# Molly Rants on TiVo, May 9th



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

The Molly Rants section on Cnet highlights some of the problems with TiVo.



> "TiVo's share of the DVR market is small and shrinking--it lost nearly half its subscribers from 2007 to 2009, and had less than 3 million subs in October 2009. By contrast, the subscription-free Roku, which offers many of the same Web video features of the TiVo with no monthly fee, has sold 1 million boxes and just expanded into Best Buy."


A hard hitting article that states what many of us here have known for a while. She failed however to attribute the most glaring reason people are leaving TiVo and that is CableCard and Tuning Adapter configuration issues. Those two items alone make using a TiVo a nightmare.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

I don't think that's why people are leaving Tivo at all. In any numbers, at least.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

slowbiscuit said:


> I don't think that's why people are leaving Tivo at all. In any numbers, at least.


I agree - it is why more people are not signing up for TiVo. Making folks call your biggest competitor and be at their mercy is not the best business plan


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

While you guys may have a point, there are the upgraders that have been using older models that decide to upgrade and are so disgusted they drop TiVo altogether. Something has to be attributing to TiVo's loss of subs and I don't think lackluster support is the primary reason. Cablecard, SDV, and Tuning adapter issues are new however and would help explain the sudden exodus. 

These types of issues aren't just technical either and goes to what Zeo was saying about putting your company in the hands of a competitor.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

I agree cablecards & tuning adapters are a big part of the reason why the number of subs that TiVo has is declining. I will not recommend a TiVo to anyone unless they are OTA only. 

I find Molly's rant somewhat interesting because her solution to replacing TiVo is to switch to AT&T Uverse which of course you can not use a TiVo with anyways. 

Thanks,


----------



## anotherlab (Jun 23, 2005)

slowbiscuit said:


> I don't think that's why people are leaving Tivo at all. In any numbers, at least.


I agree. The DVRs supplied by the cable companies are good enough for most people. It's hard to justify the extra expense.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

anotherlab said:


> I agree. The DVRs supplied by the cable companies are good enough for most people. It's hard to justify the extra expense.


And if they never owned a TiVo would never know the difference anyways.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

lessd said:


> And if they never owned a TiVo would never know the difference anyways.


The loss of subs would indicate that people are using TiVo and leaving it for something else, or nothing at all. What some of you are talking about would only explain slow growth, not wholesale defection from the platform.


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

anotherlab said:


> I agree. The DVRs supplied by the cable companies are good enough for most people. It's hard to justify the extra expense.


For folks in my area, it is not much of an extra expense. My cableco's HD DVR is $16 monthly. Tivo is $21 including a cablecard (no upfront, $19.95 per month for 2 years, or $99 upfront and $19.95 per month for one year- afterwards both are $12.95 which puts it a bit chaper than the cableco). Seems to me that is a pretty close choice.

My cableco also plays very well with Tivo unlike some of the others.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

Stormspace said:


> The loss of subs would indicate that people are using TiVo and leaving it for something else, or nothing at all. What some of you are talking about would only explain slow growth, not wholesale defection from the platform.


This loss may be partly monthly Series 2 users going to HD and using the cable co DVR as it is less hassle to set up and full in home warranty.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

lessd said:


> This loss may be partly monthly Series 2 users going to HD and using the cable co DVR as it is less hassle to set up and full in home warranty.


I agree with this completely and see Series 2 churn to be the main reason for the loss in subs. The series 3 line of DVR's is really not worth the trouble compared to a cable DVR in terms of working with cablecard, TA's, and SDV.

I also wonder if some of the loss is due to directTiVo's rotating out of service with no replacement.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I don't think it's really the "trouble" that loses people, it's the expense. With TiVo you have to buy the box first, which is minimum $100. Then you have to pay for service which is $20/mo. Then you have to pay the cable company to come out and install the CableCARD(s) which is $20-$40. Then you have to pay $2-$5/mo, per card, for the CableCARD(s) itself.

With a cable DVR they will usually allow it to replace your standard box for $10-$15/mo extra and will come out and install it for free. Plus if it breaks they replace it no questions asked.

TiVo is suppose to be the "luxury" offering in the space. However their recent software slump has allowed the cable DVRs to catch up and made them less attractive to even enthusiast. If they had stuck to their original intention of focusing on the technology and being an industry leader I don't think they'd be in this boat. Instead they got caught up in litigation and trying to make deals with providers and lost their way. I guess if that stuff had panned out they're probably be OK, but for the most part the litigation and "deals" have only brought in enough to barely keep them afloat.

Dan


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

How much does she want for the two Tivos?


----------



## daveak (Mar 23, 2009)

Happy with U-verse? Really? Well, that calls into questions other Molly rants... I'm just sayin'


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

I bought the Premiere in the Woot deal a few months back. It's still sitting in the box, unopened and unsubbed. 

I have a Tivo HD that I want to swap it out for. All I'd have to do is take the cablecard out of the HD and put it in the Premiere. 

But Comcast is insisting that I need a truck roll to do it, and it's not important enough to me yet to have to set it up and wait. 

The Cablecard is a trojan horse by the Cable companies. It "works" technically, but it doesn't provide VOD, and it comes with ridiculous cable requirements like costly and unnecessary truck rolls. It's not necessarily TiVo's fault, but the result is the same.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 1, 2007)

atmuscarella said:


> I agree cablecards & tuning adapters are a big part of the reason why the number of subs that TiVo has is declining. I will not recommend a TiVo to anyone unless they are OTA only.
> 
> I find Molly's rant somewhat interesting because her solution to replacing TiVo is to switch to AT&T Uverse which of course you can not use a TiVo with anyways.
> 
> Thanks,


<Sarcasm mode on>
What? you mean the door-to-door Uverse salesman who tried to persuade me to switch to Uverse was *lying*? He assured me I could continue to use my TiVos with Uverse.
<Sarcasm mode off>

When I told hime that I wanted something better than an IR blaster to control the channel selector box (and I wanted to be able to record multiple channels at once, and in HD at that) he decided he probably didn't have a sale here.


