needs the MAK. And Tivo Desktop also uses a MAK - but again I think that's just to get content OFF. 


So I can take a home video and server it up a a tivo using tivo.net without ever having entered my account's MAK. you cant TTG or MRV without the MAK. 

Hec- I guess they could turn everything on and just hard code a bogus MAK into the S3 database and that would lock down TTG and MRV for the time being....


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

MichaelK said:


> and even more frustrating to me- if you could get TTCB enabled while still diabling MRV- you couild have poor mans MRV. You could use galleon to send shows from an S2 to your TTCB server and then use TTCB to put them on the S3. It would add 1 step and double the transfer time- but it would still work.


And you could use the forthcoming Auto Transcode to mock up the S2 recording to HD.


----------



## PaulS (Sep 16, 2002)

etsolow said:


> I only want to transfer DIVX video from my PC to the S3.


+1

Doesn't even have to be Divx. I'm willing to transcode to any format they'd be willing to open up.


----------



## etsolow (Feb 8, 2001)

CheezWiz said:


> Since both programs fake a TSN to operate, I figured that it also faked being a Tivo... Unless that long number is not a TSN...
> 
> If that is the case, then that pisses me off even more about the delay of getting it enabled..!!


I'm not sure what you mean. What long number?


----------



## CheezWiz (Dec 30, 2006)

etsolow said:


> I'm not sure what you mean. What long number?


I think what I was associating as a TSN is instead a GUID.
It is hardcoded into pyTivo, but Tivo.Net generates it on installation..

In Tivo.net it is called a UUID and looks like this:
9AA45D93-2900-4C3E-9724-8AD5DED7027F

Obviously not a TSN..


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

TexasAg said:


> Nice vent, but most likely a useless one


As most "vents" are. Over-the-top emotion (starting with "painfully aware that they would like to own America's pastime"  ) is a sure-fire way of ensuring that a note gets ignored.


----------



## Marduk (Feb 15, 2007)

bicker said:


> As most "vents" are. Over-the-top emotion (starting with "painfully aware that they would like to own America's pastime"  ) is a sure-fire way of ensuring that a note gets ignored.


I do not think that this was over the top. I thought it was an intelligent point. Do you not think that the Direct TV move to block baseball from cable stations is a way to force the movement from cable to Satellite? By owning the rights to all away games, it puts money in MLB, Content on Satellite, and leaves the majority of the country left in the wind.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Of course it is a way to get folks to subscribe to DirectTV: Everything DirectTV spends money on needs to have that as either a direct or indirect objective. What I think undercuts the points being made are emotionally-over-the-top statements like "painfully aware" and Hallmark Channel heart-tugging like "America's pastime." To be honest, these terms turned me off so much that I didn't bother to read the rest, until now. It's actually okay, once you get past that part (putting aside casual mentions of sadness, which in the absence of the first paragraph would have been okay), but I didn't, and I wouldn't be surprised if the intended reader didn't either. 

Using the wrong spelling of "vein" didn't help either. 

In the end, I agree with the folks who point out that the letter is misdirected. There really isn't anyone to send the letter to, where action can be reasonable expected. The letter needs to be directed at the people who are rewarding DirectTV for this action, the fans who subscribe with them. If you want to affect how things things go, you need to get those fans to voluntarily switch to another sport that doesn't make it so hard/expensive to receive broadcasts. That will communicate the message effectively, and will be the only thing that will have a strong chance of changing things.


----------



## hornblowercat (Mar 4, 2007)

Off topic I know but has this whole thing with MLB finally been settled? Last I heard there was still a chance that cable may get involved still?

Never mind, it appears we will find out about that tomorrow at the latest by 11:59 pm edt.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/sports/20070330_On_Sports_Media___MLB_sets_cable_deal_deadline.html


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

MichaelK said:


> I believe the software is totally ready but that tivo has it disabled. Likely becasue they have no way to enable that while keeping the MRV part off.





MichaelK said:


> and even more frustrating to me- if you could get TTCB enabled while still diabling MRV- you couild have poor mans MRV. You could use galleon to send shows from an S2 to your TTCB server and then use TTCB to put them on the S3. It would add 1 step and double the transfer time- but it would still work.


http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=346504


----------

