# Verizon petitions the FCC to abandon all technology mandates, including CableCard



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/v...sXB6y1cpzW!475365121!935840470?id=60000871591


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

I'm not even going to bother reading it because I don't trust anything Verizon says.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Scumbags.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

tarheelblue32 said:


> I'm not even going to bother reading it because I don't trust anything Verizon says.


Thanks for the input.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

tarheelblue32 said:


> I'm not even going to bother reading it because I don't trust anything Verizon says.


What this person said.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

ncted said:


> What this person said.


I don't believe anything TiVo says. What's your point?

Have they come clean on Mondays reboot issue yet?


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/v...sXB6y1cpzW!475365121!935840470?id=60000871591


I do not understand your perspective... You seem to be in favor of limiting choice to anything other then what the MSO provides - forgive me if I am misinterpreting your position.

What Verizon is suggesting is to force all subscribers to *lease *a base unit from them. And to meet the intent of the legislation, they would allow some, yet as to be defined, level of connectivity to 3rd party tools and apps. The definition of what that connectivity would be, would of course be defined by them...

So, that would mean less consumer choice... Why would that be good?

If I remember correctly, you were also against 3rd party access to AT&T/DirecTV. I am just not sure I understand the argument.

Even if you hate TiVo, the argument makes no sense for anyone other than a politician getting political funding from Verizon.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

bradleys said:


> I do not understand your perspective... You seem to be in favor of limiting choice to anything other then what the MSO provides - forgive me if I am misinterpreting your position.
> 
> What Verizon is suggesting is to force all subscribers to *lease *a base unit from them. And to meet the intent of the legislation, they would allow some, yet as to be defined, level of connectivity to 3rd party tools and apps. The definition of what that connectivity would be, would of course be defined by them...
> 
> ...


Read it again. Nobody is looking to force anyone to do anything. TiVo wants the law tilted in favor of their business model and Verizon wants it tilted towards theirs.

Shocking! 

As far as Verizon giving political funding, what's your take on TiVo's petitions. They have nothing but the consumer in mind, right? :roll eyes:

Bottom line is Cable Card needs to go. Everyone agrees on it. So just do it already!


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Banker257 said:


> Bottom line is Cable Card needs to go. Everyone agrees on it. So just do it already!


Not until we have a suitable replacement.


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

I have read it, and I have read it correctly...

Yes, Verizon wants the FCC to abandon the Cable Card mandate. Okay, but they are not suggesting a replacement for the cable card mandate with another open solution. They are claiming that because other access mechanisms are being implemented* "..the need for mandates for navigation devices - in all aspects - are now unnecessary"*

_"These mandates need not be enforced because multiple solutions are now available for consumers to use retail commercial electronic devices with navigation devices *supplied by Multichannel Video Programming Distributors (MVPDs)*_"

So because Verizon is offering an iPad app or some other access channel, there is no longer a need for 3rd party navigation devices - once again: *...use retail commercial electronic devices WITH navigation devices supplied by Multichannel Video Programming Distributors (MVPDs)*


 use retail commercial electronic devices * (iPads, Android phones, other)*
 with navigation devices supplied by Multichannel Video Programming Distributors *(Leased Verizon Cable Box)*

We get it, you hate TiVo - that is fine, but I ask again: Are you in favor of limiting choice to anything other then what the MSO provides? If not, what exactly are you suggesting and what would this future look like? Is anyone actually pushing for that future?


----------



## Grakthis (Oct 4, 2006)

If I understand this correctly, the gist is, Tivo says "we don't want to have to follow this rule" and Verizon says "We don't want to follow this other rule! So we should just get rid of all the rules." And that seems like a bogus position, because "I don't want to follow this rule" does not mean you hate all the rules, which seems to be what Verizon is claiming. Verizon is citing TiVo's desire to waive THIS ONE RULE as proof that all the rules are dumb.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

bradleys said:


> I have read it, and I have read it correctly...
> 
> Yes, Verizon wants the FCC to abandon the Cable Card mandate. Okay, but they are not suggesting a replacement for the cable card mandate with another open solution. They are claiming that because other access mechanisms are being implemented* "..the need for mandates for navigation devices - in all aspects - are now unnecessary"*
> 
> ...


You're not saying that TiVos 1% of the market is going to change what the MSO's do, are you?

Consumers have a choice between 3-5 MSO's if they don't like what one offers. TiVo (3rd party box) is a NON ISSUE for 99% of the General TV viewing public.

The experiment failed. Nobody is interested in paying for something they can get for free. Let it go, already!


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Grakthis said:


> If I understand this correctly, the gist is, Tivo says "we don't want to have to follow this rule" and Verizon says "We don't want to follow this other rule! So we should just get rid of all the rules." And that seems like a bogus position, because "I don't want to follow this rule" does not mean you hate all the rules, which seems to be what Verizon is claiming. Verizon is citing TiVo's desire to waive THIS ONE RULE as proof that all the rules are dumb.


It's not Verizon that wants to move the goalposts


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> The experiment failed. *Nobody is interested in paying for something they can get for free.* Let it go, already!


Please explain in whatever words you want where "free" fits into this?

Are you saying Cable and FiOS are doomed to fail because OTA will win?
Color me confused as to what the "free" option is in your view.


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> You're not saying that TiVos 1% of the market is going to change what the MSO's do, are you?
> 
> Consumers have a choice between 3-5 MSO's if they don't like what one offers. TiVo (3rd party box) is a NON ISSUE for 99% of the General DVR public.
> 
> The experiment failed. Nobody is interested in paying for something they can get for free. Let it go, already!


CONSUMERS DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE BETWEEN MSO's! Municipalities actually get Franchise fee payments from the MSO's because they are legal monopolies.... Most only have one cable company available to them. Some lucky ones also have FIOS available, the only other option is Satellite. Where it isn't a direct Monopoly, it is an Oligopoly... This is not my definition, this is the LEGAL DEFINITION.