----------



## swinca (Jun 19, 2003)

Part of the problem is that the market has matured and Tivo has not kept up in some aspects. Back in the day, Tivo was clearly superior to anything else on the market. That is not true anymore. When I moved out of Comcast's area and decided to upgrade to HD, satellite was the only real choice, and HD Tivos don't work with satellite. I can't speak for Directv, but the Dish DVR does a great job at a reasonable cost. My Series 2 is still running on my old SD TV, but once either of them dies, it's over. There is no upgrade path with Tivo.


----------



## cjsiv (Jun 5, 2010)

I will be leaving in about a month. I have one premiere and one hd. I just switched back to directv from OTA only. The directv whole home dvr is actually pretty good. Not as fancy as my tivo, but it does an above average job. For OTA, tivo is awesome. I can't comment on cable cards, etc because I have never used one. The part I miss the most is that the tivos are the best media streamer I have ever used. MP4's over ethernet via pytivox from my mac is flawless. I just can't justify the monthly fee for the media streamer though. Still searching for a suitable replacement. So far my ps3 with medialink is a close second. For the most part, my year of tivo use has been pleasant. My boxes have greatly depreciated though due to this $99 and $19 a month deal. I paid full price a year ago. May just hang on to them other than give them away.


----------



## bschuler2007 (Feb 25, 2007)

Yeah count me as a Tivo media streamer hold out. The one thing Tivo does best.. and most people don't even know that it can do it. LOL.

Trying to get my local friends who have RCN to move from their old RCN HD DVR to a RCN Tivo is like pulling teeth. They don't want the truck fee, etc.. If a friend can't convince another friend to spend the extra dough for a Tivo.. nobody can. The future doesn't look good for retail, IMHO.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

larrs said:


> For folks in my area, it is not much of an extra expense. My cableco's HD DVR is $16 monthly. Tivo is $21 including a cablecard (no upfront, $19.95 per month for 2 years, or $99 upfront and $19.95 per month for one year- afterwards both are $12.95 which puts it a bit chaper than the cableco). Seems to me that is a pretty close choice.


Plus, with lifetime, it can easily be CHEAPER over the course of a few years.. and I don't mean like 5-10 years... People just don't realize that and/or are unwilling to put the up front payment.


----------



## bluetex (Apr 24, 2005)

Molly'd been hinting at this on Buzz Out Loud for a few weeks. You'd think some savvy CSR looking for a leg up in the company woulda called in some favors and/or at least escalated this one to the Managers (or higher) to earn some brownie points. I guess not.

Customer Service Fail (again).

I wish I had some great insight on some point that Molly's missing, but I don't think there is one in this case. Tisk Tisk TiVo!


----------



## javabird (Oct 13, 2006)

I don't understand the comparison with Roku (I didn't listen to the Molly rant, though). The Tivo records TV shows when they are broadcast, which the Roku doesn't do -- or am I missing something?

And if your broadband provider has a bandwidth cap, it's not going to pay off to try to save money streaming, unless you don't use that much.


----------



## innocentfreak (Aug 25, 2001)

I don't necessarily agree with most of Molly's points. I do however find myself wishing something bigger and better would come along.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

swinca said:


> Part of the problem is that the market has matured and Tivo has not kept up in some aspects. Back in the day, Tivo was clearly superior to anything else on the market. That is not true anymore. When I moved out of Comcast's area and decided to upgrade to HD, satellite was the only real choice, and HD Tivos don't work with satellite. I can't speak for Directv, but the Dish DVR does a great job at a reasonable cost. My Series 2 is still running on my old SD TV, but once either of them dies, it's over. There is no upgrade path with Tivo.


If you are on cable, Tivo is still superior to anything else on the market (with possible exception of roll your own HTPC, which has different strengths and weaknesses). I have no desire to switch to sat.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

innocentfreak said:


> I don't necessarily agree with most of Molly's points. I do however find myself wishing something bigger and better would come along.


Here in lies the problem. What most people say they want as far as functionality would require hardware near that of a medium HTPC and they only want to pay $100 for it and of course it shouldn't have a subscription fee either. 

Hopefully the FCC will get cable cards replaced with something that actually works in the consumers benefit and includes satellite. If they do TiVo should be able to build a good DVR around it. Of course it can only be price competitive in areas where cable and satellite DVRS are not being used as loss leaders. Which is another problem that TiVo can not do much about.

Thanks,


----------



## innocentfreak (Aug 25, 2001)

slowbiscuit said:


> If you are on cable, Tivo is still superior to anything else on the market (with possible exception of roll your own HTPC, which has different strengths and weaknesses). I have no desire to switch to sat.


This is only true because you have used and like TiVo. My sister who only uses TiVo when she is visiting my parents doesn't like it and prefers the FiOS DVR.



atmuscarella said:


> Here in lies the problem. What most people say they want as far as functionality would require hardware near that of a medium HTPC and they only want to pay $100 for it and of course it shouldn't have a subscription fee either.
> 
> Hopefully the FCC will get cable cards replaced with something that actually works in the consumers benefit and includes satellite. If they do TiVo should be able to build a good DVR around it. Of course it can only be price competitive in areas where cable and satellite DVRS are not being used as loss leaders. Which is another problem that TiVo can not do much about.
> 
> Thanks,


While I agree somewhat that is the case with most things. As far as the stuff I want beyond additional tuners and expanded storage, most of my requests are software/feature based.

I definitely hope the next solution, assuming it keeps AllVid naming, is actually consumer friendly. Of course at the same time TiVo may die even quicker when the barrier to entry is much lower and companies like Roku, Apple, Microsoft, Google, etc are able to throw their hat in the ring.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

innocentfreak said:


> I definitely hope the next solution, assuming it keeps AllVid naming, is actually consumer friendly. Of course at the same time TiVo may die even quicker when the barrier to entry is much lower and companies like Roku, Apple, Microsoft, Google, etc are able to throw their hat in the ring.


I generally believe competition results in better products that cost less. So more players would hopefully make TiVo better.

While I really like having a good DVR I am not married to having it be a "TiVo". If Roku, Apple, Microsoft, Google or anyone else builds a DVR that I find to be a better value for me I would not hesitate to buy it.

Right now I only have 3 choices as I am OTA only. So it is TiVo, a HTPC, or the Channel Master CM-7000PAL. Of those 3 options TiVo is in my mind my best value when I factor in both cost and usability. Just for the record I actually have a HTPC that I built attached to my TV and decided to not put any tuners in it and therefor do not use it as a DVR.

Thanks,


----------



## rage777 (Aug 19, 2006)

Can't it just be the economy? The recession started in late 2007 early 2008, which is the time period of the downfall. People just don't want to pay the $200+ and the monthly fees for a luxury item. When I got my Series 2, it was free and I just paid the $200 (I think) for lifetime. Compared with my HD and Premiere which I paid a lot more for, the Series 2 still works fine. If I was in a money crunch, I wouldn't buy a 500-600 dollar luxury item.


----------



## innocentfreak (Aug 25, 2001)

atmuscarella said:


> I generally believe competition results in better products that cost less. So more players would hopefully make TiVo better.
> 
> While I really like having a good DVR I am not married to having it be a "TiVo". If Roku, Apple, Microsoft, Google or anyone else builds a DVR that I find to be a better value for me I would not hesitate to buy it.


I agree somewhat, but I think the problem will be more TiVo keeping up with other companies. Competition does help, but when you aren't known for speed it can also quickly knock you out of the race.

I think this is where TiVo is and has always been incredibly weak. They have never been known for quick releases or timely updates. Now imagine you have multiple other companies with competing products who can get updates and new models on a timely basis.


----------



## anotherlab (Jun 23, 2005)

Turtleboy said:


> The Cablecard is a trojan horse by the Cable companies. It "works" technically, but it doesn't provide VOD, and it comes with ridiculous cable requirements like costly and unnecessary truck rolls. It's not necessarily TiVo's fault, but the result is the same.


Not all Cable companies require truck rolls. I had to replace my TiVo HD's hard drive last week and have the cablecard re-paired to the TiVo. I have Verizon FiOS and they were able to do it over Twitter in a few minutes. At 1:30am.

In my area, most people opt for a package with Internet, phone, and cable. They usually get the DVR tossed in at a discounted rate. At that point, the customer is not terribly inclined to get a TiVo. When I switched from TWC to VZ FiOS, the cost of the multiroom DVR and additional STBs was less than what I was paying for my TiVo Series 2 boxes (which wouldn't have worked well with FiOS anyways).

It's easy to stream a show from the DVR to one of the STBs. I can also pick a show to record on the DVR from the STB. So I cancelled the 2 Series 2 boxes (are they worth anything on eBay?) and kept just the TiVo HD. If I had never had the TiVo HD, I would be happy with the FiOS DVR. The TiVo can do a lot more, but for DVR functionality, the FiOS DVR is as good or better than my TiVo HD.

For a while, TiVo used to be the only the DVR in town. Then it became the luxury DVR because the Cable companies had horrible DVRs. The FiOS DVR on IMG 1.9 is pretty close to the TiVo experience. TiVo needs to up their game if they want to be viable. In ten years, they have 2 profitable quarters? Enforcing IP through drawn out lawsuits is not the model for sustainable growth.

I don't see partnerships with cable companies as the answer. While some of their DVR offerings are horrible, some are as good or better than TiVo. There is no compelling reason for a cable company to partner with TiVo at this point other than to supply VOD content as a TiVo channel.

What does TiVo need to do to compete?

No more half finished products. Seriously, a slow and partially SD interface doesn't cut it anymore.
Make the slider remote standard or lower the price on it. Having a QWERTY keyboard differentiates TiVo from the rest of the pack. That's a feature to exploit.
DLNA support. I don't want useless fluff like the Framechannel. Let me connect to PC and stream the content down.
Stream to a cheap TiVo branded box that has a tuner and very little else. 
Record 4 or more channels at once. I shouldn't need multiple DVRs. Give me one that can record more than 2 channels and can be viewed from other devices.
More VOD deals with the cable companies. If TiVo can get a percentage of the VOD fee, it's a win for the Cable company and for TiVo.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

rage777 said:


> Can't it just be the economy? The recession started in late 2007 early 2008, which is the time period of the downfall. People just don't want to pay the $200+ and the monthly fees for a luxury item. When I got my Series 2, it was free and I just paid the $200 (I think) for lifetime. Compared with my HD and Premiere which I paid a lot more for, the Series 2 still works fine. If I was in a money crunch, I wouldn't buy a 500-600 dollar luxury item.


You have to remember also that for a large segment of TiVo customers there has been a loss of features compared to previous models. Cable companies are now offering a whole house DVR which allows for the show to be recorded and watched anywhere in the home, TiVo doesn't do that any more in areas where the CCI byte has been deployed. No one wants to have to record a show multiple times just to be able to watch it in a different room and the lack of MRV makes those extra tuners you once had for resolving conflicts more difficult to manage.

Of course I'm told that almost no one has multiple TiVo's or cares about MRV, yet subs are still disappearing.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

innocentfreak said:


> I agree somewhat, but I think the problem will be more TiVo keeping up with other companies. Competition does help, but when you aren't known for speed it can also quickly knock you out of the race.
> 
> I think this is where TiVo is and has always been incredibly weak. They have never been known for quick releases or timely updates. Now imagine you have multiple other companies with competing products who can get updates and new models on a timely basis.


Given the current state of third party DVRs there is no history to show adequate volume/demand to justify large expenditures in software and hardware development. If AllVid or whatever replaces cable cards changes that is an unknown.

I am not sure of the exact numbers but I believe something like 60 million + households have pay tv and high speed Internet. Seems like someone should be able to build a compelling OTA/Pay TV DVR with integrated Internet access that will sell more than a few million units, if AllVid ends up being the game changer it appears it could be.

it is hard to tell if others will be faster than TiVo. Google TV hasn't set anyone on fire with quick updates to fix it's problems. Microsoft is already in the DVR software business so they should be able to move DVR software into a consumer box pretty easily. Sage TV is also well positioned to move their software into a consumer box. The bottom line is if money can be made, money can and will be spent to move faster by everyone.

Thanks,


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

innocentfreak said:


> This is only true because you have used and like TiVo. My sister who only uses TiVo when she is visiting my parents doesn't like it and prefers the FiOS DVR.
> ..............