So you are saying that we should just accept what the MSO's are providing?

I would actually argue that TiVo did push the MSO's quite a bit... Do you think they would have ever offered a DVR in the Monopoly environment they exist in?

The experiment failed? Line up like lemmings and take what you are given? That is really your argument?

I generally try to give people the benefit of doubt, critique never hurt anyone... But you? You really want only these legally defined monopolies to choose how, where and when you access your content with no outside pressure?

- I am old enough to remember when my family had to pay for each cable TV outlet in the house (no box)
- I am old enough to remember when we had only telco supplied phones in the house
- I am old enough to remember when each additional phone in the home was an added fee.

It was third party companies, like TiVo, that lobbied and pushed and got the restrictions changed. Is TiVo the best company in the world - no... Are we lucky the world isn't filled with people who think like you? - VERY MUCH SO, YES!


----------



## tatergator1 (Mar 27, 2008)

Banker257 said:


> Nobody is interested in paying for something they can get for free. Let it go, already!


I thought we had moved on from this argument. You are the 1% in the case of your "free" DVR argument. Sure, MVPD's run promos for "free" equipment. in nearly every case, it's for 3,6,or 12 months. After that, you're paying for it at a monthly rate that, over a period of 3 years or greater, will exceed the ownership costs of a Tivo solution.

People are fickle with MVPD providers. People are conditioned to a monthly payment scheme for everything. These are just some of the reasons few people opt for a 3rd party solution. I get it, both Tivo and Verizon are talking their book. That doesn't mean government regulation leading to an open standard is a bad thing.

I'm starting to wonder if you would have also advocated against government intervention in residential telephony service. I mean, those telephones that Ma Bell made you rent from them were top of the line. 3rd party CE manufactures could never manufacture phones with more and better features. \sarc


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

bradleys said:


> Most only have one cable company available to them. Some lucky ones also have FIOS available, the other option is Satellite.


Hence my "consumers have a choice between 3 - 5 MSO's". That's all the competition anyone needs.

Having the government bail out another failing business, after doing everything they could, doesn't help the majority of the public.

TiVo has had 14 years to make a go of it. How much longer do we pretend they have a viable business model?


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

tatergator1 said:


> I thought we had moved on from this argument. You are the 1% in the case of your "free" DVR argument. Sure, MVPD's run promos for "free" equipment. in nearly every case, it's for 3,6,or 12 months. After that, you're paying for it at a monthly rate that, over a period of 3 years or greater, will exceed the ownership costs of a Tivo solution.
> 
> People are fickle with MVPD providers. People are conditioned to a monthly payment scheme for everything. These are just some of the reasons few people opt for a 3rd party solution. I get it, both Tivo and Verizon are talking their book. That doesn't mean government regulation leading to an open standard is a bad thing.
> 
> I'm starting to wonder if you would have also advocated against government intervention in residential telephony service. I mean, those telephones that Ma Bell made you rent from them were top of the line. 3rd party CE manufactures could never manufacture phones with more and better features. \sarc


People only care about getting their utilities as cheap as possible. Stop bringing up business models from 1952.

Nobody (99%) is willing to BUY something their MSO will give them for free and replace when it breaks.


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> Hence my "consumers have a choice between 3 - 5 MSO's" that's all the competition anyone needs.
> 
> Having the government bail out another failing business, after doing everything they could, doesn't help the majority of the public.
> 
> TiVo has had 14 years to make a go of it. How much longer do we pretend they have a viable business model?


MOST have two at best - the Cable company licensed to provide service in their community and Satellite. Some, also have FIOS - although they are no longer expanding.

Nobody has 5.

Bailing out what? Because cable is a monopoly, the FCC is charged with their oversite and control. Not even the government considers the environment competitive....

TiVo is a going concern with money in the bank... But frankly, as far as I am concerned TiVo can go out of business. That isn't the point.

The point is for the FCC to continue to provide control on the limitless power the MSO's have over their customers.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

dianebrat said:


> Please explain in whatever words you want where "free" fits into this?
> 
> Are you saying Cable and FiOS are doomed to fail because OTA will win?
> Color me confused as to what the "free" option is in your view.


I'm pretty sure you know exactly what I'm saying. If you disagree, by all means, feel free to debate.

If not, I see no need to do this silly dance again.

It's not a cult. It's a bandwagon!


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> People only care about getting their utilities as cheap as possible. Stop bringing up business models from 1952.
> 
> Nobody (99%) is willing to BUY something their MSO will give them for free and replace when it breaks.


See, that is the thing.... I am not that old.

Cable still charged for each active outlet in your home up until the late 1980's. It was the late 70's before you could purchase your own phone, and even then they still wanted to charge you an additional outlet fee until about 1980.

And the MSO is not giving you anything for free... I have FIOS and they charge me for the box. If I want their DVR, they charge me a lot. As a consumer, I have saved quite a bit of money over the years with TiVo...

But as I said, this has nothing to do with TiVo, this has to do with consumer choice no matter who the player is.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

bradleys said:


> MOST have two at best - the Cable company licensed to provide service in their community and Satellite. Some, also have FIOS - although they are no longer expanding.
> 
> Nobody has 5.
> 
> ...


I have no interest in arguing the difference between 3 or 5 MSO's.

How many retail subs does TiVo claim to have including Minis?


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> I'm pretty sure you know exactly what I'm saying. If you disagree, by all means, feel free to debate.
> 
> If not, I see no need to do this silly dance again.
> 
> It's not a cult. It's a bandwagon!


But you offer not options... Just take what you are given and like it.

You are just one of those guys that loves to mix things up and get everyone worked up... I am not even sure you believe your own rhetoric.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/v...sXB6y1cpzW!475365121!935840470?id=60000871591





> .....Subscribers can access FiOS TV programming on CE devices such as Xbox game
> consoles and smart TVs, through the FiOS TV application......



Why the heck would I want to go back to watching Tv like I did forty years ago? With no way to pause, rewind, fast forward, record, etc. That is what the FiOS TV app does. Make watching TV seem like how it was when I was a child.  It just makes no sense to me.


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> I have no interest in arguing the difference between 3 or 5 MSO's.


But it is a huge difference, and exactly the point you are trying to make. Let me put it this way, nobody has more then *ONE *Cable provider to choose from. Yes, that is a definitive statement and I mean it exactly the way I said it - nobody has more then *ONE *cable provider to choose from. Nobody, none, nada....

That is why they are classified as a Monopoly by the federal government.



> How many retail subs does TiVo claim to have including Minis?


Exactly why does it matter how many subscriptions TiVo has?

As far as I am concerned TiVo could go out of business tomorrow, but it is the FCC's responsibility to provide protections to the consumers as a counter to the Monopoly charter they have been given.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

If Verizon actually decided to drop CableCard, it would incredibly idiotic. Virtually all FIOS customers have 1 or 2 cable companies that also service them, so the TiVo and MCE users, which are probably far more likely to have FIOS in the first place, would all jump ship, dropping FIOS's penetration, and pissing off the people that everyone else goes to for tech advice. Dropping CableCard support would literally mean handing all those tech savvy customers right back to Comcast, CableVision, and TWC all at once.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> I don't believe anything TiVo says. What's your point?
> 
> Have they come clean on Mondays reboot issue yet?


Anything? Really? I don't believe what you're saying.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

bradleys said:


> That is why they are classified as a Monopoly by the federal government.
> 
> Why does it matter how many subscriptions TiVo has?


TiVo sued their "competition" basically creating a Monopoly on DVR's technogy. How did that work out for them?

Comparing 1970's phones to DVR's is ridiculous. Who sold phones in 1970 and who sells DVR's today?


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

aaronwt said:


> Why the heck would I want to go back to watching Tv like I did forty years ago? With no way to pause, rewind, fast forward, record, etc. That is what the FiOS TV app does. Make watching TV seem like how it was when I was a child.  It just makes no sense to me.


It's their same old shiny new object distraction argument.

"Oh look, we made a crappy app with access to 1/4th of our total channel lineup and no DVR functionality whatsoever. Oh, and we can and HAVE pulled apps from devices anytime we want, leaving consumers no assurances of continued service, as half-baked and limited as it already is. This changes everything! No need for competition!"


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Bigg said:


> If Verizon actually decided to drop CableCard, it would incredibly idiotic. Virtually all FIOS customers have 1 or 2 cable companies that also service them, so the TiVo and MCE users, which are probably far more likely to have FIOS in the first place, would all jump ship, dropping FIOS's penetration, and pissing off the people that everyone else goes to for tech advice. Dropping CableCard support would literally mean handing all those tech savvy customers right back to Comcast, CableVision, and TWC all at once.


Couldn't agree more. Anyone who's paying attention knows that Verizon (or anyone for that matter) is not going to "drop" CC.

"Phase it out" on the other hand...


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

ncted said:


> Anything? Really? I don't believe what you're saying.


I'll take that as a "NO".


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> TiVo sued their "competition" basically creating a Monopoly on DVR's technogy. How did that work out for them?
> 
> Comparing 1970's phones to DVR's is ridiculous. Who sold phones in 1970 and who sells DVR's today?


The federal government does not classify TiVo as a Monopoly, the federal government does classify the Cable Companies as a Monopoly - I am not sure what your point is.

The comparison is accurate... A number of companies large and small were thwarted by Ma Bell for years trying to sell phones. Ma Bell argued that they could not guarantee reliability of the phone system and network if they didn't control the telephone handset itself.

Finally, the FCC disagreed...


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

bradleys said:


> The comparison is accurate... A number of companies large and small were thwarted by Ma Bell for years trying to sell phones. Ma Bell argued that they could not guarantee reliability of the phone system and network if they didn't control the telephone handset itself.
> 
> Finally, the FCC disagreed...


AT&T--Making stupid arguments to the FCC for decades.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

dianebrat said:


> Please explain in whatever words you want where "free" fits into this?
> 
> Are you saying Cable and FiOS are doomed to fail because OTA will win?
> Color me confused as to what the "free" option is in your view.


He somehow thinks his DVR provided by Directv is FREE.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

bradleys said:


> The federal government does not classify TiVo as a Monopoly, the federal government does classify the Cable Companies as a Monopoly - I am not sure what your point is.
> 
> The comparison is accurate... A number of companies large and small were thwarted by Ma Bell for years trying to sell phones. Ma Bell argued that they could not guarantee reliability of the phone system and network if they didn't control the telephone handset itself.
> 
> Finally, the FCC disagreed...


Nobody has "thwarted" TiVo from selling their product. They've had 14 years and all they got was 1% of the market.

Time to pull the plug and see what happens. Maybe they come out with a kick ass product that everyone HAS to have.

That's my point.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

magnus said:


> He somehow thinks his DVR provided by Directv is FREE.


It's not a Cult. It's a bandwagon!


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> Nobody has "thwarted" TiVo from selling their product. They've had 14 years and all they got was 1% of the market.
> 
> Time to pull the plug and see what happens. Maybe they come out with a kick ass product that everyone HAS to have.
> 
> That's my point.


You have no point... This isn't about TiVo - you are advocating that for the FCC to allow the MSO's to keep their closed ecosystems.

That is the stupidest argument I have ever heard. How can anyone create anything without access?


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

bradleys said:


> You have no point... This isn't about TiVo - you are advocating that for the FCC to allow the MSO's to keep their closed ecosystems.
> 
> That is the stupidest argument I have ever heard. How can anyone create anything without access?


+1

Closed ecosystems need to me smashed open by the government wherever they exist.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

bradleys said:


> You have no point... This isn't about TiVo - you are advocating that for the FCC to allow the MSO's to keep their closed ecosystems.
> 
> That is the stupidest argument I have ever heard. How can anyone create anything without access?