So does she think missing recordings is normal then? Several of my neighbors use the FiOS DVRs. They are consistently missing shows because the DVR decided not to record them. TiVo does not have this issue.

But even with the complaining from my neighbors about their FiOS(and Comcast) DVRs, they prefer to get the DVR from their cable provider, even though it is nowhere near as reliable as a TiVo is.


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

I think the lost subs are a bit over exaggerated. Tivo lost 1.5 million subs from former DirecTivo customers. That makes up the majority of their losses over the past few years. You also have to factor in the number of Lifetime subs. I believe they are only kept on the books for 4 or 5 years? That would mean 2 of my 3 Tivos are no longer considered active subs and the third will come off in a year. There are also people who may have two or more S1 or S2 single tuner units that they retire in favor of one S3 or S4 dual tuner units. The economy and the cost of a new Tivo also have to play a role in terms of getting new subs.

I'm not suggesting that Tivo is doing great and the above are all excuses but those factors do have to be taken into consideration at least a little bit, especially the loss of the DTV subs.


----------



## innocentfreak (Aug 25, 2001)

aaronwt said:


> So does she think missing recordings is normal then? Several of my neighbors use the FiOS DVRs. They are consistently missing shows because the DVR decided not to record them. TiVo does not have this issue.
> 
> But even with the complaining from my neighbors about their FiOS(and Comcast) DVRs, they prefer to get the DVR from their cable provider, even though it is nowhere near as reliable as a TiVo is.


She hasn't missed any recordings. If she had she would have have asked me for a copy. She may not record the same shows they do.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

Stormspace said:


> Of course I'm told that almost no one has multiple TiVo's or cares about MRV, yet subs are still disappearing.


Sure doesn't seem like that on these forums. Lets be honest the number of reasons that TiVo is losing subs that they can do little or nothing about is all most a perfect storm of destruction add in their failings and it is a perfect storm of destruction.

From my point of view TiVo is losing subs for the following reasons that they can not do anything about:


Cable cards - they make a TiVo cost more and they cause increased costs and complications for consumers
Their stand alone units have been locked out of the Satellite HD market completely 
Many cable and satellite companies us DVRs as loss leaders, making TiVo's costs seem unreasonable. 
TiVo is an optional and luxury product and we did just have the worst ression of my life. 
There are also things they could fix or do that I think would help with their subs. 

They need to make streaming work. TiVo to TiVo, Storage Server to TiVo, and TiVo to something on a remote/second TV. 
They actually need to make the Premiere be the box they advertised. It needs to do the Internet as well as Roku, Apple TV, or a Boxee Box.
They need to deal with their HDUI. While I don't care to use it the way they market the Premiere requires that it work and work well which it clearly doesn't for many people. 
Even if they did do the above I really don't think it over comes the issues that they can not control but it sure wouldn't hurt.

Thanks,


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

atmuscarella said:


> Given the current state of third party DVRs there is no history to show adequate volume/demand to justify large expenditures in software and hardware development. If AllVid or whatever replaces cable cards changes that is an unknown.
> 
> I am not sure of the exact numbers but I believe something like 60 million + households have pay tv and high speed Internet. Seems like someone should be able to build a compelling OTA/Pay TV DVR with integrated Internet access that will sell more than a few million units, if AllVid ends up being the game changer it appears it could be.
> 
> ...


What this generation needs is an inexpensive VCR replacement with a tuner that works with cable. The company that releases that will be the one on top.

Whether TiVo wants to be that company or not is in question. They can either move forward with a high margin "luxury" product with a small adoption rate, or give up entirely and produce something for the masses.

IMO, TiVo should go with a no sub manual single tuner recorder that uses IR blasters to control the cable box with an optional sub fee of 5.00/month for guide data only. Since it wouldn't have cable cards it wouldn't have to honor the CCI either. Sell this box for 100.00-200.00 dollars.


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

Stormspace said:


> What this generation needs is an inexpensive VCR replacement with a tuner that works with cable. The company that releases that will be the one on top.
> 
> Whether TiVo wants to be that company or not is in question. They can either move forward with a high margin "luxury" product with a small adoption rate, or give up entirely and produce something for the masses.
> 
> IMO, TiVo should go with a no sub manual single tuner recorder that uses IR blasters to control the cable box with an optional sub fee of 5.00/month for guide data only. Since it wouldn't have cable cards it wouldn't have to honor the CCI either. Sell this box for 100.00-200.00 dollars.


The problem with this is how do you handle HD with a cable box? Soon, HD will be the only format there is. HD boxes are slowly elimintating all connections except HDMI and although Tivo could rely on component and RCA stereo audio for the time being, it would be a matter of time before that gets eliminated. HDMI is another story that could easily be controlled to not allowing a copy via that interface, just like the CCI flag.

Plus, your other thought is impossible. THere would be no such thing as a single tuner anything if dealing with cable. If you mean OTA, that is different, but still problematic as most cable household don't receive any OTA. And, any box that records only one channel at once and forces you to watch the channel that is recording (your cable box scenario) is not going to be any kind of a big seller.


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

atmuscarella said:


> There are also things they could fix or do that I think would help with their subs.
> 
> They need to make streaming work. TiVo to TiVo, Storage Server to TiVo, and TiVo to something on a remote/second TV.
> They actually need to make the Premiere be the box they advertised. It needs to do the Internet as well as Roku, Apple TV, or a Boxee Box.
> ...


I agree with this and almost submitted the exact list. This is really what it would take to fix this business. That and perhaps getting something done about cablecards- maybe even subsidizing the truck roll.

From a low end of the market stance, I would suggest Tivo offer $0 upfront, first two months free (to subsidize the cablecard truck roll) and $17.95 for two years thereafter as a permanent offer to new subs only. I think the upfront is the major problem for Tivo. Also at $17.95 the average customer would be at $20 with the cablecard fee.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

Stormspace said:


> What this generation needs is an inexpensive VCR replacement with a tuner that works with cable. The company that releases that will be the one on top.
> 
> Whether TiVo wants to be that company or not is in question. They can either move forward with a high margin "luxury" product with a small adoption rate, or give up entirely and produce something for the masses.
> 
> IMO, TiVo should go with a no sub manual single tuner recorder that uses IR blasters to control the cable box with an optional sub fee of 5.00/month for guide data only. Since it wouldn't have cable cards it wouldn't have to honor the CCI either. Sell this box for 100.00-200.00 dollars.