The FCC gave third party access (CableCards) before TiVo came to market. Look it up.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

tarheelblue32 said:


> +1
> 
> Closed ecosystems need to me smashed open by the government wherever they exist.


14 years of "open access" got TiVo 1% of the market. The people have spoken.

Let it go already...


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> I'm pretty sure you know exactly what I'm saying. If you disagree, by all means, feel free to debate.
> 
> If not, I see no need to do this silly dance again.
> 
> It's not a cult. It's a bandwagon!


No, I don't know what you mean, there's nothing "free" other than OTA, you pay for Cable, Satellite, or FiOS and then you pay for the boxes, so I have no idea where you get this "free" from unless it's OTA, it's really that simple.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Most people still don't even use DVRs. DVR use is only at 49% which is still amazing to me. I stopped watching most live TV back in the 80's with VCRs. And DVRs just made it so much easier in the 21st century.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

magnus said:


> He somehow thinks his DVR provided by Directv is FREE.


wow.. seriously?


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> The FCC gave third party access (CableCards) before TiVo came to market. Look it up.


Yes, I had a Cablecard in a TV prior to tivo.

Again, this has nothing to do with tivo - without an access mechanism nobody can provide a solution,

This has nothing to do with tivo.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

dianebrat said:


> wow.. seriously?


Uh, yea... Like seriously... 

"It's not a Cult. It's a Bandwagon!"


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

bradleys said:


> Yes, I had a Cablecard in a TV prior to tivo.
> 
> Again, this has nothing to do with tivo - without an access mechanism nobody can provide a solution,
> 
> This has nothing to do with tivo.


Don't tell me, tell Verizon.


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

No, I think it was Comcast...


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

TiVos Petition
*
" TiVo filed its petition on August 29, requesting further waiver or clarification with respect to the requirement that TiVo products supplied wholesale to cable operators much include an industry-standard, interactive, and recordable home networking interface.
*
TiVo acknowledged in the petition that TiVo products leased by MSOs dont support all elements of an open industry standard as that term has been defined by the Commission, and thus does not meet the letter of the rule. TiVo argued in part that strict compliance of the rule would harm smaller cable operators that use TiVo products, that it would serve no public interests, and would be extremely expensive for TiVo given its historic investments. "

- See more at: http://www.multichannel.com/news/te...ish-set-top-rules/384634#sthash.4BnyCPv2.dpuf


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

The point of this conversation has nothing to do with tivo... They could ask for a pink elephant balloon as far as I care - I would consider the efficacy of that request as it comes.

The point of this conversation is your assertion (and Verizon's) that the FCC should remove all requirements for direct access by third party navigation devices in favor of allowing them to provide access exclusively through proprietary systems.

That is the stupidest thing I have ever read on this forum.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Banker257 said:


> Hence my "consumers have a choice between 3 - 5 MSO's". That's all the competition anyone needs.


I have exactly one. Time Warner Cable.

I can't get satellite - my townhome faces the wrong direction.

I can't get UVerse, even if I wanted it - they don't have a VRAD close enough to me.

There aren't any other competitors in this marketplace.

I'm sure I'm far from the only one in this position.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

LoadStar said:


> I have exactly one. Time Warner Cable.
> 
> I can't get satellite - my townhome faces the wrong direction.
> 
> ...


I thought Dish was the opposite of DirecTV.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Banker257 said:


> I thought Dish was the opposite of DirecTV.


Their satellites are all in the southern sky.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

LoadStar said:


> I have exactly one. Time Warner Cable.
> 
> I can't get satellite - my townhome faces the wrong direction.
> 
> ...


I'm in the exact same position you are. AT&T VRAD over a half-mile away and 70' tall pine trees on the southern side of the house. TWC is my only option.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

Banker257 said:


> The FCC gave third party access (CableCards) before TiVo came to market. Look it up.


The FCC mandated third party access before TiVo came to market. It didn't become available until 2004.


----------



## tatergator1 (Mar 27, 2008)

dianebrat said:


> wow.. seriously?


He got a new customer promo from DirecTV where his DVR fees are negated by credits for a certain term, which he never clarified for how long. His DVR is "free" and we went at it for pages in another thread arguing it's not free. We're not going to change his mind. He keeps throwing "free" around like everyone gets a free MSO DVR, so why the hell would anyone pay for TiVo.

Honestly, he's getting to the point of trolling with some of his responses.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

This just shows how broken the whole system is. The FCC doesn't need to remove all technology mandates they need to stop giving out waivers and force everyone to use a single technology mandate.

The problem is that the FCC doesn't understand the technology so they pass off the job of designing the technology to industry groups who in turn drag their feet and make it excessively complicated in an effort to make it as useless as possible. 

The FCC needs to just ignore all these guys and pass an AllVid standard that applies to all MSO and which is designed by a consumer advocacy group and not the industry.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

tatergator1 said:


> He got a new customer promo from DirecTV where his DVR fees are negated by credits for a certain term, which he never clarified for how long. His DVR is "free" and we went at it for pages in another thread arguing it's not free. We're not going to change his mind. He keeps throwing "free" around like everyone gets a free MSO DVR, so why the hell would anyone pay for TiVo.


I can't believe anyone would even attempt that argument, there's no Cable or Satellite setup where you get a "free" device that you can take with you when you leave, in that aspect the portability of the Tivo ecosystem is worth a great deal to me and I don't depend on a provider subsidy. More so there's no current provider that offers "free" equipment as SOP for their customers so I can't even fathom how he can make the argument that "Nobody is interested in paying for something they can get for free" when "free" is anything but.


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

bradleys said:


> Nobody has 5.


1 + (sometimes) 1 + (even less often) 1 = 5. This is pretty basic stuff.

I don't know what your problem is, but it is embarrassing to see you display your mathematical inadequacy here.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Banker257 said:


> Couldn't agree more. Anyone who's paying attention knows that Verizon (or anyone for that matter) is not going to "drop" CC.
> 
> "Phase it out" on the other hand...