Well I think you just described a used Series 1 or 2 TiVo with lifetime. I don't see allot of people out looking for them.

If the devise is going to be able to do HD it is going to cost more than you would like. Hauppauge's HD PVR costs $200 and you need a computer to plug it into.

I don't think cost is as big of a problem as you think it is. Look how many ipads apple has been able to sell (15 million last year). If TiVo could sell half that many DVRs in a year they would be an amazing success.

Thanks,


----------



## jeff92k7 (Jan 18, 2006)

innocentfreak said:


> I would argue the recorded content is going to vary based off the source so no it isn't the same, otherwise why watch HD over SD. I have always heard bad things about the compression on Uverse but I can't say whether Comcast is supposed to be better or worse.


I totally agree. Having just left uverse, I can tell you that their HD picture quality sucks. The SD quality is one of the best out there, if not the best, but the HD quality is the worst, by far.

Comcast would have to be better.

I have Time Warner now and the difference is night and day. Colors are more vivid, the picture is sharper and has more depth, and there are far fewer compression artifacts.

Uverse HD is practically unwatchable with any fast motion. It would break up into horrible blocks until the movement in the image slowed down.

Jeff


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Stormspace said:


> What this generation needs is an inexpensive VCR replacement with a tuner that works with cable. The company that releases that will be the one on top.
> 
> ............


It's called a stand alone DVD burner. Walmart sold them for only $50 several years ago. A digital tuner and it burns to a disc. It does the same thing a VCR did only you burn to a write once or rewritable disc.

The problem is many people couldn't figure out how to use a vcr. And even more can't figure out how to use a dvd burner.

Heck, you change an input on the TV an alot of people can't figure it out. I can't count the number of times at work someone changes the input on a TV in a confernce room, and it sits there on a blank screen until someone sends a trouble ticket it. Because they have no idea why it won't work.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

There was just a report put out stating the number households that own a television actually went down the first time in 20 years. Similarly cable companies are losing TV subscribers.

People aren't watching TV as much as they used to. They're watching online on their PCs, laptops, tablets, phones, etc. I can watch nearly everything I record on my TiVo on my iPad, be it from Comcast's or Hulu's app or whatever.

I'm not sure there will even be a market for DVRs a few years down the line, even if allvid is a success. There definitely won't be a market for a VCR replacement. TiVo really needs to reinvent themselves. They tried to do that with the Premiere, but other than their Amazon VOD implementation, all their streaming implementations (Netflix, Youtube, etc) are inferior to other devices out there like Roku, Apple TV and even game consoles.


----------



## jcthorne (Jan 28, 2002)

slowbiscuit said:


> Ugh, and rent a couple of boxes from the cableCo, and then hope that the IR blaster works 100% of the time? No thanks.
> 
> Allvid is our last best hope, but knowing the FCC and the influence of money from Big Content, it will probably be fubar'd worse than Cablecard. At least with CC we'll be able to do self-installs everywhere later this year, and rents will be standardized.


As more and more cableco content is moved to SDV and on demand services, the cable cards are less and less useful. Allvid is a pie in the sky dream that will never come to pass in the utopia way you invision.

My suggestion for adding analog component input and an IR blaster (which worked 100% for years for many users that took the time to set it op correctly) was to get away from the whole DRM/cablecard/big brother problem completely. It would also open the platform up to Uverse and Sat customers again. Alas, I realize now that the days of analog component outputs on cableco boxes being active in HD format are numbered and this sort of move by tivo would just hasten it to be closed. Idea would not work. Tivo is screwed for other than the OTA/online content market. I fear the end is upon tivo's business model as there simply is not enough cord cutters to make the product viable.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

You don't need a new Tivo for this, you can do this with an HTPC and the Hauppauge HD-PVRs. Records component-in straight off of a box, folks use them with sat/cable boxes and to avoid DRM all the time. I think it's an expensive, power-sucking kludge, but more power to them.

Not as easy to use as Tivo of course, but it's been out there for a while. And according to posters in this thread, Media Center is all plug and play so the average user can do this without a sweat. LOL.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

jcthorne said:


> ... Tivo is screwed for other than the OTA/online content market. I fear the end is upon tivo's business model as there simply is not enough cord cutters to make the product viable.


Exactly why TiVo has been trying to make deals with pay TV providers directly to use TiVo's software and/or hardware and has been fighting hard to enforce their patents.

I have no way of knowing where TiVo is going but we do know they have some money to make a run at whatever they decide too do.

Thanks,


----------



## AntiPC (Jul 22, 2005)

jeff92k7 said:


> Uverse HD is practically unwatchable with any fast motion. It would break up into horrible blocks until the movement in the image slowed down.


Perhaps it is dependent on the bandwidth, because I have never experienced anything like that here, and I rather doubt that the millions of Uverse subscribers are living with this.

Sometimes you have to call customer service, which brings us back to Molly's rant.....


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

slowbiscuit said:


> .......Allvid is our last best hope, but knowing the FCC and the influence of money from Big Content, it will probably be fubar'd worse than Cablecard.


+1 :up:


slowbiscuit said:


> ....... At least with CC we'll be able to do self-installs everywhere later this year, and rents will be standardized.


And considering your assessment above, how confident should we be about self-install being implemented successfully? Cable Cos frequently don't get CableCARDs working properly even after several truck rolls (since the problem usually is due to the signals they send from the head end).


----------



## innocentfreak (Aug 25, 2001)

AntiPC said:


> Perhaps it is dependent on the bandwidth, because I have never experienced anything like that here, and I rather doubt that the millions of Uverse subscribers are living with this.
> 
> Sometimes you have to call customer service, which brings us back to Molly's rant.....


It all depends on what you get used to. When I had DirecTV it would break up pretty regularly and I just accepted this was how it was. Once I switched to FiOS I didn't have this issue anymore. When I visit my father who has DirecTV, I can't stand it but he doesn't notice it.

I don't remember ever reading a review that praised Uverse for their picture quality, but I do remember reading multiple reviews talking about poor image quality and pixelation.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

AntiPC said:


> Perhaps it is dependent on the bandwidth, because I have never experienced anything like that here, and I rather doubt that the millions of Uverse subscribers are living with this.
> 
> Sometimes you have to call customer service, which brings us back to Molly's rant.....


Yes, but how do you watch several HD channels concurrently in a household of four or five with Uverse?


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

jcthorne said:


> As more and more cableco content is moved to SDV and on demand services, the cable cards are less and less useful. Allvid is a pie in the sky dream that will never come to pass in the utopia way you invision.
> 
> My suggestion for adding analog component input and an IR blaster (which worked 100% for years for many users that took the time to set it op correctly) was to get away from the whole DRM/cablecard/big brother problem completely. It would also open the platform up to Uverse and Sat customers again. Alas, I realize now that the days of analog component outputs on cableco boxes being active in HD format are numbered and this sort of move by tivo would just hasten it to be closed. Idea would not work. Tivo is screwed for other than the OTA/online content market. I fear the end is upon tivo's business model as there simply is not enough cord cutters to make the product viable.


How about a dual tuner PLUS an HDMI input capable box? The tuners could do OTA (for SAT & Cable Subscribers) and unencrypted QAM/Analog (for Cable). The HDMI input would support HDCP and any content that was recorded via the HDMI input would be output in HD with copy protection and set per the requirements of the content owners- not the cableco. Anything output over the component outs would be downrezzed to 540p like the Blu-Ray spec is about to do and of course any other outputs would be SD. That would effectively eliminate cablecards and provide ability to record up to three shows for a cable subscriber (with OTA), two copies for a sat customer (one OTA) and one show for others who wouldn't care to set up the OTA or Clear QAM channels (and I would clearly put the setup of clear QAM on the user's plate). And. I would think content providers would be happy with this.

Throw in better streaming support (more codecs supported from a PC and streaming from box to box) and Roku style Internet functionality and I think you have a winner.

Sure, the cablecos can counter their box does two cable channels at once, but you could counter with the "one box solution" argument- I am thinking more of the 30 minute infomercials from the late 90s...


----------



## jeff92k7 (Jan 18, 2006)

AntiPC said:


> Perhaps it is dependent on the bandwidth, because I have never experienced anything like that here, and I rather doubt that the millions of Uverse subscribers are living with this.
> 
> Sometimes you have to call customer service, which brings us back to Molly's rant.....


It's not a user end bandwidth issue, but it is a bandwidth issue. Uverse compresses their HD streams to around 5.5 to 6Mbps. This is to allow as many streams as possible in their limited bandwidth adaptation of tv service. This is the same for every user regardless of what the user's actual incoming bandwidth may be.

Currently, the best provisioning package you can get from ATT is a 32/5 profile (32Mbps down, 5Mbps up) for all services. Voice takes first priority, tv service second, and internet services get whatever is leftover. Voice is negligible, but with 4 HD streams at a max 6Mbps rate at once will consume 24Mbps of the total 32Mbps. That leaves a max of 8Mbps available for internet surfing.

No matter who you are or where you are, this is the best you can hope for right now.

My maximum user rate (sustainable speed on line between my router/modem and the uverse vrad box) was around 60Mbps. I was (and actually still am even though I cancelled their tv svc) on the 32/5 profile meaning even though my line will support up to 60Mbps, they only give me a max of 32Mbps.



aaronwt said:


> Yes, but how do you watch several HD channels concurrently in a household of four or five with Uverse?


Uverse allows up to 4 HD streams on households with the 32/5 profile. If you're on the 24/5 or 19/2 profile, you may be limited to only 3 or 2 HD streams, but everyone should be able to receive at least 4 SD streams.

In other words, everyone can get 4 streams. It depends on your provisioning package as to how many of those can be HD. Your provisioned speed is determined by the distance and line quality between your modem/router and the neighborhood vrad box.



innocentfreak said:


> It all depends on what you get used to. When I had DirecTV it would break up pretty regularly and I just accepted this was how it was. Once I switched to FiOS I didn't have this issue anymore. When I visit my father who has DirecTV, I can't stand it but he doesn't notice it.
> 
> I don't remember ever reading a review that praised Uverse for their picture quality, but I do remember reading multiple reviews talking about poor image quality and pixelation.


Ditto. I was used to Dish network before switching to uverse and I immediately noticed it the first time I watched Uverse HD content. Prior to Dish, we had comcast. I noticed that the Dish HD content was a little softer than the Comcast content had been.

Now I'm with Time Warner (they bought out comcast a few years ago in this area). It was immediately noticable going from the worst HD picture quality available to me, to the best HD picture quality available to me.

For those interested, bitrates are just a very vague indicator of picture quality because different providers use different compression formats, but it does give a very broad overview of what kind of quality to expect.

Uverse HD: 6Mbps (8Mbps for on-demand content)
Dish/DirecTV: last I heard, they were somewhere in the 8-10Mbps range
Cable: 10-12Mbps (varies with provider, yours may be different)
FIOS: Not sure. FIOS isn't available to me 
OTA: 19.2Mbps max (subchannels take from the total bitrate available)
Blu-Ray: 36Mbps for 1x speed. Movies start at 54Mbps but can be higher

Jeff


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Don't forget that the codec has a lot to do with it. Cable, FIOS, OTA are all mpeg2 and sat/U-Verse are mpeg4, which on average uses about half the bandwidth for the same quality. Which kind of makes you scratch your head when U-Verse doesn't look as good as a 12mbps 720p cable channel.


----------



## jcthorne (Jan 28, 2002)

larrs said:


> How about a dual tuner PLUS an HDMI input capable box? The tuners could do OTA (for SAT & Cable Subscribers) and unencrypted QAM/Analog (for Cable). The HDMI input would support HDCP and any content that was recorded via the HDMI input would be output in HD with copy protection and set per the requirements of the content owners- not the cableco. Anything output over the component outs would be downrezzed to 540p like the Blu-Ray spec is about to do and of course any other outputs would be SD. That would effectively eliminate cablecards and provide ability to record up to three shows for a cable subscriber (with OTA), two copies for a sat customer (one OTA) and one show for others who wouldn't care to set up the OTA or Clear QAM channels (and I would clearly put the setup of clear QAM on the user's plate). And. I would think content providers would be happy with this.
> 
> Throw in better streaming support (more codecs supported from a PC and streaming from box to box) and Roku style Internet functionality and I think you have a winner.
> 
> Sure, the cablecos can counter their box does two cable channels at once, but you could counter with the "one box solution" argument- I am thinking more of the 30 minute infomercials from the late 90s...