The companies we need to watch are the Charters of the world. Well, Charter. They have limited competitive exposure, except to DirecTV and DISH I suppose. Comcast/TWC from a market perspective is a risk as well, but they have some competitive exposure to FIOS, and we know that Comcast is pretty friendly to TiVo, so likely they will move forward with TiVo to a downloadable security system.

But FIOS is in no position to not be supporting CableCard. If Comcast takes over TWC, there may be some pressure on Verizon to develop a VOD app for TiVo as well, as Comcast will likely get that running in the NYC market.



Banker257 said:


> The FCC gave third party access (CableCards) before TiVo came to market. Look it up.


That's ridiculous. Digital cable didn't exist in any meaningful way when TiVo came to market in 1999. TiVo needed CableCard to survive in the mid-2000's, because analog was dying and HD was taking over.



aaronwt said:


> Most people still don't even use DVRs. DVR use is only at 49% which is still amazing to me. I stopped watching most live TV back in the 80's with VCRs. And DVRs just made it so much easier in the 21st century.


True. It's amazing to me that people pay for cable TV without a DVR.



Wil said:


> 1 + (sometimes) 1 + (even less often) 1 = 5. This is pretty basic stuff.
> 
> I don't know what your problem is, but it is embarrassing to see you display your mathematical inadequacy here.


No one has 5 QAM providers. Some have 2 QAM providers, U-Verse and the two satellite providers like we have here (albeit with very limited U-Verse coverage). Some have 3 QAM providers and the two satellite providers. But these are all the exception to the rule, except for a few specific areas, like metro Boston, where a number of towns have 3 QAM providers (all of which offer over 100mbps internet service), although virtually all of Boston proper is an ironclad Comcast monopoly. Most areas have limited or no U-Verse/FIOS, and are mostly ruled by a cable monopoly.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

tatergator1 said:


> Honestly, he's getting to the point of trolling with some of his responses.


Yes, seriously.... don't feed the troll.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

Banker257 said:


> I'm pretty sure you know exactly what I'm saying. If you disagree, by all means, feel free to debate.
> 
> If not, I see no need to do this silly dance again.
> 
> It's not a cult. It's a bandwagon!


You seem to be saying that, because the sales pitch includes the word "free", there's a hardware fairy that gives cable and satellite companies set top boxes for free so that they can pass them on to their customers for free and never need to charge their customers extra to pay whoever manufactured those boxes.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

magnus said:


> Yes, seriously.... don't feed the troll.


Yep. HE's becoming a caricature.

At this point he's got 3 or 4 one liners and he just keeps repeating them over and over and over.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Is anyone really surprised that an admitted Tivo hater is going to start trolling threads like these?


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

The funny thing is that Verizon's filing is supposedly in response to TiVo's recent request for waiver or clarification of the regulations on providing an industry standard video interface.

Historically when the FCC has created a regulation like this that is so vague as to be pointless the MSOs have either ignored it or done the absolute minimum to say that they're complying even if it serves no practical benefit. Tivo has taken the opposite approach and has repeatedly called on the FCC to either clarify the regulations or give them a waiver. Verizon has twisted this to say, "See, not even TiVo agrees with these regulations so we should get rid of them all."


----------



## Sixto (Sep 16, 2005)

Whether it's 1% or .00001% it's wonderful to have a choice for those that want high end features with any local content provider. Choice is good for those that want to spend.


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

slowbiscuit said:


> Is anyone really surprised that an admitted Tivo hater is going to start trolling threads like these?


Folks, FYI... Banker257 is the same person as enormastitz who was banned by the moderators here at TCF quite some time ago. He's also Jackmeoff on some of Dave Zatz's comment threads and he's currently Tim_TiVo on Investor Village. He truly hates TiVo. He's a DIRECTV subscriber and doesn't even use a TiVo. He's been trolling message boards about TiVo for many many years. We've banned him completely from any sort of discussion on Investor Discussion Board because the fact of the matter is you can't have an intelligent conversation with a troll.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

nrc said:


> The funny thing is that Verizon's filing is supposedly in response to TiVo's recent request for waiver or clarification of the regulations on providing an industry standard video interface.
> 
> Historically when the FCC has created a regulation like this that is so vague as to be pointless the MSOs have either ignored it or done the absolute minimum to say that they're complying even if it serves no practical benefit. Tivo has taken the opposite approach and has repeatedly called on the FCC to either clarify the regulations or give them a waiver. Verizon has twisted this to say, "See, not even TiVo agrees with these regulations so we should get rid of them all."


Here's TiVo's petition explained in laymen's terms. From Multichannel:

TiVo's Petition

" TiVo filed its petition on August 29, requesting further waiver or clarification with respect to the requirement that TiVo products supplied wholesale to cable operators much include an industry-standard, interactive, and recordable home networking interface.

TiVo acknowledged in the petition that TiVo products leased by MSOs don't support "all elements of an open industry standard as that term has been defined by the Commission, and thus does not meet the letter of the rule." TiVo argued in part that strict compliance of the rule would harm smaller cable operators that use TiVo products, that it would serve no public interests, and would be "extremely expensive" for TiVo given its historic investments. "

- See more at: http://www.multichannel.com/news/tec....4BnyCPv2.dpuf


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

banker257 - TiVo's possition isn't the point of this thread. The point of this thread is your assertion that the cable companies should not be required to provide any access mechanism for third party navigation devices. And that the cable company devices are "good enough" and "free".

I suspect you are 12 years old sitting in your parents basement trolling websites to see how many arguments you can start.

My assertion is you should be banned.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

sbiller said:


> Folks, FYI... Banker257 is the same person as enormastitz who was banned by the moderators here at TCF quite some time ago. He's also Jackmeoff on some of Dave Zatz's comment threads and he's currently Tim_TiVo on Investor Village. He truly hates TiVo. He's a DIRECTV subscriber and doesn't even use a TiVo. He's been trolling message boards about TiVo for many many years. We've banned him completely from any sort of discussion on Investor Discussion Board because the fact of the matter is you can't have an intelligent conversation with a troll.