Almost all HDMI output is DRM locked down to prevent copying or recording. Its far worse than the copy bit flags in the cable signals. There is simply almost NOTHING to record via an HDMI input unless tivo lies and tells the source device it is a display rather than a recorder. Won't ever happen for a Tivo. With component in, DRM does not exist. Also HDMI to component devices exist and work very well, thus keeping the DRM issues outside of tivo.


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

jcthorne said:


> Almost all HDMI output is DRM locked down to prevent copying or recording. Its far worse than the copy bit flags in the cable signals. There is simply almost NOTHING to record via an HDMI input unless tivo lies and tells the source device it is a display rather than a recorder. Won't ever happen for a Tivo. With component in, DRM does not exist. Also HDMI to component devices exist and work very well, thus keeping the DRM issues outside of tivo.


So replace my HDMI example with component. Now, you have the issue of component being sunset or downscaled but that would take time (years). You also have to worry about stereo only audio with that scenario, which many would not want. However, the whole idea was to eliminate cablecards, so I guess it would work- but only for a few willing to compromise...


----------



## jcthorne (Jan 28, 2002)

Why would it need to be stereo audio only? If its going to have HD component inputs, a digital audio input is trivial. Still would likely not work for Tivo long term. 

I do not see a long term way forward. Now that the Tivo/Comcast partnership is cancelled, its likely so will the DirectTV one and its game over unless Tivo finds a way to reinvent itself. They cannot survive long term on the less than 2 million subs they currently have and the results of the Dish lawsuit show that Tivo will not survive on patent suits either.

I am really bummed about this. Perhaps they will see the need to make the Premiere what it was advertised to be and try to move forward with it....we can only hope.


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

larrs said:


> So replace my HDMI example with component. Now, you have the issue of component being sunset or downscaled but that would take time (years).


All of the government's and cable labs' "work" spent standardizing and developing cablecards would have been better spent on 3 simple requirements to cable boxes:

1) Component out

2) SPDIF audio out

3) standardized RS-232 control protocol / interface to change channels

They could have even combined the above 3 into a special plug (I know how people like to invent new plugs). Tivo goes back to being a box that talks to a cable box. All of the cablecard/tuning adapter/truck roll/SDV problems go away.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

smbaker said:


> All of the government's and cable labs' "work" spent standardizing and developing cablecards would have been better spent on 3 simple requirements to cable boxes:
> 
> 1) Component out
> 
> ...


I don't want two boxes and I doubt many others want that either. So all the above would have accomplished is TiVo losing subscribers faster than they are currently as people pick up the cable company DVR. CableCards would work fine if Cable companies actually bothered to put forth any effort to support them. For areas that don't require a tuning adapter, they actually work well. It's just getting them installed that's a pain.


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

morac said:


> I don't want two boxes and I doubt many others want that either.


It's the model that Tivo supported for a decade. IMO, the biggest impediment to Tivo purchase is the cablecard and worse yet, a truck roll for those providers that don't allow self-install. You have to deal with pairing issues, you have to deal with techs who've never seen a Tivo before, and repeat the hassle whenever the Tivo is replaced or upgraded.

Instead, use the cable box as a tuner. Bring the Tivo home, and plug it in. Up and running in a couple of minutes. We're an instant gratification society.

Providers would have been free to implement the cable box any way they desired, so long as it provided the standardized outputs and control protocol. Nobody would care about SDV or tuning adapters. Cableco never even needs to be aware that you own a Tivo. Your equipment becomes your own business again.

I would gladly trade the inconvenience of a second box for the simplicity.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

smbaker said:


> It's the model that Tivo supported for a decade. IMO, the biggest impediment to Tivo purchase is the cablecard and worse yet, a truck roll for those providers that don't allow self-install. You have to deal with pairing issues, you have to deal with techs who've never seen a Tivo before, and repeat the hassle whenever the Tivo is replaced or upgraded.
> 
> Instead, use the cable box as a tuner. Bring the Tivo home, and plug it in. Up and running in a couple of minutes. We're an instant gratification society.
> 
> ...


HD = gone
Dual tuners = gone
paying dual subscription fees for half the value.
IR interface is slow and clumsy.

I would rather have the providers box than this.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

smbaker said:


> All of the government's and cable labs' "work" spent standardizing and developing cablecards would have been better spent on 3 simple requirements to cable boxes:
> 
> 1) Component out
> 
> ...


Replace the audio and video connections with an IP stream and the RS-232 with a web services API and you essentially have the Allvid proposal. The special new plug will be an RJ-45 connector.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Yep, nrc is spot on here, and I don't want to go back to two boxes either. Unfortunately just as with Cablecard, the industry is fighting Allvid tooth and nail because it could result in an open market where they lose control of 'the user experience', i.e. force-feeding ads and other useless add-ons to your screen. They want you to use their boxes, and only their boxes.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

jeff92k7 said:


> ...............
> Uverse HD: 6Mbps (8Mbps for on-demand content)
> Dish/DirecTV: last I heard, they were somewhere in the 8-10Mbps range
> Cable: 10-12Mbps (varies with provider, yours may be different)
> ...


The absolute max bitrate for a BD title, audio and video combined, is 54mb/s. Not higher than that.
Most movies are around 30mb/s average. Some approach close to 50mb/s but that is very rare.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

The cable cards and set top boxes make it more difficult for people to use cable service without paying. Many people feel entitled to free cable, if the cable company did not disconnect their line. Now the most you will get without paying are analog channels and unencrypted QAM channels.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

larrs said:


> So replace my HDMI example with component. Now, you have the issue of component being sunset or downscaled but that would take time (years). You also have to worry about stereo only audio with that scenario, which many would not want. However, the whole idea was to eliminate cablecards, so I guess it would work- but only for a few willing to compromise...


Component has already been phased out by the movie industry. New Blu-ray players made since Jan 1 2011 only have HDMI or composite output.

http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2...-presses-on-with-plan-to-plug-analog-hole.ars

"The terms of the agreement state that AACS licensees must limit analog output to interlaced SD resolution ("composite video, s-video, 480i component video and 576i video") for any device manufactured after December 31, 2010. Then, after December 31, 2013, no device that can decrypt AACS content can be made with any analog output whatsoever."

http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=36227

Also, future Blu-ray movies will be limited to 540p on component output on all existing players.

Since TV channels frequently play HD movies, and Disney, Comcast, and TWC are owned by (or are) content owners, I'm guessing that their cable boxes will be sunset sooner rather than later.

The future is HDMI or bust.


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

nrc said:


> Replace the audio and video connections with an IP stream and the RS-232 with a web services API and you essentially have the Allvid proposal. The special new plug will be an RJ-45 connector.


This would be perfect. Well, assuming it isn't obfuscated into uselessness by the powers that be during the approval process.

My main point being, there's nothing wrong with putting these components into a separate "box" from the Tivo. In fact, it makes a lot more sense to put the tuners in the allvid box than it does in the Tivo. Abstract the cableco-specific stuff into one box (allvid adapter/gateway) and the cableco-independent stuff into the other box (Tivo). It's easy to create a well-defined interconnect between the two.

Looking at the Wiki page, I see that the "Allvid Alliance" is composted almost entirely of device manufacturers, with the conspicuous absence of major providers (Comcast, etc). I assume it's already encountering resistance from the cablecos?


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Yes, and the satco's, and AT&T. It will end up just as bad as Cablecard, most likely. They really don't want to give up control over the 'user experience'.


----------



## jcthorne (Jan 28, 2002)

BobCamp1 said:


> Component has already been phased out by the movie industry. New Blu-ray players made since Jan 1 2011 only have HDMI or composite output.
> 
> http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2...-presses-on-with-plan-to-plug-analog-hole.ars
> 
> ...


Sales of HDMI to component conversion adaptors are brisk and are going to get better....They are legal and they work very well. I use component connections for all HD material in our home. The 2 devices I have that are HDMI only output have converters to component. I choose not deal with the DRM BS. Also why the only BluRay drive I own is in my laptop for ripping to our server to watch the material on the tivo. The tighter they close thier grasp.....


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

jcthorne said:


> Sales of HDMI to component conversion adaptors are brisk and are going to get better....They are legal and they work very well. I use component connections for all HD material in our home. The 2 devices I have that are HDMI only output have converters to component. I choose not deal with the DRM BS. Also why the only BluRay drive I own is in my laptop for ripping to our server to watch the material on the tivo. The tighter they close thier grasp.....


They aren't all that "legal". Intel could sue them if they wanted to, but they haven't yet. I don't think Intel will sue them unless they get enormous pressure.


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

Are there HDCP strippers yet? It seems the natural evolution given that HDMI->component and component->HDMI converters are available. 

I've read that the HDCP master key was leaked. Does that make all this HDCP copy protection nuisance completely moot at this point? Didn't a similar thing happen with DVDs? Will anyone ever learn?


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

smbaker said:


> Are there HDCP strippers yet? It seems the natural evolution given that HDMI->component and component->HDMI converters are available.
> 
> I've read that the HDCP master key was leaked. Does that make all this HDCP copy protection nuisance completely moot at this point? Didn't a similar thing happen with DVDs? Will anyone ever learn?


There are HDMI adapters but none that can do HDCP, at least that can overtly be sold in the US.

Once again, speaking of rants, we have an industry deciding that the entire population can PAY for technology to keep them from being able to use the equipment they themselves PAY for. Consider that the movie industry has managed to control your entire television system even if you never give them a single dollar and never go to or watch a single movie.

And the mantra is for less government. How about fewer connected business cabals?


----------



## Fofer (Oct 29, 2000)

Turtleboy said:


> I bought the Premiere in the Woot deal a few months back. It's still sitting in the box, unopened and unsubbed.
> 
> I have a Tivo HD that I want to swap it out for. All I'd have to do is take the cablecard out of the HD and put it in the Premiere.


You should probably activate that Premiere unit pretty soon. I am unsure of all the details but it's sounding like the price will go up for all new subs in the next day or two.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=469658


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

slowbiscuit said:


> Yep, nrc is spot on here, and I don't want to go back to two boxes either. Unfortunately just as with Cablecard, the industry is fighting Allvid tooth and nail because it could result in an open market where they lose control of 'the user experience', i.e. force-feeding ads and other useless add-ons to your screen. They want you to use their boxes, and only their boxes.


Yep, the proceedings for the Allvid proposal are here:

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/proceeding/view?name=10-91

Right now they're working the angle they there's no way that one standard API can serve their needs and besides, everyone wants "apps" anyway. In other words they'd like to make Allvid about as useful as the firewire port on your cable box and keep all their content locked into their channels.


----------



## innocentfreak (Aug 25, 2001)

And if they don't get that they want to be able to control the interface for their content. They have described it like a mall where you walk through and every storefront looks different rather than say how TiVo presents it with the new search under one universal UI.


----------



## jcthorne (Jan 28, 2002)

netringer said:


> There are HDMI adapters but none that can do HDCP, at least that can overtly be sold in the US.


Search HDFury2. And its sold by amazon which is about as overtly sold in the US as it gets. I will add that its a very high quality device and the image from it is impeccable.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

smbaker said:


> Are there HDCP strippers yet? It seems the natural evolution given that HDMI->component and component->HDMI converters are available.
> 
> I've read that the HDCP master key was leaked. Does that make all this HDCP copy protection nuisance completely moot at this point? Didn't a similar thing happen with DVDs? Will anyone ever learn?


Yes there are HDCP strippers, that's what the HDMI to component out boxes essentially are. There are other HDCP strippers that output HDMI.

The master key just lets you make your own device without Intel's permission. Such a device would let you send an unencrypted stream to something else. But no one has yet built a device that does that (and maybe captures the data to make an unencrypted copy) because it is difficult to do. It most likely needs to be done in silicon.


----------