I had a hunch.. it's rare for a troll to be so voracious in their inaccurate positions unless they've done it before, and this time they're much less vulgar, but still a troll.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

bradleys said:


> banker257 - TiVo's possition isn't the point of this thread. The point of this thread is your assertion that the cable companies should not be required to provide any access mechanism for third party navigation devices. And that the cable company devices are "good enough" and "free".
> 
> I suspect you are 12 years old sitting in your parents basement trolling websites to see how many arguments you can start.
> 
> My assertion is you should be banned.


Exactly. Without CableCard, Retail TiVo units definitely wouldn't exist, and they might have gone totally out of business before their current MSO business could be drummed up. Access to cable companies HAS to be open in order for alternatives to crappy cable boxes to exist (i.e. MCE and TiVo).

Whether to force providers to use CableCards in all boxes, or to force open access to non QAM-based networks is a more complicated discussion because of the technical hurdles involved...

It would be a very Verizon-like thing to close their network up as much as possible to third-party devices, it would be great to see all the TiVo users on FIOS leave all at once for CableVision, TWC/Comcast, RCN, or whatever their local provider is... Even though it's a relatively small percentage, a hit to sub numbers and the loss of the most engaged, tech-savvy subs in a highly competitive marketplace would be tough for the executives to explain to stockholders...


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Verizon has about 10% of the US *QAM* subscribers. There are just under a million retail TiVo subs out there, figure that's maybe 750k QAM subscriptions, which would mean that Verizon, in theory, would have 75k. But, TiVo users are more tech-savvy than average, so it's probably more like 100-125k. Sure, losing 100k subscribers is 2% of their sub base, but losing 2% of their sub base in one quarter would look like a bit of a disaster on the reports...


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Bigg said:


> Verizon has about 10% of the US *QAM* subscribers. There are just under a million retail TiVo subs out there, figure that's maybe 750k QAM subscriptions, which would mean that Verizon, in theory, would have 75k. But, TiVo users are more tech-savvy than average, so it's probably more like 100-125k. Sure, losing 100k subscribers is 2% of their sub base, but losing 2% of their sub base in one quarter would look like a bit of a disaster on the reports...


TiVo counts Mini's as subs. There are roughly 620,000 Cable Cards in service today.

If TiVo has 99% of them, and I'm sure they do, FIOS has roughly 60,000 TiVo subs using your estimate.

Still a lot of subs to walk out the door, but not really devastating when you consider that it's unlikely every TiVo sub is going to cancel.


----------



## Grakthis (Oct 4, 2006)

magnus said:


> Yes, seriously.... don't feed the troll.


Banker cannot possibly post here for any other reason than to troll. His positions are non-sense, blatantly partisan and have no place on a forum dedicated to the TiVo product.

I get confused by these kinds of posters, because, he doesn't have enough posts to be part of any "community", he clearly has an agenda, but he's not bright enough to voice that agenda in a way that convinces anyone. And he's not even a good enough troll to derive any kind of enjoyment from his ridiculous positions.

So what is his goal? Why is he here? Just ignore him, people. He will either go away, or become irrelevant.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

Bigg said:


> Verizon has about 10% of the US *QAM* subscribers. There are just under a million retail TiVo subs out there, figure that's maybe 750k QAM subscriptions, which would mean that Verizon, in theory, would have 75k. But, TiVo users are more tech-savvy than average, so it's probably more like 100-125k. Sure, losing 100k subscribers is 2% of their sub base, but losing 2% of their sub base in one quarter would look like a bit of a disaster on the reports...


They wouldn't lose them -- the FIOS DVR is good enough where the Tivo users would just switch to using that DVR instead of switching to DBS. Plus they're just not suddenly going to drop support -- they'll be phased out.

I found this link:
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/140530/tivo10-q.html

where the MSO-Tivos number 3.4 million and the retail-Tivos total 961 k. So 78% of Tivos are leased through MSOs. And those Tivos don't necessarily need a CableCard -- the security can be handled using software.

The stand-alone boxes don't need CableCards either:

http://www.multichannel.com/news/tv-apps/comcast-tivo-working-non-cablecard-approach/375989

Everybody acknowledges that the FCC rules have not kept up with technology, and that CableCards failed to create a decent amount of third-party boxes. Tivo is no longer depending on the FCC, they're creating individual business agreements with the MSOs instead. In fact, some of the rules are now even getting in Tivo's way. There have been so many exceptions granted to these rules that Verizon is arguing that the rules are now moot, and this latest request from Tivo is "the straw that broke the camel's back."


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

The FCC isn't going to abandon open access, no matter how much Verizon whines. Also, most of the TiVo MSO's use cablecards - not some magical software security.

I do agree that Cable Cards are getting long in the tooth and there is some risk in this transition, but there is also value. It has been argued that the complexity of cable cards is one of the reasons the 3rd party industry has struggled - and others have completely stayed out.

A simple, robust Allvid type implementation could gain a lot more traction for devices like the XBox and even down to the Roku and Apple TV.

The risk is if the FCC allows each MSO to create a proprietary access channel - if that happens, you will have the same outcome as the cable cards today.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

Bigg said:


> Exactly. Without CableCard, Retail TiVo units definitely wouldn't exist, and they might have gone totally out of business before their current MSO business could be drummed up. Access to cable companies HAS to be open in order for alternatives to crappy cable boxes to exist (i.e. MCE and TiVo).


And slavery helped make this nation what it is today. Without slavery, this nation wouldn't have had the trade and free labor necessary to thrive like it has. But that doesn't mean that slavery is still needed TODAY.

What's worse is that CableCard didn't even work -- there is no third-party DVR market except for Tivo, who is still here only because of lawsuits and licensing agreements.

Also, access doesn't have to be open. And it doesn't have to be mandated by the FCC. Thanks to Tivo's IPR, they have come to private business agreements which will bypass CableCards (and AllVid) and provide Tivo users with software encryption. This in turn will allow Tivo users access to VOD and PPV.

There are only two major MSOs -- Comcast and TWC. Soon to be one? The other MSOs will just use their solution. Maybe Verizon and Cox are big enough that they want and can afford to develop their own solutions. So worst-case it's three or four different but very similar solutions that Tivo has to implement. Not a big deal. Your cell phone already does it with the different models of towers out there.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

bradleys said:


> The FCC isn't going to abandon open access, no matter how much Verizon whines. Also, most of the TiVo MSO's use cablecards - not some magical software security.


The Tivo MSOs use CableCards because they're mandated.

The software security isn't magical. It already exists. It's just currently stored in the CableCard. You just have to store it in the DVR instead. The DVR has more than enough processing power to handle it. The same goes for the tuning adapter, too.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

BobCamp1 said:


> What's worse is that CableCard didn't even work -- there is no third-party DVR market except for Tivo, who is still here only because of lawsuits and licensing agreements.


I agree with you that CableCards did not work as intended, but that does not mean that the FCC should give up on open access. Quite the contrary, the FCC should learn lessons from the failures of CableCard and make the next open-access encryption standard better by having it being truly open and universal, and less susceptible to shenanigans by the MSOs.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

tarheelblue32 said:


> I'm in the exact same position you are. AT&T VRAD over a half-mile away and 70' tall pine trees on the southern side of the house. TWC is my only option.


I have the same problem for satellite reception and about a year ago ATT U-Verse came to my street, so I did have an option other than Comcast, U-Verse is now trying to sell off its service or close it down as almost nobody took it, so Comcast is my only option if I want cable, if I wanted OTA I would have to put a tall antenna on my home to get ABC, the internet I now have (100Mb/s speed download) would cost me about $65/month without cable, and my two land line phone service would cost me about the same with AT&T, that about $130/month, so for another $70/month I get cable with HBO, SHO, Stars, 4 cable cards and some other stuff I don't need now, and I can use my TiVos. I can afford the $1000/year over trying OTA and other ways to see TV. The wife factor is also part of this. (hard enough to show her how to use Netflix streaming)


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

lessd said:


> the internet I now have (100Mb/s speed download) would cost me about $65/month without cable, and my two land line phone service would cost me about the same with AT&T


If you have high-speed internet, you can replace those landlines with VoIP lines for free.


----------



## Zephyr (Sep 16, 2005)

wmcbrine said:


> Scumbags.


Best you can do?

Please, save your crude expressions for some other more suitable forum.

Love 'em, or hate 'em, better way to express it here, please?

Thanks!


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Banker257 said:


> TiVo counts Mini's as subs. There are roughly 620,000 Cable Cards in service today.
> 
> If TiVo has 99% of them, and I'm sure they do, FIOS has roughly 60,000 TiVo subs using your estimate.
> 
> Still a lot of subs to walk out the door, but not really devastating when you consider that it's unlikely every TiVo sub is going to cancel.


Hmmmmm, that's an interesting point. So I'm 4 subs then. I doubt TiVo has 99% of CableCards. Maybe 80-90%, as there are quite a few MCE diehards out there with CableCards.

Most TiVo subs would cancel, as it's easy to switch to cable when you can just swap a CableCard, and get a cable modem. Many of the FIOS subs switched from cable to FIOS, so going back wouldn't be hard at all.



BobCamp1 said:


> They wouldn't lose them -- the FIOS DVR is good enough where the Tivo users would just switch to using that DVR instead of switching to DBS. Plus they're just not suddenly going to drop support -- they'll be phased out.


WHAT?!? Why would they go to DBS? DBS doesn't have TiVo (in any meaningful way). They would go to cable. It's easy to switch to cable from FIOS.



BobCamp1 said:


> And slavery helped make this nation what it is today. Without slavery, this nation wouldn't have had the trade and free labor necessary to thrive like it has. But that doesn't mean that slavery is still needed TODAY.


WOW. I can't take your post one bit seriously.



> There are only two major MSOs -- Comcast and TWC. Soon to be one?


You conveniently forgot Charter, Cox, CableVision, BHN, and soon Greatland as large cable providers.



lessd said:


> I have the same problem for satellite reception and about a year ago ATT U-Verse came to my street, so I did have an option other than Comcast, U-Verse is now trying to sell off its service or close it down as almost nobody took it, so Comcast is my only option if I want cable, if I wanted OTA I would have to put a tall antenna on my home to get ABC, the internet I now have (100Mb/s speed download) would cost me about $65/month without cable, and my two land line phone service would cost me about the same with AT&T, that about $130/month, so for another $70/month I get cable with HBO, SHO, Stars, 4 cable cards and some other stuff I don't need now, and I can use my TiVos. I can afford the $1000/year over trying OTA and other ways to see TV. The wife factor is also part of this. (hard enough to show her how to use Netflix streaming)


AT&T is dumping us to Frontier because CT is way outside their core markets. We're totally disconnected from the rest of AT&T-land by NY and PA. U-Verse has had excellent uptake given how little they spent on the crappy infrastructure, and how it's only available to about half of users in CT.

But your point about having only one option for cable is true.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Bigg said:


> You conveniently forgot Charter, Cox, CableVision, BHN, and soon Greatland as large cable providers.


After the Comcast/TWC merger, it will basically be Godzilla and the 7 dwarfs.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Can we comment on this to the FCC?


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

@Zephyr: *plonk*


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

mattack said:


> Can we comment on this to the FCC?


Anyone can file a comment on the original waiver request. This was Verizons comment to TiVo's request for a clarification/waiver.

I'm not sure if you can comment on a comment. You're certainly allowed to file one, just not sure if the FCC will except it.


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> I'm not sure if you can comment on a comment. You're certainly allowed to file one, just not sure if the FCC will except it.


Whether they'll make an exception and accept it, maybe worth a try.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Wil said:


> Whether they'll make an exception and accept it, maybe worth a try.


just looked it up. The deadline for filing a comment was 10/6. TiVo has until the 20th to respond.

"Comments and oppositions are due October 6, 2014."
"Petitioners reply is due October 20, 2014."

The docket number is 14-146 if you'd like to follow along and here's a link to the filings

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment_se...er=&submissionTypeId=&__checkbox_exParte=true


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> The deadline for filing a comment was 10/6.


Sew its to late?


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

tarheelblue32 said:


> I agree with you that CableCards did not work as intended, but that does not mean that the FCC should give up on open access. Quite the contrary, the FCC should learn lessons from the failures of CableCard and make the next open-access encryption standard better by having it being truly open and universal, and less susceptible to shenanigans by the MSOs.


But that's impossible. This has been tried across dozens of industries and it never works. There are always loopholes and there are always patent issues to deal with, no matter how hard the committee drafting the standards tries to avoid them.

Even when by some miracle these issues aren't a problem, there are always compatibility issues that need addressing because every standard has gray areas. They are addressed either by the two companies contacting each other directly, or by the much smaller company simply changing their product so that it works even though it might violate the open standard.

Now an open standard is a good place to start if there are a dozen companies or more involved. But we just have Tivo as the main sole provider of third-party boxes, and Comcast/TWC as the main MSO. Two is much less than 12.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that the latest Tivo petition is to waive the open standard requirement for streaming between the main box and the Minis. Since Tivo provides boxes to MSOs who then lease them to customers, Tivo accidentally falls under this rule. That's right. Even Tivo no longer wants open standards in some situations (mainly when it inconveniences them). Verizon cried foul, saying that THEY'VE had to follow open standards even though it has been inconvenient for them.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

tarheelblue32 said:


> After the Comcast/TWC merger, it will basically be Godzilla and the 7 dwarfs.


Exactly.

53.7 million cable MSOs total
34.3 million of those are either Comcast or TWC. 63.9%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple-system_operator

Why do people think Tivo has had no comment on the Comcast/TWC merger? Here's a hint: they've struck deals with Comcast to provide VOD, PPV, built-in SDV support, and CableCardless security. The four major deficiencies in owning a Tivo. Tivo could get rid of 64% of its headaches if the merger were allowed.

Since only 1.3% of CableCards are installed in non-MSO devices (1.1% in Tivos and .2% in other devices), the number of CableCards in non-MSO devices would drop to 0.6%. I seriously hope that nobody spends money on addressing those 0.6% of boxes (and even fewer people, as most Tivo owners have more than one box) when the subject is not about food or housing, but on how to record TV shows.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Wil said:


> Sew its to late?


You're really proud of yourself, aren't you? :roll eyes:


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

BobCamp1 said:


> Exactly.
> 
> 53.7 million cable MSOs total
> 34.3 million of those are either Comcast or TWC. 63.9%
> ...


You're exactly right, this merger will be the best thing that happens to TiVo as long as Comcast plays nice after the ink is dry.

I wouldn't count on that. I think of TiVo as the geek dancing with the hot chick. You know she's going to dump him the second the Quarterback asks her to get him some punch.


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> ...I think of TiVo as the geek dancing with the hot chick. You know she's going to dump him the second the Quarterback asks her to get him some punch.


Projecting are we?


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

mattack said:


> Can we comment on this to the FCC?


Comments on proceeding 14-46 were due 10/6/2014. Anyone is free to submit a reply comment in response to Verizon's letter. FWIW, Verizon was the only comment received on TiVo's original petition. I expect we will see a reply comment from TiVo and possibly a reply to TiVo's reply comment from Verizion. It is possible that TiVo could wait until the 10/20/2014 deadline for reply comments before responding which would effectively shut out Verizon from any rebuttal.


----------



## randian (Jan 15, 2014)

Bigg said:


> Dropping CableCard support would literally mean handing all those tech savvy customers right back to Comcast, CableVision, and TWC all at once.


Maybe that's exactly what Verizon wants. It's clear they don't want to make the long-term, IMO profitable, investment in expanding FIOS. They want to milk it until it falls apart from age and disrepair.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

tarheelblue32 said:


> After the Comcast/TWC merger, it will basically be Godzilla and the 7 dwarfs.


That doesn't mean that they won't exist.



BobCamp1 said:


> Why do people think Tivo has had no comment on the Comcast/TWC merger? Here's a hint: they've struck deals with Comcast to provide VOD, PPV, built-in SDV support, and CableCardless security. The four major deficiencies in owning a Tivo. Tivo could get rid of 64% of its headaches if the merger were allowed.


Not only that, but TWC has gone out of their way to break TiVos because for some reason they hate them, while Comcast openly embraces TiVo users.



> Since only 1.3% of CableCards are installed in non-MSO devices (1.1% in Tivos and .2% in other devices), the number of CableCards in non-MSO devices would drop to 0.6%. I seriously hope that nobody spends money on addressing those 0.6% of boxes (and even fewer people, as most Tivo owners have more than one box) when the subject is not about food or housing, but on how to record TV shows.


And MCE is the only other system, which currently has no support from Microsoft.



randian said:


> Maybe that's exactly what Verizon wants. It's clear they don't want to make the long-term, IMO profitable, investment in expanding FIOS. They want to milk it until it falls apart from age and disrepair.


But in order to milk it, they need the best penetration they can get. And to just dump a whole bunch of tech-savvy customers who not only are more likely to have FIOS in the first place, but are the people others go to for tech advice, would be just idiotic.

Hopefully once they get a CEO who isn't a total idiot, they will continue expanding FIOS.


----------



## Wil (Sep 27, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> You're really proud of yourself, aren't you? :roll eyes:


Your current ID was already pretty well-exposed, but for my small additional contribution, sure.


----------

